Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Economy and infrastructure: “What about us?”

Economy and infrastructure: “What about us?”
Getty Images

Dr. LaSheyla Jones, a grassroot urban planner, architectural designer, and public policy advocate specializing in implementing holistic approaches to address socially disorganized communities. She is a Public Voice Fellow through the OpEd Project.

As the White House, under the Biden-Harris Administration, touts an economic and infrastructure plan for Black Communities, many residents have found themselves marginalized by city highway designs that perpetuate inequality and hinder their quality of life. Communities are being redesigned without consideration of specific needs and values of disadvantaged individuals, perpetuating a cycle of city designs that disregards the concerns and aspirations of those whose circumstances often go unheard. This pattern leaves vulnerable populations wondering (to quote Michael Jackson’s lyrics in “Earth Song”), “What about us?”


For example, my hometown of Dallas is now ranked among the least affordable cities for homebuyers, with rising housing costs relative to average income making homeownership unattainable for many in the southern sector of the city. Individuals with average income have to allocate 41.48 percent of their monthly earnings to housing expenses for a median priced home, highlighting the disparity between housing prices and stagnant wages that perpetuates the wealth gap. One complaint is the policy’s emphasis on multi-family rental development over affordable single-family homes.

Oak Cliff, one of the largest neighborhoods located in Southern Dallas and often intermingled with areas identified as minority dominant and economically underprivileged, has once again become prime real estate for those looking to capitalize during an era of extensive gentrification. The extensive history of Oak Cliff communities, dominated by people of color, have experienced population displacement by way of white flight, steering, and redlining in which Dallas Segregation Ordinances effectively created segregated areas that are still clearly divided to this day.

Decades later, decisions for disadvantaged communities prioritize the desires of the economically and politically powerful rather than addressing the needs of those affected by government misinformation and propaganda. Many of these minority (specifically Black) communities, once home to residents that had accomplished home ownership and economic stability have been subjected to heavy eminent domain proceedings by local government to support freeway infrastructures and public facilities at the detriment of local inhabitants. In essence, communities of color in these areas are under structural, economic, and political attack and have been targeted by developers and government entities, while being unprotected by government policies.

Residents in communities like this face restricted access to affordable assets that enable wealth accumulation, such as homes, due to policies that do not hold responsible entities accountable. A lack of economic resources like banks in areas, such as communities South of Interstate 30, has created significant obstacles, as decision makers implement policies that label certain communities “high risk” and thereby deny them access to vital resources.

As Kathryn Holliday, PhD notes, “Highway development proceeded in parallel with housing policies created by the Federal Housing Administration to undermine economic viability of minority neighborhoods.” These systemic issues create bottlenecks and impede residents’ ability to thrive and prosper.

The misconception is that minority communities should appreciate government interventions for revitalization without considering the evidence of resident displacement and lack of input from those affected.

In contrast, revitalization efforts in wealthier and non-minority communities are approached as collaborative partnerships that consider the input of all stakeholders. This inclusive approach supports sustainable development that aligns with residents aspirations.

The Biden administration’s efforts to address systemic disparities in minority communities are commendable. However, it is crucial to recognize that investing in economic development and infrastructure without considering the true needs of residents and community members can be seen as irresponsible. Job creation is vital, but should empower disenfranchised communities to cultivate additional job prospects within minority communities.

U.S. government history demonstrates the significance of economic power. It is essential to adopt a holistic approach to urban development that encompasses people, structures, economics, transportation, and policy. Offering merely financial aid and constructing buildings will not suffice. We must strive for an inclusive approach that addresses the comprehensive needs of communities and ensures that the question, “What about us? ” is intricately considered and answered.


Read More

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The Momnibus Act was previously known as the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act, but the word 'Black' has been removed from the title and appears only once across the latest package.

Emily Scherer for The 19th

The Word ‘Black’ Has Disappeared From a Set of Bills Aimed at Addressing Black Maternal Health

The word “Black” has been almost completely removed from a package of bills that have long been viewed as Congress’ main legislative vehicle to address the Black maternal health crisis, frustrating some advocates who feel Black women are being erased from the policy.

The key change this year is the title. The Momnibus Act — filed in mid-March — was called the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act in 2023; before that it was the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2021 and the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2020. None of the previous packages, which were championed by Democrats, have been enacted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Never Intended To Be Just

U.S. President Donald Trump on May 22, 2026 in Suffern, New York.

(Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)

Trump Never Intended To Be Just

Let us set aside, for a moment, the fact that in suing the IRS, Donald Trump initiated a lawsuit that was meritless, frivolous, and a blatant conflict of interest…in his own words, “I am supposed to work out a settlement with myself.” Let us further acknowledge, but look past the fact, that the settlement is filled with “illegal cookies” like his effort to exempt himself and his family members or family-controlled companies, from past or future IRS audits or any future obligations to ever pay federal taxes.

Please appreciate, but set aside for a moment, that this is the most corrupt administration in modern US history. Further, I would like to ignore the fact that this appears to be an effort to finance a private militia that has violently sought to undermine the US Government and the electoral capacity of the vote of the people of the United States of America.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less