TRUMP STOPS TAXPAYER-BACKED MORTGAGES FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS

TRUMP STOPS TAXPAYER-BACKED MORTGAGES 

FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS

How Democrats are taking the economy hostage 

to protect illegal aliens

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273245/trump-stops-taxpayer-backed-mortgages-illegal-daniel-greenfield; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism

When Barack Obama implemented his unilateral amnesty for illegal aliens who claimed to have entered this country before the age of sixteen, the illegally amnestied illegals qualified for many benefits.

One of these were FHA loans.

FHA loans are government-backed mortgages meant for poorer Americans unable to qualify for normal mortgages. Democrat abuse of the FHA helped lead to the Great Recession and in the years afterward, FHA insured loans hit losses of $70 billion. By 2012, the FHA was $16 billion in the hole and had to be bailed out. The delinquency rate for FHA loans is still more than three times higher than normal loans, and depending on the period, have hovered between 8% and 14%. Time to bring in the illegal aliens.

When Obama illegally implemented DACA, a program exempting certain illegal aliens from government action, they were also allowed to apply for FHA loans. How many illegal aliens obtained FHA loans?

In December, a letter from three Senate Democrats claimed that HUD barred “approximately 800,000 individuals approved for DACA from FHA-insured mortgage loans”. This refers to the total number of DACA illegal aliens and it’s unknown how many of them have obtained FHA loans in past years.

Ellie Mae’s millennial tracker estimated that the average size of an FHA loan to millennials is $186,454. Potential exposure to illegal alien mortgages could then climb as improbably high as $150 billion.

It’s unknown how many illegal aliens have taken out FHA loans, but some media stories have cited loan officers for whom illegal alien FHA loans represent a significant percentage of their business.

The Trump administration has applied the brakes to this avalanche of taxpayer-insured mortgages to illegal aliens. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had begun notifying lenders that the FHA was no longer in the illegal alien mortgage business. The reasons were common sense. DACA illegal aliens, or in media spin, DREAMERs, were not legal residents and weren’t being legalized.

Under Obama, FHA rules had been bent so far backward that people who were not only non-citizens, not only non-permanent residents, but weren’t even legally here, were having taxpayers guarantee their mortgages. Not only hadn’t the Democrats learned anything from the Great Recession, they were determined to make the irresponsible behavior of the FHA a decade ago seem sober and sensible.

And they aren’t giving up.

The December letter by Senator Menendez, who had recently been on trial for corruption charges, Senator Booker, on whose watch the $100 million poured into Newark public schools dissipated, and Senator Cortez-Mastro, who had been accused of taking dirty money, claimed to be, “appalled that the Trump Administration would exploit a federal government program to deny Dreamers an opportunity of owning their own home.” But it was the Democrats who had exploited a federal government program meant for poor Americans to benefit not only foreigners, but illegal aliens with no right to be here.

The letter by the three Senator Democrats falsely claimed that President Trump was targeting a “portion of the American public”, when in fact illegal aliens are not part of the American public. They demanded, “sound and unambiguous legal reasoning” for the move. The sound and unambiguous reasoning would be that illegal aliens are not legally resident in the United States and therefore do not qualify for loans.

Much of the furor over FHA loans for illegal aliens was stirred up by Dani Hernandez, an underwriter for NewCastle Home Loans. NewCastle in Chicago markets aggressively to DACA illegal aliens, declaring, “Don’t let the political climate worry you. DACA recipients are eligible to buy a home.” It also assures the illegal aliens that they can qualify for FHA loans and it “specializes in working with DACA recipients.”

Prospective FHA borrowers are also informed that they can get a loan with a credit score as low as 500 and a 50% debt-to-income ratio.

The illegal alien mortgage business, built on the backs of American taxpayers, is obviously profitable. But it’s also a silent nuclear weapon threatening mass destruction of the economy in case of deportations.

The more illegal aliens end up with FHA loans, and as those FHA loans are turned into Ginnie Mae Mortgage Backed Securities, deporting DACA illegal aliens would risk mass defaults on FHA loans which are backed by American taxpayers. Quite a few Ginnie Mae bonds are being held by Japan and China.

That’s why HUD’s move of stopping the flow of FHA loans to illegal aliens is so vital and important.

Not only do FHA loans endanger our economic security, they also endanger our national security. Their very existence serves as political leverage to prevent the government from enforcing the law. Every illegal alien mortgage not only robs American taxpayers, but puts them at risk of even worse losses.

And considering the role of mortgage-backed securities in the Great Recession, the threat is real.

However, HUD has carefully avoided taking a clear position to prevent the inevitable lawsuits and overrides by Obama and Clinton judges embedded in the federal judiciary. Instead, HUD officials have successfully warned off many lenders by creating ambiguity about the status of DACA FHA loans.

The riskier illegal alien FHA loans appear, the more irresponsible taking them on will seem. And lenders will be aware of the shadow of the “False Claims Act” hanging overhead if they bite on illegal loans.

This is far from an ideal solution. But it’s an understandable response by a crippled executive branch that has had its legal powers stripped from it by Democrat activists operating under the guise of judges.

But taxpayer-backed mortgages for illegal aliens are only the tip of the tottering FHA iceberg that President Trump needs to begin shutting down to avoid another recession caused by bad loans.

FHA loans to non-citizens are also extended to non-permanent residents and even to “refugees”. The Office of Refugee Resettlement had even been promoting Freddie Mac’s Islamic Sharia-compliant mortgages for Muslim “refugees”. Foreigners here under Temporary Protected Status, a category that the Trump administration has begun winding down, are also potentially eligible for FHA loans.

The FHA is deeply dangerous and troubled. It is in desperate need of reform.

American taxpayers have long been exploited by the FHA as a piggy bank to pay off Democrat voters. But DACA FHA loans have taken this a step further by taking the economy hostage for illegal aliens.

