Obama’s last act is to force suburbs to be less white and less wealthy

Hillary’s rumored running mate, Housing Secretary Julian Castro, is cooking up a scheme to reallocate funding for Section 8 housing to punish suburbs for being too white and too wealthy.

The scheme involves super-sizing vouchers to help urban poor afford higher rents in pricey areas, such as Westchester County, while assigning them government real-estate agents called “mobility counselors” to secure housing in the exurbs.

Castro plans to launch the Section 8 reboot this fall, even though a similar program tested a few years ago in Dallas has been blamed for shifting violent crime to affluent neighborhoods.

It’s all part of a grand scheme to forcibly desegregate inner cities and integrate the outer suburbs.

Anticipating NIMBY resistance, Castro last month threatened to sue suburban landlords for discrimination if they refuse even Section 8 tenants with criminal records. And last year, he implemented a powerful new regulation — “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” — that pressures all suburban counties taking federal grant money to change local zoning laws to build more low-income housing (landlords of such properties are required to accept Section 8 vouchers).

Castro is expected to finalize the new regulation, known as “Small-Area Fair Market Rents” (SAFMR), this October, in the last days of the Obama presidency.

It will set voucher rent limits by ZIP code rather than metro area, the current formula, which makes payments relatively small. For example, the fair market rent for a one-bedroom in New York City is about $1,250, which wouldn’t cover rentals in leafy areas of Westchester County, such as Mamaroneck, where Castro and his social engineers seek to aggressively resettle Section 8 tenants.
“We want to use our housing-choice vouchers to ensure that we don’t have a concentration of poverty and the aggregation of racial minorities in one part of town, the poor part of town,” the HUD chief said recently, adding that he’s trying to undo the “result of discriminatory policies and practices in the past, and sometimes even now.”

A draft of the new HUD rule anticipates more than 350,000 Section 8 voucher holders will initially be resettled under the SAFMR program. Under Obama, the total number of voucher households has grown to more than 2.2 million.

The document argues that larger vouchers will allow poor urban families to “move into areas that potentially have better access to jobs, transportation, services and educational opportunities.” In other words, offering them more money to move to more expensive neighborhoods will improve their situation.
A 2011 study sponsored by HUD found that adults using more generous Section 8 vouchers did not get better jobs or get off welfare. In fact, more went on food stamps. And their children did not do better in their new schools.

Worse, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods, ruining the quality of life for existing residents.

“Males…were arrested more often than those in the control group, primarily for property crimes,” the study found.
HUD recently tested this new theory in Dallas with disastrous results.

Starting in 2012, the agency sweetened Section 8 voucher payments, and pointed inner-city recipients to the far-flung counties surrounding Dallas. As government-subsidized rentals spread in all areas of the Metroplex (163 ZIP codes vs. 129 ZIP codes), so did crime.
Now Dallas has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and recently had to call in state troopers to help police control it. For the first time, violent crime has shifted to the tony bedroom communities north of the city. Three suburbs that have seen the most Section 8 transfers — Frisco, Plano and McKinney — have suffered unprecedented spikes in rapes, assaults and break-ins, including home invasions.

Although HUD’s “demonstration project” may have improved the lives of some who moved, it’s ended up harming the lives of many of their new neighbors. And now Castro wants to roll it out nationwide. Soon he will give Section 8 recipients money to afford rent wherever they choose — and if they don’t want to move, he’ll make them an offer they can’t refuse.

that Idiot needs to be locked up on a Section 8!

Looks like her running mate maybe Elizabeth Warren.

interesting ideas

Id love to read the actual proposal instead of someones opinion of it though


there are studies about concentrated poverty and the obstacles it produces

I wouldn't support moving from one culture of 'entitlement' to another culture of 'entitlement' though

as in the extremely poor being thrown in with extremely wealthy

but certainly breaking the cycle by assisting people to live in areas that aren't so highly concentrated in poverty,, is an excellent idea,,

imho

This would be good, if it worked. What probably would happen is more corrupt bureaucrats get rich off of it and their cronies get the free stuff.

OMG!

