The hits keep on coming at the American public. Unfortunately, it is the elected officials in Washington, DC, that keep betraying their constituents and voter base who are swinging the bats. Even with a majority Republican House and Senate, establishment Obama-loving GOP members have voted to remove further rights of citizens using our own tax dollars.
In short, if Big Brother’s race-obsessed data-gathering machine determines that there are not enough poor or minority residents on welfare living in your city, town, zip code, or neighborhood, Obama wants to change that using your tax dollars. The scheme also sidelines states and borders by considering “regions” instead, a key element of the agenda to break down the traditional United States and its federalist system of government.
Friends, this is where the final blow to liberty and freedom, outside of quashing Christianity, will occur – in our own city councils, county commissioners and local elected officials. It works very simply, in disguise, and enticing to local officials. The New American explains, "the 'Affirmatively Further Fair Housing' plot is contingent on successfully bribing local officials into compliance." These bribes take the form of unconstitutional "grants" and other funds coming from the federal government's unconstitutional agency, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, giving the agency and the federal government the upper hand in "planning."
However, there is a remedy. It is called nullification. If no other link is read, the link for nullification is a must read by everyone. The States can simply nullify this unconstitutional housing project to "prohibit cities and towns" from morphing into agents of the federal government. Nullification is the rightful course against unconstitutional legislation going back to the 1700s. For those who question nullification in this day and age, remember, liberals, LIBERALS, used it in states like Colorado to nullify "federal and international prohibitions against marijuana."
Likewise, local governments can refuse to accept money in the form of unconstitutional grants and funds from HUD. This leaves the long arm of the lawless in Washington, DC, with zero leverage over local governments and officials. This is probably the simplest way to thwart this forced change. States have long since sold out to be subjects of the federal government.
One Republican who led the way against this latest lawlessness by the Obama administration is Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT). He proposed an amendment to the Senate Transportation and HUD appropriations bill that would have defunded Obama's AFFH dictatorial decree and implementation by HUD.
In a speech on the Senate floor, Lee explained how this edict works, what is violated, and how this amendment would prevent it.
Here’s how the rule works.
AFFH requires cities and towns across the country to audit their local housing policies, under close supervision by HUD regulators, who may have never have lived anywhere near there.
If any aspect of a community’s housing and demographic patterns fails to meet HUD bureaucrats’ expansive definition of “fair housing,” the local government must submit a plan to reorganize the community’s housing practices according to the preferences and priorities of the bureaucrats.
Critics of AFFH often say – as I have said – that this rule turns HUD into a National Zoning Board with the power to unilaterally rewrite local zoning laws and land-use regulations in every city and town in America.
But that’s not quite how the rule works, and it’s why Senator Collins’ amendment would not do anything to prevent the implementation of AFFH.
In the 10 months since the rule was finalized, it has become clear that the mechanics of AFFH are much more underhanded and subversive than critics have often claimed.
Under the new rule, HUD doesn’t replace local Public Housing Authorities – it conscripts them into its service.
Mr. President, this gets to the heart of the difference between my amendment and the amendment offered by my colleague, Senator Collins.
The danger of AFFH is not that HUD will direct local governments and public housing authorities to make specific changes to their zoning policies. It will just threaten them, by tying obedience to federal Community Development Block Grants.
Traditionally, local officials have been free to use their CDBG grant money according to their community’s needs and priorities. But under AFFH, HUD officials will withhold a local government’s CDBG funds unless that local government adopts HUD’s preferred housing policies.
This comes down to Americans being able to retain the choice in where they live. Lee explained:
As currently written, it permits the Department of Housing and Urban Development to proceed in the implementation of its radical new regulation, the insultingly misnamed “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule,” or AFFH.
Proponents of AFFH, including President Obama, claim that it fulfills the original purpose and promise of the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
But the truth is, HUD’s new housing rule isn’t the fulfillment – but a betrayal – of the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
The original intent of the Fair Housing Act was to protect the God-given right of individuals and families – no matter their skin color or ethnicity – to buy and rent homes where they please. By contrast, the explicit purpose of HUD’s new rule is to empower federal bureaucrats to dictate where a community’s low-income residents will live.
This is not what “progress” looks like, Mr. President.
AFFH not only grants unprecedented new powers to HUD that were not contemplated by – and have no legitimate basis in – the Fair Housing Act of 1968, but it will ultimately hurt the very people it purports to help: public-housing residents – especially African-American public-housing residents – who too often find themselves trapped in dysfunctional, broken neighborhoods.
To make matters worse, this new rule will end America’s unique – and uniquely successful – commitment to localism and diversity, and make neighborhood-level construction decisions subject to the whims of future presidents.
If this past year has not yet done enough to give you pause about handing over such power to the Executive Branch, you’re not paying close enough attention.
So, instead of housing and neighborhood planning being left to local governments who know the needs of their area better than Washington bureaucrats, the bureaucrats would then dictate to local governments the planning. How does that work out for the population? Again, Lee provided an appropriate example that fell on deaf ears.
Predictably, proponents of the rule claim that this will be a collaborative process, with local-government officials in the driver’s seat while the bureaucrats at HUD merely provide “support” and “guidance.” But the 10-month track record of AFFH suggests that the opposite will be true.
In fact, I have already heard from the Housing Authority of Salt Lake County predicting that the costs of complying with AFFH will stretch their already-thin resources, add hundreds of hours of bureaucratic paperwork to their workloads, and eliminate their autonomy to determine the best ways to provide adequate low-cost housing to their community.
The history of Chicago is instructive here.
In the 2000s, Chicago’s city government demolished many of its public-housing facilities without a plan to replace them.