The FHA loan was created to serve Americans. If it is to continue to exist, it should only serve Americans.

There has never been any reason given why the United States government should be extending its credit on behalf of foreigners, whether they are residents, temporary workers or, let alone, illegal aliens.

The risk of such loans has been rolled into the overall risk for Americans. And the buck was passed.

The artificial stimulation of the housing market isn’t reason enough for the government to be putting the economy at risk and taxpayers on the hook for the illegal aliens whom Democrats hope to turn into voters. DACA was an illegal policy. FHA loans for DACA recipients piles illegality on illegality.

American taxpayers should be let off the hook for illegal alien mortgages before the cost grows too high.
____________________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/273282/fannie-mae-backs-mortgages-illegal-aliens-daniel-greenfield

MINISTER ASKS FEDS TO INVESTIGATE AFTER BEING THREATENED WITH EVICTION FOR HOSTING BIBLE STUDY IN APARTMENT COMPLEX

THEY WOULD NEVER THINK OF DOING THIS TO MUSLIMS

MINISTER ASKS FEDS TO INVESTIGATE AFTER BEING THREATENED WITH EVICTION FOR HOSTING BIBLE STUDY IN APARTMENT COMPLEX

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2018/10/15/minister-asks-feds-to-investigate-after-being-threatened-with-eviction-for-hosting-bible-study-in-apartment-complex/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

FREDERICKSBURG, Va. — An elderly minister who had been conducting Bible studies in the community room of an apartment complex in Virginia has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as he has been ordered to cease holding the offerings in the building under threat of eviction.

According to the complaint, Ken Hauge and his wife, who live at The Evergreens at Smith Run in Fredericksburg, received a “Notice to Cure Default or Quit” surrounding complaints in regard to the Bible studies, as well as the viewing of weekly films in the club room.

“Landlord has received a series of complaints over the last several months regarding your conduct at the community,” it read. “Specifically, landlord has learned that you have hosted Bible study classes in the club room and have recently opened up these Bible study classes to non-residents of the community.”

“Landlord has received complaints from other residents that when they attempt to use the club room while you are hosting a Bible study class, they are being ‘harassed’ and pressured to join the Bible study class, making them feel so uncomfortable that they leave the club room to avoid confrontation,” the notice claimed.

It also alleged that Hauge’s presentation of a “religious” film each Sunday night in the club room, followed by a group discussion about the movie, has resulted in similar complaints. Some residents reportedly complained that Hauge was using the room for counseling sessions for both tenants and non-residents, and that it prevented them from using the area for activities that they had previously scheduled.

“[M]ultiple residents have stated to landlord that they feel uncomfortable using the club room due to the frequency of religious activities and the interactions with you and your guests (both residents and non-residents) when the complaining residents attempt to use the club room,” the notice outlined.

It pointed to various rules about the community, such as that “conducting any kind of business” in the building is prohibited, and that tenants cannot disturb the “comfort” or “convenience” of others. The notice further provided a list of events that are acceptable at the Evergreens, such as birthday parties, wedding receptions, potluck dinners and social activities—none of which included Bible studies.

Under threat of eviction, the notice demanded that Hauge submit a request form and deposit in advance of any activity to allow for time to determine whether that event is permissible, but also advised that Bible studies and “religious” movie screenings will not be allowed, classifying them as business operations.

“[C]ease conducting any business operations in the apartment and the community (including, without limitation, the club room) other than expressly permitted under your lease. Bible study class, religious movie screenings and counselings sessions are not permitted ‘at home’ business operations, nor permitted activities in the club room,” the notice read.

The Hauges deny the allegations and have retained representation from the First Liberty Institute, which after writing a letter to the owners of The Evergreens, filed a formal complaint with the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Hauges contend that the Bible study was only for residents and was never open to the public, and that any claims they pressured others to join are false.

They state that, conversely, they were the ones who endured harassment from some upset residents who objected to the gathering.

“For example, this individual has confronted Hauge in the hallway and subjected him to profane rants concerning the Bible study. Similarly, some residents have attempted to disrupt Bible study meetings by causing noise in the community room,” the complaint reads.

“Other Bible study attendees have received disparaging comments concerning their religious beliefs while encountering these individuals in the hallways. Bible Study attendees felt intimidated by this behavior, concerned that they might similarly be confronted in the hallway and subjected to profane rants and disparaging comments,” it states.

The Hauges also note that they did go through the proper channels to apply for permission, but were repeatedly told to call the event a “book review” and not a Bible study, and after that matter was resolved, the offering was placed on the community calendar by staff.

The formal complaint also contends that the various films that are being viewed on Sunday evenings by a handful of residents cannot be considered religious, as they are general documentaries or travelogues, and any mention of religion is incidental.

“[T]he notice mischaracterizes Hauge and other residents’ habit of watching a documentary or travelogue in the community room as ‘religious movie screening,’ which it also considers a prohibited business activity. The handful of residents who gather to watch the programs on Sunday night do so informally, desiring simply to share a casual activity with others in order to fill an otherwise empty evening,” it states.

The Hauges further argue that they have never held any counseling sessions despite the allegations in the notice. And while they have held mid-week Bible studies for residents and have offered documentaries in the club room on Sunday nights, neither of those events can be considered business activity.

“Primarily, the notice fabricates a lease violation by mischaracterizing Hauge’s Bible study and religious practice as a business activity prohibited in either the community room or the apartment. Hauge may be a minister by profession, but he led the Bible study in his personal capacity and on his own time,” the complaint reads. “Such studies are a common practice among Christians, who often gather outside of their churches to study the Bible and develop friendships in their spare time.”

The filing argues that while the notice suggests that the Bible study was unauthorized, The Evergreens “have been aware of the Bible study for approximately a year and a half, even approving its community room use and listing it on the resident calendar for a time.”

