Housing discrimination in the United States

Housing discrimination is when an individual or family is treated unequally when trying to buy, rent, lease, or sell a home based on certain characteristics, such as race, class, sexuality, or religion. This type of discrimination has been thought of to lead to housing and spatial inequality and racial segregation which, in turn, can exacerbate wealth disparities between certain groups. In the United States, housing discrimination began after the abolition of slavery as part of a federally-sponsored law, but has since been made illegal and now, studies may possibly show, exists in more subtle forms.

History of Housing Discrimination

Following the abolishment of slavery, fifteen state courts obeyed ordinances that enforced the denial of housing to African-American and other minority groups in white-zoned areas. These ordinances were then made illegal in the 1917 Supreme Court case, Buchanan vs. Warley. Following this decision, however, nineteen states legally supported “covenants”, or agreements, between property owners to not rent or sell any homes to minorities. Although the covenants, too, were made illegal in 1948, they were still allowed to be present in private deeds. It was not until the Fair Housing Act of 1968 that the Federal Government made its first concrete steps to deem all types of housing discrimination unconstitutional. The Act explicitly prohibits housing discrimination practices common at the time, including filtering information about a home’s availability, racial steering, blockbusting, and redlining. Nevertheless, the U.S. Census of Population has shown that minorities living in concentrated, high-poverty areas had actually increased following the passage of the Fair Housing Act from 1970 to 1990. African- Americans residing in these areas rose from 16 percent to 24 percent, and Hispanics living in these areas have increased from 10 to 15 percent. While this does not necessarily point to evidence of housing discrimination, it does mirror the phenomena of white flight -- the mass exodus during the 70’s and 80’s of European-Americans from cities to the suburbs that left only 1/4th of the Anglo population still living in metropolitan areas. American sociologist Douglas Massey, in his essay, “The New Geography of Inequality in Urban America,” argues that this new racial geography in the United States has laid the foundation for housing discrimination to occur in order to keep up the status quo.

Demographics

According to the U.S. Census of Population in 1990, 25.3% of all Anglo-Americans in the U.S. lived in central city areas. The percentage of African-Americans living in inner cities was 56.9%, and the percentage of inner city Hispanics was 51.5%. Asian-Americans living in central cities totaled 46.3%. vii Furthermore, according to a more recent U.S. Census Bureau study, the average white person living in a metropolitan area lives in a neighborhood that is 80% Anglo and 7% Black, while the average African-American lives in a neighborhood that is 33% white and more than 51% black.viii As of 2000, 75% of all African- Americans live in highly-segregated communities, making them the most segregated group in the nation. It can be argued that these statistics do not point to evidence of housing discrimination, but rather to segregation based on historical reasons which have made minorities more economically deprived, and thus prone to living in more poverty-stricken inner city areas. However, a 2008 study published by the U.S. Housing Scholars cites the fact that “[d]isparities between neighborhoods for blacks and Hispanics with incomes above $60,000 are almost as large as the overall disparities, and they increased more substantially in the [1990s].”

In a comprehensive study by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in 2000, paired-tests (in which two applicants of different races but the same economic status and credit scores apply to rent or buy a house) were used to determine whether or not statistics about segregation truly pointed to housing discrimination. This study reported that although adverse treatment of minorities has decreased over time, roughly 25% of white applicants were still favored above those who were African-American or Hispanic. About 17% of African-American applicants and 20% of Hispanic applicants were subjected to adverse treatment, including receiving less information about a home or being shown fewer, lower-quality units..

Housing Discrimination Practices of Today

Famed sociologist and expert in the field of housing discrimination studies,John Yinger, argues that practices like these in the housing market--as evidenced by countless U.S. Census of Population reports-- have led to segregation, and can be interpreted as forms of modern-day housing discrimination. One important example cited is of realtors opting to place Public Housing in crowded inner city minority neighborhoods instead of those with an Anglo majority due to “public and political pressure.” Other housing phenomena that Yinger argues encourage segregation are those of sorting and bidding in which bidders perceived to be higher-class win out on cheaper per-square-foot, larger homes farther away from inner cities. The study done by the U.S. Housing Scholars adds that school zoning has also been named a culprit for housing segregation, and may be used as a critical venue for housing discrimination. It also cites the Internet as yet another means for the perpetuation of housing discrimination that is, as of now, unrestricted by the provisions of the Fair Housing Act. While the Fair Housing Act strictly prohibits any sellers from using language that explicitly names a preference for a certain group, third-party sellers that use sites like Craigslist.com and Roommate.com to find buyers or renters are granted immunity from the FHA, and the websites are not held liable. This was cemented by the 2003 court case, The Fair Housing Council of San Francisco Valley vs. Roommate.com, in which Roommate.com was not held liable for users with advertisements such as, ‘looking for White Christian Male,’ since the website did not have the resources to monitor and censor such usage.

LGBT Housing Discrimination

While many believers in the still-present threat of housing discrimination cite racial disparities as evidence, other studies have shown that another growing trend that points to its existence is the discrimination in the housing market against those who identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or transgender. Since housing discrimination based on sexual orientation was not explicitly cited in the Fair Housing Act, as of now, it is banned only in seventeen states. Furthermore, in all states, same-sex couples are unable to apply to Public Housing as a family unit, thus decreasing their chances at being accepted into the program.Although the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is currently working on the first nation-wide study of LGBT housing discrimination, one New York Times article cites a Jacksonville survey in which 1 in 10 homosexual couples reported overt unequal treatment by landlords. In a more comprehensive study done by the Fair Housing Commission of Michigan, statistics showed that out of 120 paired-tests, almost 30% of same-sex couples were discriminated against by being given higher rental rates and less encouragement to rent.

Effects of Housing Discrimination

John Yinger, a strong proponent for the still-existence of housing discrimination, argues that it is something perhaps most concretely evidenced by its effects: concentrated poverty. This has been known to create a variety of risk factors for those who live in these areas, including high rent burdens, poor- quality housing and health risks, lack of access to housing wealth, neighborhood effects, and spatial mismatch.. Another risk factor stemming from housing discrimination is wealth accumulation; an analysis of 2005 PSID (Panel Study of Income Dynamics) data shows that “homes in white communities increase $28,600 more over a thirty-year mortgage period than do comparable homes in black communities.” These cyclical factors often contribute to a “poverty trap” which renders generations of American families unable to escape.

Proposed Solutions to Prevent Housing Discrimination

There have been a number of solutions proposed to finally end the threat of what many believe to be housing discrimination, and eliminate any legal loopholes in which it may operate. These may include increased Federal Legislation enforcement, scattered-site housing, subsidies (house-hold based, direct, or tax-based) , or state and local enforcement on a more concentrated level.

Notes

Loretteb (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)