H.R.482 - Local Zoning Decisions Protection Act of 2017
congress.gov
congress.gov
The government created visualization site https://egis.hud.gov/affht/# specifically would be banned for further support, maintenance or use by members of the federal government.
Fortunately the raw data is still available for download.
To me, government-ordered public-interest website teardowns sound a lot like a 21st century version of book-burning.
Bill sponsors include Marco Rubio and Mike Lee in the Senate
Geographic scientists have taken notice http://news.aag.org/2017/01/creating-and-preserving-actionab...
A lot of it is just plain census data, with some additional housing details filled in! Adding maps makes it more accessible :)
Fortunately that's not what this is. No longer operating a website is not the same as ordering other such websites to be torn down. No need to overstate the problem.
[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/03/...
> The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, in its decision last week, held that the North Carolina state legislature acted to entrench itself and “it did so by targeting voters who, based on race, were unlikely to vote for the majority party. Even if done for partisan ends, that constituted racial discrimination.”
> The court called this strategy what it is: racist. The panel wrote that “using race as a proxy for party may be an effective way to win an election. But intentionally targeting a particular race’s access to the franchise because its members vote for a particular party, in a predictable manner, constitutes discriminatory purpose. This is so even absent any evidence of race-based hatred and despite the obvious political dynamics.”
> In North Carolina, the legislature requested racial data on the use of electoral mechanisms, then restricted all those disproportionately used by blacks, such as early voting, same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. Absentee ballots, disproportionately used by white voters, were exempted from the voter ID requirement. The legislative record actually justified the elimination of one of the two days of Sunday voting because “counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.”
I welcome any other sources you might have showing that this is factually incorrect.
Gotcha.
And having grown up in a 95%+ white area and moved to SF, it's been my personal experience that it's very easy to have sweeping assumptions about groups you haven't met any members of (which is a class segregation of housing and schooling can lead to future problems).
To take this a step further, I think such biases even hold to a lesser extent within races (based on accents, dress, hobbies) that perpetuates the class system and ultimately the 1% issue.
By being able to track the racial makeup of every census tract you would be able to self-segregate.
If you follow this line of reasoning, then this action is a good one, since it promotes racial integration.
In other words, choose your side and then have at it! When there are no shared principles and values, then there are no shared actions.
Would this not defund access to census data? As census data shows disparities in race?
Edit: OK, after having talked to a buddy about this, it looks like this is address directly at HUD, and would not affect census data as that is under commerce.
From my perspective that says they cannot even create the data, let alone give anyone access to it.
The current title is click-bait.
How is the original title preferable?
"Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. "
This case seems very much to be in the obfuscating category, and the whole purpose of posting it seems to be the element of the intent that the title obfuscates.