The Hauges believe that leadership at The Evergreens is rather listening to hostile voices of complaint without looking into whether there is any validity to the claims, and are themselves unfairly targeting the practice of religion as its new community room policy bans any use for “religious services or for other religious purposes.”

“For fear of losing their home, the Hauges complied with the notice and policy by ceasing to hold Bible study meetings pending resolution of this matter. We respectfully request that the department investigate … and take all appropriate action,” the letter reads.

“It is both shameful and illegal to threaten elderly residents with eviction simply for holding a Bible study,” Lea Patterson, associate counsel for First Liberty Institute, said in a press release. “Treating residents unequally simply out of hostility to religion violates federal law and taints Virginia’s long history of religious freedom.”

The Community Realty Company, which owns The Evergreens, told reporters following the Hauge’s filing that the minister and his wife have not “been denied the right to practice their religion in their apartment, nor have any other of the residents.”

LIBERAL COLLECTIVIST COMMUNE: TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DELAYS OBAMA DECREE TO "DIVERSIFY" YOUR COMMUNITY

 LIBERAL "FAIR" COLLECTIVIST COMMUNE

 

 
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DELAYS OBAMA DECREE TO "DIVERSIFY" YOUR COMMUNITY

BY ALEX NEWMAN

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/27926-trump-admin-delays-obama-decree-to-diversify-your-community; 

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The Trump administration has decided to delay — but not yet scrap — a draconian and widely condemned “regulation” from the Obama administration known as the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) rule. The scheme, which became a lighting rod of controversy, aims to gather massive amounts of demographic data on every community in America, then use the awesome powers of the federal government to redistribute people based on race and income. It's all to advance some nebulous notion of “diversity” and “fairness,” advocates say. On both sides of the debate, though, there is an expectation that the recently unveiled delay could be a stop-gap measure while the rule is totally abolished.
Officially, the rule was “delayed” because local governments were having trouble understanding — not to mention complying — with the byzantine mandates. About one third of the initial local government plans for compliance submitted to the feds were rejected, sparking concerns, according to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development officials. Multiple local bureaucrats from big liberal cities and the Obama administration were quoted downplaying the confusion and celebrating the rule as if it were some great invention or innovation. Unsurprisingly, establishment mouthpieces such as the New York Times did not quote a single critic, despite quoting liberally from tax-funded supporters with a clear conflict of interest.

   The rule itself is confusing. Under the guise of making communities more “diverse” and ending “segregation,” the Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) scheme would radically reshape your neighborhood. Not enough federally subsidized low-income apartments in your upper- or middle-class suburb of single-family homes? The AFFH would change that by plopping more welfare recipients and Section 8-subsidized apartments there. Not enough whites, Latinos, black people, Muslims, or Asians in your community? The AFFH would seek to redistribute people, too, until the feds' vision of racial, religious, and income levels being harmonized is realized across America.
In addition to the gnashing of teeth by the establishment's leading propaganda organs, a coalition of establishment AstroTurf groups on the left-wing fringe also whined about the delay in enforcing the rule. Basically, the alliance claimed that poverty and poor education are a result of a federal government that has not been active enough in redistributing people based on their demographics and socioeconomic status. However, federal studies that have been done show that redistributing poor or minority people into wealthier communities did not actually improve wellbeing, resulted in more food stamp use, and brought crime into safer neighborhoods.
Outraged by the delay, the coalition, which includes everything from transgender groups and the ACLU to a range of front groups for billionaire extremist George Soros, demanded that HUD begin vigorously enforcing the decree. Ironically, they claimed not allowing D.C. bureaucrats to immediately reshape communities across America was “giving local residents less voice in important decisions about their communities.” Seriously. 
But if the hysterics are correct, the delay may just be a temporary measure as the scheme is tossed into the trash heap of regulations being dismantled by the Trump administration. The current HUD secretary, Ben Carson, was actually a fierce critic of the scheme prior to joining Trump's cabinet. In a stinging rebuke of the power grab, Carson said that the Obama agency's rules relied on a “tortured reading” of the relevant federal statutes.
“The new rule would not only condition the grant of HUD funds to municipalities on building affordable housing as is the case today, but would require that such affordable housing be built primarily in wealthier neighborhoods with few current minority residents and that the new housing be aggressively marketed to minorities,” warned Carson in a column while he was running for the GOP nomination.
As intended, the Obama rule would fundamentally transform many communities — especially wealthier suburbs. “In practice, the rule would fundamentally change the nature of some communities from primarily single-family to largely apartment-based areas by encouraging municipalities to strike down housing ordinances that have no overtly (or even intended) discriminatory purpose — including race-neutral zoning restrictions on lot sizes and limits on multi-unit dwellings, all in the name of promoting diversity,” added Carson, a widely respected pediatric neurosurgeon once labeled an “extremist” by the fringe left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center.
However, as with other socialist schemes that have backfired everywhere they have been tried, Carson predicted that the AFFH would end up becoming yet another government-mandated boondoggle. “These government-engineered attempts to legislate racial equality create consequences that often make matters worse,” he concluded, offering examples such as the failed “busing” experiments with school children. “There are reasonable ways to use housing policy to enhance the opportunities available to lower-income citizens, but based on the history of failed socialist experiments in this country, entrusting the government to get it right can prove downright dangerous.”
However, after becoming HUD boss, Carson has softened his tone, and vowed to “reinterpret” the rule rather than scrap it altogether, alarming those who supported him for the post due to his opposition to AFFH. “Do I believe in fair housing? Of course, I believe in fair housing,” Carson was quoted as saying by the Washington Examiner, adding that he did not believe in “extra manipulation and cost.” “So we just have to reinterpret it, that's all,” Carson said, without elaborating on how he might reinterpret it to be less costly and manipulative. Of course, lawless Supreme Court decrees notwithstanding, no amount of manipulation outside a constitutional amendment could make the rule constitutional, since the feds have no constitutional authority over housing policy, period.
In an e-mail to The New American, American Policy Center chief Tom DeWeese said much more was needed to rein in an out-of-control federal government — but that the delay could be a good first step. “I'm glad to see Carson is finally taking some steps,” said DeWeese, author of the new book exposing “sustainable development” titled Sustainable! The War on Free Enterprise, Private Property and Individuals. “Is it enough? Time will tell. He is under tremendous pressure by the non-governmental organizations [NGOs] to not touch this sacred cow. But if we are to restore American freedoms and property rights, this must be the first target.”
An entire chapter in his new book is actually dedicated to exposing the dangers of Obama's AFFH scheme. “The main points are that the enforcement of AFFH, without a clear definition of what it really is — forcing local communities to strip search every neighborhood for ´equality,' 'balance,' and other specific measures dictated by HUD —has created specific guidelines dictating specific numbers of each for a proper "balance," DeWeese warned. “They have to do this every five years. If HUD finds the neighborhood 'out of balance' then the community needs to bring it in balance — perhaps by advertising to find the ethnic or racial groups, etc, to bring in HUD-dictated balance. It is social engineering and most specifically destroys local rule.”
Trump has cut 22 federal regulations for every new one added, sparking nationwide celebrations and a dramatic economic boost that has seen the stock market soar to record highs. The AFFH, though, is more than just another burdensome Obama-era regulation that is dragging down productivity and wasting money. Instead, it represents one of the subversive tactics used by Obama and the establishment behind him to “fundamentally transform the United States of America,” as Obama infamously put it. Indeed, it is an attempt to centrally plan local communities by an all-powerful government that, unless it is restrained, will continue to devour every last freedom until at last it kills its own host — the American people.
Not only is this AFFH regulation unconstitutional, it is dangerous: It undermines freedom of association, the right to self government, the rule of law, private property rights, local governance, states' rights, and much more. Trump and Carson should make good on yet another pledge by killing the rule once and for all. Then, if they want to truly show respect for their oath of office, they can work to shut down the entire unconstitutional and unnecessary “housing” bureaucracy. In the meantime, though, communities can and must protect themselves from this federally mandated social engineering by refusing to accept “grants” from HUD — and by firmly rejecting the strings that come attached to them. 