Those with the resources and wherewithal to choose where to live moved to places where housing is cheap and economic opportunity is plentiful. But the less fortunate were relocated to more remote, less prosperous towns, like Dubuque, Iowa, at the behest of – who else – the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
In 2008, the city of Dubuque was struggling to meet the needs of its own public-housing residents. Yet in stepped HUD, declaring that the city’s housing policies would fail to meet the agency’s fair-housing standards – and that, therefore, the city would be ineligible to receive federal funding from HUD – unless the local government actively recruited Section 8 voucher holders from Chicago.
Unwilling to lose access to federal funding on which the city had come to rely, the small Iowan town acquiesced to HUD’s demands.
This imposed an enormous administrative burden on the city’s resource-strapped housing agencies, but HUD’s real victims were Chicago’s public-housing residents who were forcibly displaced to an unknown town 200 miles from the city they used to call home.
As we see in the example, state boundaries are totally ignored and replaced with "regions" that clearly cross state lines. In other words, bypass of the State government occurs, violating the Tenth Amendment, in favor of the Washington, DC "region" platform. Lee's amendment would have effectively defunded this travesty and stopped its implementation.
According to Lee, "... low-income families are not statistics to be managed by distant bureaucrats – they’re human beings, our neighbors in need, who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect."
But, Lee's amendment was rejected by the DC traitors in favor of an amendment by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), a known liberal establishment type. The DC traitors, instead of upholding their oath and supporting the Constitution, clearly continued the status quo of violating it. The amendment proposed by Collins has been called "a cheap and transparent ploy aimed at providing political cover for pro-Obama Republicans to bankroll Obama's AFFH scheme with federal tax dollars. And there can be little doubt about it."
Under the Collins amendment, HUD may not directly force local authorities “to undertake specific changes to existing zoning laws.” But as Lee explained, the Collins measure would allow the “underhanded and subversive” mechanics of the AFFH to continue.
How did this atrocity come to pass? It's very simple really and best explained by Rick Manning, President of Americans for Limited Government.
“Americans wonder what is going wrong with the system in Washington, D.C. where Senators seem more interested in playing paddy cake with President Obama and his radical agenda rather than standing up and fighting it,” said a statement by Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning, who supported Lee's measure to de-fund Obama's schemes bribing local governments for “racial and income gerrymandering zoning requirements.” “Unfortunately, too many of [Lee's] Republican colleagues were more afraid of the race hustlers who seek to put low income high rise apartments into middle-class neighborhoods.” [emphasis mine]
And, this is the true issue as stated by Manning – race hustlers seeking to disrupt all middle-class neighborhoods by putting low income high rise apartments in their midst.
The issue at hand boils down to freedom and constitutionality. The Constitution grants no authority to the federal government over housing or the movement of people. What authority not granted to the federal government becomes the authority of the States or the people, respectively – the Tenth Amendment. Individuals are free to choose where their live, in what type of dwelling they live and how they live based on their income. Cities and localities create ordinances on dwellings and initiate zoning laws in order to protect property values of the citizens who live there.
Besides being unconstitutional and HUD being an unconstitutional agency, the New American indicates "the evidence also suggests that the HUD 'Community Development Block Grant' bribes used to advance AFFH are a massive failure."
According to a study by the Reason Foundation, the flow of taxpayer dollars has primarily benefited cronies and special interests, while doing basically nothing to reduce poverty. So taxpayers are being unconstitutionally bilked out of almost $15 billion a year to shower on crony capitalists. Now Obama wants to use the handouts to help re-shape America too — and, presumably, to transform the demographics of America's state legislative and congressional districts.
In fact, even the federal government's own studies show that the radical “housing diversity” machinations being pushed from D.C. have failed miserably to accomplish the feds' own stated objectives. “A 2011 study sponsored by HUD found that adults using more generous Section 8 vouchers did not get better jobs or get off welfare,” reported Paul Sperry in the New York Post. “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.”
The failure of Lee's amendment to pass does not mean the fight is over as others, like property-rights attorney Ethan Bevins with the College of Public Interest Law at the Pacific Legal Fund, vow to keep fighting by using legal action. According to Bevins, once the people start feeling the effects of Hussein Soetoro's AFFH in the form of "government-engineered changes in home pricing, neighborhoods being reshaped, communities getting sick of 'mummification by red tape,' and people realizing the strings attached to federal money end in a noose," Lee's amendment might stand another chance at passage. Bevins stated the Pacific Legal Fund will not hesitate "to resort to the courts to do what the Senate cannot."
It's time to face facts here. The War on American Citizens is here, now, and has every intention of escalating. Our elected officials in Washington, DC, are bought and paid for by special interest, the wealthy, and blackmailed by one Hussein Soetoro to eradicate every last bastion of freedom, liberty and unalienable God-given rights of the people. It is a move toward totalitarianism not seen since the Bolshevik revolution resulting in the installation of communism in the land of Russia and Mao Tse Tung's revolution producing dictatorial communist rule of China. If you are unfamiliar about what happened during those historical events, do some research – millions were murdered by their own government, millions starved to death, and the people were herded wherever the government wanted them to go; they owned nothing, had zero freedoms and worked in jobs the government dictated. Everyone was equally miserable except for the controlling political elite and wealthy.
While some may be perfectly content with the "nanny police state," many are not. The point of no return is almost upon us. What we choose now, will determine what fate will await our posterity and what we will choose to leave them. Anyone who thinks the situation will be different here than in Russia or China does not understand the evilness that absolute power can generate. While the majority of people may think their idea of "equality" will be the norm should the farce of communism overtake this nation, they would be wrong, as it is what the "ruling elite" think is equal for the people, excluding them, that will be prevalent.
Sometimes it is easier to "cut out the tumor" than it is to try to eradicate it with chemotherapy or radiation. For once the big offense has been removed, the smaller fragments can be managed with the smaller measure.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.