LATINOS AND HOUSING POLICIES OF
EXCLUSION
BY STUDENT
Introduction
The history
of land lost and housing exclusion began following the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The
Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty ended the Mexcan-American War in 1848 and transferred
more than half of Mexico’s territory into U.S. control (Bender, 17). Today,
land lost and housing exclusion continues through the subprime lending implosion
in the early 2000s, resulting in many Latino/as becoming a statistic of the
foreclosure crisis (Bender, 45). As you can see, housing segregation for
Latino/as in the U.S. developed slowly and deliberately and continues to
characterize the present lives of many minorities in America (Seitles, 1). Some
of those public policies are red-lining, a discriminatory rating system used by
the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to evaluate the risks associated with
loans made to borrowers in specific urban neighborhoods, zoning and building
codes used to target the living arrangements of improvised Latino/as regardless
of their immigrant or citizenship status, and ordinances directed at preventing
undocumented immigrants from renting housing, as well as ordinances that are
seemingly neutral but aim to discourage racial minorities and more generally
the impoverished from living in the community by denying affordable housing or
regulating the density of residential units (Bender, 57; Seitles, 3). Another
practice of exclusion is steering implemented through private law. Steering is
a practice whereby minority home purchasers are systematically offered housing
in different neighborhoods than those in which they are interested. I believe
the right to choose where one wants to live is a fundamental constitutional right.
The question I propose in this blog post is: Are people of color today, allowed the
right to choose where ever they want to live in the United States of America?
Model of a Latino geographic area of housing exclusion: East Harlem “El Barrio”
Puerto Rico
is a common wealth of the United States and residents of the island became
citizens in 1917 under the Jones Act (Bender, 113). Many Puerto Ricans migrated
to the main land mainly due to the decline in the Puerto Rican sugar industry, affordable
air travel in the 1940s and the lure of jobs in New York City (Bender, 114).
The move to New York transformed the mostly farm workers into urban and
industrial service workers, who mostly lived in East Harlem the epicenter for
Puerto Rican migration (Bender, 114). In East Harlem, Spanish Harlem or El
Barrio, living conditions were deplorable where the housing units were
over-crowded, dilapidated and unsanitary (Bender, 115). It was not until the
1960s and 1970s that Puerto Ricans gain adequate access to public housing
projects that displaced more of them than could be housed (Bender, 115). Bender
writes, “The
Puerto Rican legacy of loss in El Barrio also resonates with the gentrification
experience of African Americans in neighboring Harlem, in which new condominium
developments replaced aging brownstones and retain catering to upscale
residents replaced dollar stores” (Bender, 114,115). In 1945, only 13,000
Puerto Ricans lived in New York City and by 1955, almost 700,000 Puerto Ricans
migrated to the main land (Bender, 114).
Conclusion
Examples of
discrimination in federal housing policy persists today and they are as
numerous as they are disturbing. An example of housing policy discrimination is
currently being experienced by many Latino/as in Prince William County,
Virginia. The suburban town of Manassas’ booming housing economy lured a wave
of Latino immigrants, legal and illegal. Manassas benefited economically from
the Latino immigrant population who were the main labor force in the housing
construction industry. However, the presence of Latino/as in the Prince William
County caused the existing conservative Anglo middle-class to initiate the passing of the 287G (9500
Liberty). This is an Immigration Statute that would allow the police department
to randomly check the immigration status of Latino/as in this community they think
might be illegal (9500 Liberty). The 287G statute caused a division in the Manassas
community, where the white residents wanted the Latino/as residents to leave
due to over crowdedness in their schools, hospital, homes, gang issues, raising
of chicken and corn in plain view (9500 Liberty). The difference of culture
displayed by the Latino immigrants threatened Manassas’s normative middle-class
lifestyle. This is personal to me because I am an immigrant who migrated to the
United States to pursue the American Dream. The American dream in my opinion is
to earn my college degree in order to get a great paying job, which will reward
me with the middle-class life style. My parents brought me to America so that I
can have the opportunity to have a better life than they had. This brings me
back to the question I proposed in the beginning of my blog, “Are people of color
today, allowed the right to live wherever they want to in the United States?” I
have come to the conclusion that this is not possible because of the many
housing barriers that prevents people of color from choosing their ideal place
of residence.