Related articles:
Bill Would Nullify Obama Plot to “Diversify” Your Neighborhood
Trump’s Regulatory Rollback: Not 2 to 1, but 22 to 1!
Battle Rages as GOP Saves Obama Plot to Diversify Neighborhoods
Obama Seeks to Reshape Neighborhoods With Housing “Diversity”
UN's “New Urban Agenda” to Assault Liberty in a City Near You
Private Property Ownership — the First American Right To Die Under Barack Obama’s Tyranny
CFR Globalist: End U.S. States, Build China-style Regional Gov't
President's New Housing Plan: Another Racist Policy
A New Symbol Has Been Cast: People • Property • Liberty
HUD Seeks to Address "Inequality" in Wealthy Neighborhoods Through Regulations
“Smart Cities” to Spy on You in Ways Orwell Never Imagined
Communist Chinese Regime Forcing Rural Population Into Cities
________________________________________________________
SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS:
https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2017/04/bill-would-nullify-obama-plot-to.html 
https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2016/11/feds-usurp-housing-authority-to-fight.html 
https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2016/07/listen-this-time-or-grant-money-from.html 
https://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2016/06/obamas-new-version-of-desegregation.html 
VIDEOS:

 Tom DeWeese: HUD's AFFH Will Destroy 

Your Neighborhood

 AFFH MUST BE STOPPED

 AFFH will allow the Federal Government to rewrite local zoning laws and build low income housing - GHETTOS - in white upper middle class neighborhoods. Rapes, robberies, burglaries and black mob violence against whites will cause race wars that will rip our country apart. Obama is a maniac working for the psychopaths that run the Federal Reserve.

 Is AFFH Really Fair?

 Last week HUD released a rule so radical, you'd think Marx wrote it. In an expansion of AHF, the government created a rule intended to decrease residential segregation. So how does a government that can't manage a post office reengineer our neighborhoods? Is this even the role of the government?

 OBAMA'S FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION: AFFH ALLOWS HUD TO CHOOSE 

YOUR NEIGHBORS

 AFFH is a program that will allows the FEDS to come into your town and do a demographic study. They want to know what race of people lives where. If you take their grant money (HUD) they will then get to dictate to you whether or not your city is a "racist/segregated" city.

 
 

