Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Why Doing Immigration the “White Way” Is Wrong

The president is granting refugee status to white South Africans. Meanwhile, he is issuing travel bans, unsure about his duty to uphold due process, fighting birthright citizenship, and backing massive human rights breaches against people of color, including deporting citizens and people authorized to be here.

The administration’s escalating immigration enforcement—marked by “fast-track” deportations or disappearances without due process—signal a dangerous leveling-up of aggressive anti-immigration policies and authoritarian tactics. In the face of the immigration chaos that we are now in, we could—and should—turn our efforts toward making immigration policies less racist, more efficient, and more humane because America’s promise is built on freedom and democracy, not terror. As social scientists, we know that in America, thinking people can and should “just get documented” ignores the very real and large barriers embedded in our systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
Insider trading in Washington, DC

U.S. senators and representatives with access to non-public information are permitted to buy and sell individual stocks. It’s not just unethical; it sends the message that the game is rigged.

Getty Images, Greggory DiSalvo

Insider Trading: If CEOs Can’t Do It, Why Can Congress?

Ivan Boesky. Martha Stewart. Jeffrey Skilling.

Each became infamous for using privileged, non-public information to profit unfairly from the stock market. They were prosecuted. They served time. Because insider trading is a crime that threatens public trust and distorts free markets.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

A pump jack seen in a southeast New Mexico oilfield.

Getty Images, Daniel A. Leifheit

Supreme Court Changes the Game on Federal Environmental Reviews

Getting federal approval for permits to build bridges, wind farms, highways and other major infrastructure projects has long been a complicated and time-consuming process. Despite growing calls from both parties for Congress and federal agencies to reform that process, there had been few significant revisions – until now.

In one fell swoop, the U.S. Supreme Court has changed a big part of the game.

Keep ReadingShow less