Part of the American Dream is working hard, saving one’s pennies and securing the best housing one can afford for his family. Countless Americans have moved from the inner cities in recent decades to carve-out a life free from the traffic and the crime that too-often riddles the inner city.
Those seeking a bit of serenity and relative peace, however, cannot get away from the long arm of the federal government and this administration’s continual need to socially engineer and tamper with every facet of modern society.
Housing Secretary Julian Castro, a rumored top contender for Hillary Clinton’s running mate, is working to make the suburbs less prosperous and less white by using the federal government and American tax dollars to relocate inner city populations to areas that these residents would otherwise be unable to afford.
Because when you’re playing with other peoples’ money, why not spend it to put people into houses they can’t afford with government subsidies?
Castro’s plan calls for a Section 8 reboot that would greatly augment the already-obscenely redistributive concept of government-subsidized housing by increasing vouchers that can be used to secure housing in neighborhoods that would otherwise be too pricey.
A similar program was tried in Dallas several years ago and the program was a disaster. Not only is it inherently unfair to those who worked hard to pay for nice houses in nice neighborhoods, but the program did little more than shift the violence of the inner city more into pricey neighborhoods populated by families who paid good money so that they would not have to deal with the problems associated with the inner city.
Castro has already begun pushing his brand of social engineering. Last month, he threatened to sue landlords that turned-down Section 8 applicants with a criminal record and last year he implemented a plan that forces all suburban counties which accept federal grant money to prioritize building more Section 8 housing.
His latest plan, to augment the spending on section 8 to relocate families to the suburbs, is expected to be implemented by October.
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.
In expensive ZIP codes, Castro’s plan — which requires no congressional approval — would more than double the standard subsidy, while also covering utilities. At the same time, he intends to reduce subsidies for those who choose to stay in housing in poor urban areas, such as Brooklyn. So Section 8 tenants won’t just be pulled to the suburbs, they’ll be pushed there.
“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 report also detailed a similar program attempted in 1994 under President Clinton which failed miserably. Explaining the consequences of the 15 year-long study, The New York Post reports:
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.
This is yet another opportunity for the Obama Administration to meddle and punish those who have dared to provide for themselves without relying entirely upon the government.
The left relies upon promoting government dependence and augmenting problems that can allegedly only be fixed through more government intervention.
The fact is that life is unfair sometimes and some can afford houses in nicer neighborhoods and others cannot. However, the same administration that believes healthcare, phones, internet, food and housing are rights that ought to be guaranteed government now appears to operate under the belief that taxpayers not only be obliged to financially support other peoples’ supposed right to be gifted housing with a white picket fence in the suburbs.
At this point, what is the point of working hard to achieve the American dream?