BILL WOULD NULLIFY OBAMA PLOT TO "DIVERSIFY" YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD

BILL WOULD NULLIFY OBAMA PLOT TO 

"DIVERSIFY" YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD 

BY ALEX NEWMAN

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/25830-bill-would-nullify-obama-plot-to-diversify-your-neighborhood; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Legislation has been introduced in Congress to defund and overturn a controversial Obama administration decree from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to transform and “diversify” American neighborhoods under the direction of Big Brother. The new bill would also reverse the attempted unconstitutional usurpation of power over local zoning decisions by the federal government and the unelected regional authorities charged with managing the transformation. And the measure would end a “geospatial database” mandated under the scheme to track the racial and income composition of each area, a key element of the scheme to redistribute people based on their melanin content and earnings.
The Obama administration's race-obsessed decree, known as the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) rule, became a lightning rod for criticism by conservatives and constitutionalists last year. A coalition of Republican lawmakers, facing outrage among their constituents, tried to defund the unconstitutional scheme while Obama was still in office. However, establishment Republicans quietly worked behind the scenes to betray conservatives by supporting Obama's radical power grab and handing even more tax money to Obama's HUD. With those establishment lawmakers still in power, passage of the new bill remains far from assured, even with Trump in the White House, Ben Carson at HUD, and the GOP in control of both houses of Congress. But prospects are better than before, analysts say.
The bill to overturn the AFFH decree is known as the “Local Zoning Decisions Protection Act of 2017.” In the House of Representatives, where it was introduced by Representative Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), the legislation is known as H.R. 482. In the Senate, the companion bill, S. 103. was introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah). Both Representative Gosar and Senator Lee led the way last year in the unsuccessful attempt to defund and defang the AFFH scheme. Supporters of the effort, though, hope this year the chances for success will be better considering the new political dynamics — at least if the American people continue to speak out.  
The description of the six-page bill reads: “To nullify certain regulations and notices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and for other purposes.” In particular, the bill targets Obama's AFFH scheme, adopted by Obama's HUD in July of 2015, as well as any substantially similar regulation that may be published in the future. Under the legislation, the AFFH “shall have no force or effect.” The department is also prohibited from using any funds to implement the scheme, or to build the associated federal database containing “geospatial information” on the racial and income composition of American communities. 
Senator Lee was bold in slamming the scheme last year, saying it turns HUD into a “National Zoning Board.” Indeed, the explicit purpose of AFFH was “to empower federal bureaucrats to dictate where a community’s low-income residents will live,” he said. Lee also outlined how the Obama HUD edict would purport to empower D.C. bureaucrats to run roughshod over local communities and their elected officials. “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,” he explained.  
The New American was among the earliest voices to expose the Obama administration's AFFH scheme. In fact, this magazine warned as far back as 2013 — years before the regulation was formally approved — that Obama was plotting precisely such a scheme as part of his stated goal of “fundamentally transforming” America. And if it goes forward, the AFFH would indeed fundamentally transform America, down to the most minute local decisions. And of course, by redistributing people across America using federal funds, and hijacking control over local zoning decisions, the Obama scheme would also fundamentally transform politics by diluting the conservative vote in communities across the country. Similar schemes are being pushed at the global level by the United Nations.
Under the expansive regulations, cities and towns that accept federal money from the HUD would be required to submit to vast federal controls over their policy decisions. For instance, if a community receives an HUD grant, the AFFH purports to mandate costly demographic analyses at the local and regional level to determine whether there are enough low-income and minority residents living in each neighborhood, as defined by HUD bureaucrats. The giant database would include records on residents including income, race, color, religion, national origin, and much more.
If the HUD determines that not enough welfare recipients live in your neighborhood, for instance, the bureaucracy would declare your community to be “out of balance” and not in compliance with the AFFH. In response, the massive bureaucracy would use taxpayer funds — or borrowed money, considering the $20 trillion and counting in national debt — to file lawsuits against the community and impose its will. That might take the form of building more government-subsidized low-income housing in your neighborhood to attract enough welfare recipients to put your community back in balance. In short, it is social engineering by the federal government on a massive scale.
In fact, HUD has been involved in such scheming for years, with targeted communities going up against the might of Uncle Sam. In Westchester County, New York, for example, the Obama administration went to war with the community and its elected officials because they did not have enough low-income, high-density housing developments to satisfy federal bureaucrats. When local officials and residents fought back, the administration sued them, and even went so far as to seek a gag order against the county executive who was leading the fight against Obama's AFFH.
In an e-mail to members and supporters, the constitutionalist John Birch Society, which publishes this magazine, warned that the Obama scheme was an attack on fundamental American values. “AFFH is dangerous to American property owners and to local government in our communities,” the organization warned last week, calling the scheme “Barack Obama's most radical assault on American private property rights and locally elected governments.” Among other concerns, the JBS, which has chapters active in all 50 states, warned that the AFFH “obliterates personal property rights and destroys property values in whole neighborhoods.”
The Obama scheme also destroys cherished American traditions of local governance. “As HUD demands that the 'imbalance' be corrected by forcing federally subsidized housing into more affluent neighborhoods, property values plummet. Equity in those homes will be lost,” explained Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center. “In addition, as HUD moves to enforce these badly defined rules, its agents begin to dictate to local officials how their communities will develop. Locally elected officials simply become pawns to carry out HUD rules. Home rule in America will die under AFFH.”
The Left and Big Government forces, he said, are gearing up to claim that the bill to nullify AFFH is somehow “damaging” to the poor. But in reality, the AFFH itself is damaging to the poor and everyone else except government cronies — not to mention freedom, the Constitution, and key individual rights. “So AFFH is a threefold threat,” DeWeese concluded. “It destroys property rights and values. It usurps local government control. And it steals homes and dreams from the poor.” As such, property-rights advocates and constitutionalists are urging all Americans to get involved in the fight.
“There is great optimism by the sponsors of the bills that they will pass and that President Trump will sign them into law,” DeWeese noted. “However, there is growing pressure from civil rights groups, developers, and their lobbyists who fully understand the dangers these bills represent to their big government agenda. It is vital that those of us opposed to AFFH and HUD over reach keep up our own pressure by calling our Representatives and Senators to demand they support HR 482 and S.103.” The only caveat he mentioned was that the bills contain language forcing HUD to talk with “regional councils,” language he said he is hoping to have removed.
Cosponsors of the legislation in the House include Brian Babin (R-Texas), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Rod Blum (R-Iowa), Ken Buck (R-Colo.), Michael Burgess (R-Texas), Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.), Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), John Duncan, Jr. (R-Tenn.), Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.), Steve King (R-Iowa), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Ted Poe (R-Texas), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), Pete Sessions (R-Texas), Jason Smith (R-Mo.), Daniel Webster (R-Fla.), Ted Yoho (R-Fla.), Dave Brat (R-Va.), David Joyce (R-Ohio), Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), Todd Rokita (R-Ind.), and Lamar Smith (R-Texas). In the Senate, Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is also a cosponsor.
Beyond simply nullifying the Obama administration's illegal rule, Congress should also work to abolish the entire agency. There is no authority contained in the Constitution for federal involvement in either housing or urban development. As such, there is no need for, or authority for, a federal department dealing with those issues. If the electorate feels that government must be involved in housing or urban development — a dubious notion, at best — then the proper sphere of government for that is the state or local level, constitutionally speaking.
But progress limiting government to its constitutional confines at federal level may take a long time. So in the meantime, Americans should also continue to work at the local level to prevent federal meddling in their communities, while educating the electorate on constitutional governance. A good place to start is working to end the unconstitutional flow of federal tax dollars — and the strings they come attached with — to state and local governments. The feds were never meant to control local government or zoning decisions. It is time for that to stop.