Cited Works
Bender, Steven W.: Tierra Y Libertad: Land, Liberty,
and Latino Housing. New York: New York
University, 2000.
Park, Annabel and Eric Byler. 9500 Liberty. New York, 2010: www.9500Liberty.com.
Seitles, Marc. “ The Perpetuation of Residential Racial Segregation
in America: Historical Discrimination, Modern Forms of Exclusion, and
Incusionary Remedies. Journal of Land Use and Environment Law (1998): 89-123.
To answer your question as to whether people of color are allowed the right to choose wherever they want to live in the United States, I would have to also answer that by saying ‘no’. I think the place in which a person lives depends greatly on their employment opportunities and the wages they make in those occupational fields. If a person is a blue-collar worker or does not have an advanced college degree, the opportunities become very limiting. A person’s race or ethnicity is also an unfortunate implication of the many prejudices that people face concerning where they reside and the sense of belonging that is associated with residing in a place. I think some employers take advantage of the fact that Puerto Rico is part of the US and can offer the Puerto Ricans who migrate over to the US lower wages because they are still considered citizens. Employers know they don’t have to deal with the complications of papers and citizenship like they would if they hired someone who was in the US illegally. But, I think there are always going to be some people who try to profit at the expense of others and take advantage of people who come over here for the ‘American Dream’.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, I feel that people of color are extremely limited to where they GET to live. I say 'get' because many of them don't have much of a choice. Not only are they hindered economically but also based on their skin color, or foreign accent. The film the, "Sixth Section" clearly illustrates how immigrants are even deprived of housing; leaving them to reside in built-up shacks. Your point about "steering" is another great example of how Latino/as are being shown away from residential areas they may like to settle down in. Your inclusion of Puerto Ricans in this post stands out to me because even though Puerto Ricans are citizens of the United States, they are still limited to their places of residence. East Harlem taking on the name of "El Barrio" depicts just how many Puerto Ricans reside in that area due to the scarce opportunities for upward mobility. As you have stated, zoning and building codes, "steering", ethnicity, and class are some of the many barriers that Latino/as are confronted with, hampering their choices of where to live in the United States.
ReplyDeleteThis is such a well written post! I mostly liked how you included the history of Latinos in the United States to make your statement stronger. To answer the question you posted, I do not believe that people of color will ever get the opportunity to choose where they live even if their income status does change. Although this is the land of the free and opportunities Latinos and Blacks do not get these same privileges. There will always be a reason to displace or deny people of color housing, whether it is their documentation status, culture, or socio-economics. I personally enjoyed how you included the history of “El Barrio.” As we all know East Harlem is known for its rich Puerto Rican culture and even though it is a mostly a Puerto Rican dominated area they have also been victims of exclusionary housing. This also has increased in recent years because of gentrification. As a Latina of immigrant parents, we like to believe that the “America Dream” will be accomplished with our college degrees but does this change the reality of this country. Will this diploma give us the opportunity to change our ways of living despite our history in this country?
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, I believe that people of color will eventually get to live where they please. From financial perspective evidently there are just some places that people can afford but if an individual possesses the financial means then they can live in wealthier areas. I say this because every group of people whether White, Black, Latino or Asian has created neighborhoods that pertain to their culture. For example, Little Italy in the Bronx is an Italian dominated area. Washington Heights is most Latino and China town is home to many Asians. Although it may sound stereotypical, these are racially dominated communities were all created by society not by demographics.
ReplyDeleteExclusionary housing is a harmful process for everyone involved. Of course it is harmful in the sense of harming a person's feelings and making them feel inadequate, but it is also harmful towards the local community and economy. Less houses/apartments are being purchased because minority groups are being rejected; therefore there is less money being circulated in the local economy. The community suffers from the lack of business due to the reduced population. There is also a degree of separation in the community that occurs when discrimination is so blatantly present. People do not want to associate with racist housing managers or anyone who they are associated with, causing a segregated community. Last but not least, the housing managers, who are solely responsible for the exclusionary housing, are hurting themselves. Their ignorance and insensitivity towards other ethnic groups hurts their business, their reputation, and their character.
ReplyDelete