* FIXED National mortgage interest rates would accomplish an equal playing field for the rich and the lower income families.
** Personally I pay .5% , some may go-to 5%
* If you qualify for a mortgage, why would the "rate" change ?
*

Topic: Obama's HUD: Forced Integration/ Wealth Redistribution SCAM

http://m.mingle2.com/topic/show/475981/

most low income families don't have mortgages,, but pay rent to landlords

section8, depending upon the state, pays a set rent based upon the area

its kind of like how health insurance pays a set rate for certain services, whereas those without can be charged much higher rates for the same service

so, section 8 pays landlords a predetermined rate based upon appraisal of the location and local rental rates


in areas where the subsidy doesn't come close to covering the rent,,,,,this is still a problem for those who don't wish to live in areas of concentrated poverty

There has been historically low interest rates....it hasn't done much if anything to make housing more affordable for lower income families.
Besides that not all mortgages have an "adjustable rate", fixed rate mortgages are more common.

That's nowhere near Obama's last act.
And Obama signed that AFFH executive order back in like mid 2015.


Castro is HUD secretary. He's not "cooking up a scheme," he's just doing his job to facilitate the executive order Obama signed.
Have you read the liberal rainbows and puppies babblespeak they use?
Holy crap it's scary.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/press/press_releases_media_advisories/2015/HUDNo_15-084
https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/affh/
http://www.fhco.org/pdfs/AFFHJeffrey1.pdf

"I'm not beating you with a baseball bat until you shut the f up and behave how I want you to. Through rapid response networks I am horizontally and vertically integrating a recreationally supportive accountability method to ensure compliance to fair human rights standards in effect since 1903 as a means to support and enable actualized freedom and justice choices to address issues with inequality, child rape, nazi's, terrorism, 9/11."


(from the overview of HUD's 'proposal'): "The concept of AFFH requires participants to work on fixing the issues, which at their core, lead to discrimination and not allowing people the opportunity of fair housing choice"

So:
"Excuse me Mr. Government...We all chose to live here, in an area without poor people or lots of crime, but you're saying the issue is making sure people have the choice of where they live, like when you gave kids vouchers so they could choose where they went to school. So you're saying we can't really choose to live where we want to, the place we choose to make..."
Gov't response: "Your choice doesn't matter f'ker."

choice to not live around crime makes sense

choice of the financial status of neighbors is something totally different

Next she may claim she is black, like she claimed she was Native American.
And receive another $250,000 for teaching ONE class.

choice to post & actually make sense.

I tried not to use words large than three syllables

which part was hard to understand?


maybe it was the missing word 'the'??

the choice to not live around criminals makes sense

the choice to not live next to people based upon their financial status,,,not so much

Oh it is an 'M2 Archive Moment'

By your own words..... And contradictions.

"The choice to not live around criminals makes sense"

"The choice to not live next to people based upon their financial status,,,not so much"

----------
The people who PAY, FULL price, to live where they live. HAVE CHOICES. One of which is to NOT expose themselves, to crime or anything else they don't like or want. And also to have & keep & preserve what they do have, & like & EARNED, & have a RIGHT to.

It is not only the American way.. It has always been, though out the world.

" The poor will always be among you"

The ONLY people who will benefit from this are the ones that believe & want.... " Order from chaos ".
So make lots & lots of chaos.


Agenda much ?

As a medic, the overwhelming majority of violent calls.....shootings, stabbings, fights, domestic violence....and medical emergencies involving drug use were at Sect. 8 communities, apt complexes, and the like.
These places were more than frequent destinations.
Invariably, you would see a handful of residents who would shake their heads at what was going on. These people I felt sorry for.... just trying to make it and, hopefully, make it out of those hell holes one day
Maybe would should make it easier on those folks.....get the criminals out...for good. If a resident or member of a Sect 8 household gets convicted of a violent crime or a drug or alcohol crime, they relinquish their Sect 8 "privileges" ....that seems to be the buzzword these days....for good.
I mean hey.....if youre getting a big hand up...the least you could do....to me, it seems, is be a decent citizen.

choice when someone else picks up the Bill!

Choice when YOU pay for it,not when others have to pick up your Tab!

actually, no they dont

and what is 'full price'? ,,homes are usually mortgaged or rented, both are paying, just to different entities

ya see, whereas crime is something that people know and impact them,, your neighbors financial status is none of your business

as long as they are paying what they are in contract to pay and maintaining their home

so, as I said before

I have no right to demand what income my neighbor must earn

I do have a right to be concerned with maintenance and crime though