Related articles:
Battle Rages as GOP Saves Obama Plot to Diversify Neighborhoods
Obama Seeks to Reshape Neighborhoods With Housing “Diversity”
UN's “New Urban Agenda” to Assault Liberty in a City Near You
Private Property Ownership — the First American Right To Die Under Barack Obama’s Tyranny
CFR Globalist: End U.S. States, Build China-style Regional Gov't
President's New Housing Plan: Another Racist Policy
A New Symbol Has Been Cast: People • Property • Liberty
HUD Seeks to Address "Inequality" in Wealthy Neighborhoods Through Regulations
“Smart Cities” to Spy on You in Ways Orwell Never Imagined
Communist Chinese Regime Forcing Rural Population Into Cities

FEDS USURP HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FIGHT "RACISM"~SUSTAINABLE FREEDOM LAB FIGHTS BACK

FEDS USURP HOUSING AUTHORITY 

TO FIGHT "RACISM" 

BY  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/24511-feds-usurp-housing-authority-to-fight-racism; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The federal government is using the concept of "sustainable development" to usurp complete and unchallengeable control over housing in the United States. There is one group of patriots, however, that refuses to stand idly by while the fundamental right to property is abolished by the bureaucracy.

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the federal agency leading the attack against property rights and against local, accountable self-government after the fashion favored and established by our ancestors.

John Anthony of Sustainable Freedom Lab recognizes the threat and is warning his countrymen about the scope and severity of the federal assault. "HUD uses our own money to bring communities to heel," Anthony said in a statement released on the group's website October 28. "By saying “no,” we can bring the agency to its knees. We do not need Congress, we do not have the time to wait for deceptive legislation and we cannot depend on political leaders drunk with inside the beltway power. We need our neighbors, political and non-political, building the same coalitions our forefathers built to survive in this new rugged land," he added.

Anthony's assessment of HUD's ultimate aim is spot on. This federal agency and the programs it administers are nothing more than regulations conceived and written by desk-bound dictators who are given unjust authority by the president and whose diktats are beyond the reach of the people who are forced to obey these directives or face being subjected to the full panoply of punishments.

HUD's particular area of unaccountable absolutism is the environment and housing. In this latest effort, the agency's underlying policy is the promotion of “sustainability,” which is globalist newspeak for totalitarianism under one world government.

Here’s the connection, as uncovered in an article published by Property Values Defense, a grassroots organization that “unites attorneys, public officials and activists nationwide to stop federal agency overreach”:

HUD, DOT and the EPA have been instrumental in fostering regionalism since 1993. In 2009, the three agencies formed a “Partnership for Sustainable Development” for the express purpose of merging their unique authorities toward the common goal of advancing sustainable regions. In June 2016, the agency also teamed with the Department of Education to promote regional Equity Assistance Centers to advance income integration in elementary and secondary classrooms.

These agencies are working feverishly to infill suburbs by transplanting urban families into the outlying communities, which then merge with nearby counties and towns into larger regions managed by unelected councils.

Even HUD’s new Assessment of Fair Housing, the document applicants must complete to receive AFFH related grants, requires grant recipients to align their local plan with a regional plan.

Collectivism is being forced on Americans under the guise of protecting the environment and providing “affordable housing” to the less advantaged.

The true purpose, of course, is to collect all mankind into urban mega-centers in order to facilitate the imposition of top-down, strong central government rule, otherwise known as global fascism.

John Anthony rightly perceives that the problem is not one of development, but one of despotism.

"HUD [and other federal agencies] have converged into a massive administration-led autocracy, pre-planning neighborhoods, living patterns, school attendance and even the social makeup of your community," he said.

"Communities that resist face compliance reviews, withdrawal of millions in HUD funding or even civil rights lawsuits that will break the financial backs of most towns and counties. And, of course the counterfeit charges of not caring for America’s poor and needy."

That last charge will be the wedge the federal government will use to divide Americans and to convince the purportedly neglected to accept federal tyranny in exchange for "equal housing opportunities."

Of course, it is one thing for a city or county to want to resist the federal regulatory restrictions, but it is not as easy to maintain this staunch sovereignty in the face of a bag of federal cash and other incentives for playing ball with the bureaucrats.

States, counties, and cities must continue, however, refusing to dance to the tune played by the federal bandleader. They must reinforce American federalism and civil liberties by emphasizing in city and county codes and state laws the sovereignty that exists in states and that exists only on loan to the federal government, no matter how much money the latter can use to bribe the former.

When it comes to caving to the central government's offers: caveat emptor.

The familiar “carrot and stick” gambit is the coin of the realm in D.C. From police to highways, from environmental standards to labor policies, the federal government has stomped its heavy jackboot into all aspects of life — areas that were once the bailiwick of states, cities, or the people themselves.

Anthony and the Sustainable Freedom Lab offer seminars to show municipalities methods for charting a course around HUD's haranguing and around the centrifugal spin of "sustainable development."

The course, entitled "Ending HUD's Tyranny," teaches local governments to "turn the tables on the government’s argument that because you reject HUD overreach, you are a 'racist that does not care about African Americans, women or the protected classes.'"

While such lessons are useful and urgently needed if American cities and counties are to remain independent, free to forge their own infrastructure plans and housing ordinances, there is a more permanent, constitutionally sound system for forcing the federal beast back inside its constitutional cage: the law of agency.

As I wrote in an article reporting on a Georgia county's effort to nullify HUD's regulatory remaking of the right to property:

Upon its ratification, the states, as principals, gave limited power to the central government to act as their agent in certain matters of common concern: defense, taxation, interstate commerce, etc.

The authority of the agent — in this case the federal government — is derived from the agreement that created the principal/agent relationship. Whether the agent is lawfully acting on behalf of the principal is a question of fact. The agent may legally bind the principal only insofar as its actions lie within the contractual boundaries of its power.

Should the agent exceed the scope of its authority, not only is the principal not held accountable for those acts, but the breaching agent is legally liable to the principal (and any affected third parties who acted in reliance on the agent’s authority) for that breach.

Under the law of agency, the principal may revoke the agent’s authority at will. It would be unreasonable to oblige the principals to honor promises of an agent acting outside the boundaries of its authority as set out in the document that created the agency in the first place.

Imagine the chaos that would be created if principals were legally bound by the acts of an agent that “went rogue” and acted prejudicially to the interests of the principals from whom he derived any power in the first place. It is a fundamental tenet of the law of agency that the agent may lawfully act only for the benefit of the principal.

Finally, despite seeming like we are constantly "fighting an uphill battle against a government that is corrupt, dishonest packed with legions of uniformed bureaucrats," there are many avenues now open to cities and counties that lead to liberty and the protection of the right to own property and to the permanent ostracism of the globalists and their sustainability scam.

_________________________________________________________

JOHN ANTHONY OF SUSTAINABLE FREEDOM LAB

http://sustainablefreedomlab.org/

John Anthony is the founder of Sustainable Freedom Lab. He is a nationally acclaimed speaker, researcher and writer. Mr. Anthony’s Property Value Defense Network informs public officials and attorneys nationwide of the impacts of regulatory laws on property rights. His online workshop, Shattering America’s Trance, teaches effective techniques for cross-political communications.

SEE ALSO: TOM DE WEESE AT:

https://deweesereport.com/

Sustainable Freedom Lab Seminar

Published on Sep 25, 2012

While Americans focus on sustainable development, they often lose sight of the importance of property rights. In many cases people are losing their property, their ability to travel as they choose and even the right to develop their own land. All in the quest to achieve sustainable development.

What they forget is that, the best way to protect land is to own and care for your own.

This series teaches all citizens how to protect their property rights in a changing world while respecting the environment.

LISTEN THIS TIME, OR GRANT MONEY FROM H.U.D. WILL DESTROY YOUR CITY

LISTEN THIS TIME, OR GRANT MONEY FROM H.U.D. WILL DESTROY YOUR CITY

BY TOM DEWEESE

SEE: http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom274.htm; 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

by Tom DeWeese
June 27, 2016
NewsWithViews.com

Trading control of local development to the federal government for grant money

America’s homeowners should be shaking in their shoes. The federal government has decided that people who have worked, saved and planned so they can buy homes in nice, safe neighborhoods of their own choosing, are racists. They charge that it is a “social injustice.” The government now claims that it’s unfair unless everyone can have the same, whether they earn it or not. And it doesn’t matter whether they can afford such a home. We’re told that it’s racist to deny someone an equal home, just because they don’t have the money for it. White privilege, don’t you know.

You may be watching the “Black Lives Matter” protests taking place on city streets around the country. You may be alarmed that such violence can happen in your downtown. And you may wonder what is behind such activity. Well, get ready for the same kind of threats and violence to possibly come directly into your own neighborhood simply because you have a nice house.

Does that sound far fetched? Well you need the details on how the federal Housing and Urban Development agency (HUD) is working to enforce its new rule called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH).

Social Justice is the name of the game under AFFH. That means the rule of law is dismissed in favor of “fairness.” Social Justice is enforced on us using pure emotion, basically operating on the level of a twelve year old girl in a pet shop who doesn’t like seeing the puppies with their sad eyes looking out from a cage. “Let the poor little doggies out,” she cries. Social Justice is purely based on redistribution of wealth. Your wealth. That’s money you worked for, saved, invested, and protected for YOUR needs; YOUR dreams; YOUR future.

“SELFISH,” cries the social justice mongers. Why should you have so much when others have so little? Never mind that you had to save your money while forced to pay 50% of it in taxes that theoretically went to those less fortunate. The fact is, there is no “justice” in such a policy. Envy, desire, jealousy and theft are much closer to the truth.

Do you think that sounds harsh. Well, Mr. and Mrs. Property Owner, tell me how harsh this sounds! As reported by John Anthony of Sustainable Freedom Lab:

• First HUD is forcing every community which is applying for its grants to complete an “Assessment of Fair Housing” to identify all “contributing factors” to discrimination. These include a complete break down of race, income levels, religion and national origin of every single person living there. They use this information to determine if the neighborhood meets a preset “balance,” determined by HUD.

• Second, HUD demands a detailed plan showing how the community intends to eliminate the “contributing factors” to this “imbalance.”

• To produce the community’s plan for compliance, HUD rules demand that a wide array of “interested parties” participate in its creation, just to assure community input and to keep things fair, of course. These include civil rights groups, affordable housing developers and civic activist organizations. They call this “civil society.” All have a specific, left-of center agenda and a definite interest in the outcome.

• Once the plan is prepared, then the community is required to sign an agreement to take no actions that are “materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.”

• Once the community provides answers as to how they will implement the grant under these guidelines to HUD’s satisfaction, then they will receive the grant.

These are the rules your locally elected representatives are forced to agree to in order to get that “free” grant money. And nearly every city council and county commission in the nation has already taken such grants.

Now ask yourselves, just why HUD would be so insistent in demanding that the community tie itself to the so-called civil rights groups in order to get the grant. The answer to that question is diabolical.

You see, if the community hesitates to comply in any way; perhaps local voters decide to turn down a program, or there aren’t enough local funds to fully comply, then HUD has a secret weapon waiting for them. Lack of compliance, in HUD’s eyes, results in law suits over civil rights violations.

The civil rights groups them become a useful tool. They start protests and demand “fairness.” They get on television. They pressure city hall. And to the rescue comes HUD with its own law suits.

Baltimore, Maryland became one of the first cities to feel such pressure and threats as the NAACP sued Baltimore over alleged housing segregation. The NAACP argument was that Section 8 subsidized housing programs “bunch people together, and that only fuels more crime and other problems.”

The solution, says the NAACP is to “integrate the poor among wealthier families.” Outrageous as it sounds, such social justice mongers actually accuse those living in affluent neighborhoods of “self segregation for white privilege.”

The pressure from these groups, along with the massive force of HUD backing them, has resulted in Baltimore being forced to agree to spending $30 million of tax-payer dollars over the next ten years to build 1,000 low income homes in affluent neighborhoods. The result will be a destruction of property values and the loss of equity for the homeowners. In short, destruction of earned wealth, leading to destruction of the middle class. That’s what socialism does. It creates more poor.

On top of that, Baltimore has moved to destroy the property rights of landlords by denying them the ability to not rent to people who can’t afford their properties. Of course the government doesn’t say it that way, preferring to pretend that denying people who can’t pay for your property as “discrimination.” And who will pay the landlord when he is stuck with the bill? The only result will be fewer landlords and fewer choices for housing.

In Portland, Oregon, the infamous “poster child” of federal Smart Growth development policies, the city council has now unanimously approved a new tax to raise $12 million per year to pay for “affordable housing.” “The lack of affordable housing is the greatest crisis facing our city right now,” says Commissioner Dan Saltsman. Perhaps he should take a long look at the twenty year Smart Growth history of Portland in which massive amounts of land were locked away to limit the “sprawl” of the city. This lead to land shortages, which led to bans on single family homes, which led to the need for massive high rise apartment buildings, all of which led to higher costs and shortages of homes. Now, they have a “crisis “of low income housings. Their solution now is another tax on construction, driving up housing costs even more.

Do they ever learn? Government control over every aspect of our lives, as demanded by socialism never works. High costs, shortages and sacrifice are the only result. It has never been different wherever it has been enforced.

Now HUD is rushing to enforce AFFH with a vengeance. HUD has raced to make Westchester County, New York the example for more suits. Right out of the new HUD playbook, a private civil rights group called the Anti-Discrimination Center sued the county under the Federal False Claims Act, claiming Westchester County lied when they filled out the HUD compliance form for their grant. Since there is no official definition of “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” the definition is whatever HUD declares it to be. There is no way for the local government to win such a suit. The result of the suit against Westchester County was $62.5 million – a sum greater than all of the community development and related funding received by the county from HUD.

More suits are being filed against communities across the nation as HUD steps up its enforcement and local officials are scared, wondering what they can do to fight back, if anything. Some have tried to stand up to HUD, refusing to comply. But once the law suits are filed, and the “community organizers” start their pressure, most have quickly backed down.

Let’s make one thing clear. The civil rights legislation of the 1960s made it illegal to bar people from neighborhoods based on their color or ethnic background. It guaranteed them the opportunity. But it said nothing about forcing people into neighborhoods to live beyond their means. No one, no matter their color or ethnic background, has a right to force their way in to a neighborhood they can’t afford. Instead, they must do the same thing those who already live there did; work, save, invest and prepare. Then no one can stop them. It has noting to do with race or some perceived special “privilege.”

For twenty years we opponents of Agenda 21 and Smart Growth have warned of the dangers of taking these HUD grants. We were ignored and called conspiracy nuts. The result now is that HUD has taken the gloves off. There is no longer a pretense that any kind of local control over spending the grant money exists. HUD now controls your community. Property rights are dead, property values are dying, and the local officials you elected to guide your community have been rendered irrelevant by HUD mobsters who have come back to collect.

So what do local community representatives do? First and foremost STOP TAKING THE GRANTS!!!!! Second, stand up to these thugs who intend to rule our communities. Stand up to the law suits and stand up to the pressure of the special interest groups. In short, represent your community as you were elected to do. And finally, you might try listening to those of us who have studied these policies for decades instead of the slithering snakes of the American Planning Association and their ilk who fill their own pockets with those grants.

Our American liberties are counting on local and state officials to start standing on your own two feet and represent US, instead of cowering in a corner because you sold us down the river.

The American Policy Center is now working with officials who want to understand and fight back to save their communities. Recently we held a conference call for such officials. Here is a link to it so you can hear first hand of the dangers you are facing and some solutions for you to fight back. Perhaps this time you’ll listen.

Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.

A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report

For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 341-8911

E-Mail: admin@americanpolicy.org

E-Mail: ampolicycenter@hotmail.com
Website: www.americanpolicy.org

_______________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS:

BANK MORTGAGE CLERKS HYPER SCRUTINIZE FIVE YEARS OF YOUR DEPOSITS & WITHDRAWALS BEFORE MAKING COMMITMENTS~HUD WANTS TO REGULATE "INEQUALITY" IN WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS

http://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2015/06/bank-mortgage-clerks-hyper-scrutinize.html

OBAMA'S NEW VERSION OF DESEGREGATION: BATTLE RAGES AS ESTABLISHMENT GOP SAVES OBAMA PLOT TO DIVERSIFY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE TOO WHITE, TOO WEALTHY, NOT "DIVERSE" ENOUGH

http://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2016/06/obamas-new-version-of-desegregation.html