A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America: With Guests Richard and Leah Rothstein

Richard Rothstein, author of The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, and co-author Leah Rothstein join us to talk about housing segregation, how past policies still effect marginalized communities today, and how affordable housing and diverse housing opportunities leads to more diverse communities.

Facepalm America: facepalmamerica.com
Twitter: @FacepalmUSA
Find Beowulf: @BeowulfRochlen

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/facepalm-america--5189985/support.

Episode Transcript

(00:11):
Facepalm America. I'm Beaywolfrocklin, Facepalmamericadot com. Welcome as usual. You
can go to Facepalmamerica dot com andget all sorts of information about the show.
You can message us if you like, or call us at two zero
two six five six six two sevento one, and you can listen to

(00:32):
past episodes of the program at facepalmamericadot com if you like. We know,
and I think most people listening tothe show understand that housing discrimination against
people of color has been a problemthroughout the history of the United States.
It's been openly enforced by law untilrelatively recently, and continues to be undergirded

(00:57):
by legal structures to this day.But fortunately there are ways to fight against
it. Leah and Richard Rothstein arethe authors of Just Action, How to
Challenge Segregation Enacted under the Color ofLaw, and Richard Rothstein is also the
author of The Color of Law,A Forgotten History of how Our Government segregated

(01:17):
America. Leah, Richard, Welcometo Face Paul in America. Thank you
so much for being here. Thankyou, thanks for having us. I
know it goes back much further thanthis, and if you want to pick
a different starting point. Let meknow, but what was the state of
housing and housing discrimination? What didit look like for people of color at

(01:40):
the start of the twentieth century,especially in American city Well, at the
start of the twentieth century, mostAfrican Americans were still living in rural areas
in the South. So while therewere some in urban areas in the North
and the Midwest, they weren't verynumerous. The federal government wasn't involved at

(02:02):
all in housing at that time,so there were the few African Americans who
were living in northern areas were livingin separate pockets, but not as rigid
as it later became. The federalgovernment first became involved in housing during the
New Deal in the Roosevelt administration duringthe Depression, and the federal government at

(02:24):
that point imposed segregation on every urbanarea. So that's when the real excessive
segregation came about. Were it notfor those unconstitutional, unlawful federal policies implemented
from nineteen thirty three on, wewould have a racially egalitarian society today,

(02:46):
we would have non segregated neighborhoods.Of course, there was private discrimination,
private realtors, private developers, privatebanks all would have on their own segregated
the country. But they weren't ontheir own. They were all subsidized by
the federal government, then regulated bythe federal government, then the state government

(03:08):
as well. And had the federaland state governments abided by their constitutional responsibilities,
they would have told those developers,those realtors, those banks that they
could not get federal subsidies unless theyproceeded on a non discriminatory basis. So

(03:29):
the biggest example that I talked aboutin the Color of Law were the suburbs
that were created in the post WorldWar two period. The biggest one was
Levittown, the east of New YorkCity, seventeen thousand homes in one place.
Levitt was a bigot. He wouldhave kept African Americans out of that
suburb if he could have done soon his own. But he wasn't on

(03:52):
his own. He couldn't find thebanking financing to buy the land and build
that project. The only way hecould do it was by going to the
Federal Housing Administration and Veterans Administrations,submitting its plans for the development and the
required commitment never to sell a hometo an African American This was written out
in a federal policy manual. Themanual even said that a developer like levitt

(04:15):
or any other who was going tobuild an all white project couldn't do so
if it was going to be locatednear more African Americans were living, because,
in the words of the manual,that would run the risk of infiltration
by inharmonious racial groups. So that'swhere it really intensified. And of course
it's established patterns that exist to thisday because those suburbs that were created,

(04:38):
not just Levittown but in every metropolitanarea of this country appreciated in value unexpectedly.
The white returning war veterans factory workerswho moved into those modest suburbs didn't
expect to get rich by doing so, but they did because their homes spectacularly
appreciated in value. Homes that theFAHA and V subsidized in Levittown and elsewhere

(05:01):
in the country every metropolitan area soldin the mid twentieth century for about eight
nine thousand dollars in today's money.That's about one hundred thousand dollars. Those
homes nowhere sell for one hundred thousanddollars today. Two hundred three hundred and
four hundred and five hundred thousand dollars, in some places a million dollars or
more. The white families who benefitedfrom that unexpected appreciation used the wealth that

(05:26):
they gained to send their children tocollege, to take care of temper emergencies,
to subsidize their retirements, and tobequeath welled to their children and grandchildren
who then had down payments for theirown homes. African Americans were prohibited by
explicit federal policy from participating in thisprogram that generated wealth, and that's why
we have a segregated society today withthis enormous wealth gap that maintains its segregation.

(05:51):
Yeah, you can understand the implicationsthat has for each successive generation.
Let me ask you a question derivedfrom some you know, personal relation and
interest. My my grandfather was involvedin the creation of Lakewood in in California.

(06:13):
Was the same legal system that thatyou know undergirded the same discriminator territory
legal system that undergirded Levittown? Didit? Was it also involved in in
in in Lakewood as well? Yes, it was. Lakewood was an example.
There were the others in California aswell. Lake was an example.
It was covered with restrictive convenants.There's deed, clauses that prohibited resale to

(06:34):
African Americans, and the f hA and v A financed it on a
racially discriminatory basis. How was it, I mean, what were the I
can certainly imagine given the the federalpower that the South UH and the you
know, the anti black South held, you know in the Senate and other

(06:57):
places on Capitol Hill, why thatcame to be? Why through the New
Deal and even post World War twolike, was that acceeded to Was there
just no other way of getting itaccomplishment or was that just the assumption that
was made. What was the processfor inserting that explicit racism into the legal

(07:18):
structure. No, it's an exaggerationto say that this was because of the
Southern congressman and senators. Certainly theyinsisted on maintaining segregation in their states,
but for example, although they segregatedtheir schools, they didn't insist on northern
schools being segregated. The federal governmentdidn't have to kowtow to Southern Democrats Dixiecrats

(07:46):
in order to segregate Levitt Town orLakewood the Southerners wouldn't have abjected to selling
homes in those developments to African Americans. Now, if it did that in
the South, you could say thatthe be It dixocrats would have prevented it.
But this was a not simply somethingdemanded by Southern Democrats. Yeah,

(08:07):
this was homegrown California racism so tospeak. Well, federal Federal Washington,
d C. Is where it camefrom California as well. You know,
the California licensed to all the realestate agents who sold homes in those places.
And if California was fulfilling its constitutionalresponsibilities, it would have lifted licenses

(08:33):
from real clues who wouldn't sell homesin Lakewood to African Americans. So let
me ask, like, there arethese big sections of like major American cities
that basically were off limits to AfricanAmericans and other people of color. What
kinds of opportunity I mean? Wasit just there were only essentially for the

(08:56):
most part, other specific places wherepeople of color could live. Was that
racial boundary ever crossed at least upthrough the nineteen fifties, And what opportunities
were available to people of color topurchase houses, pass on generational wealth,

(09:18):
etc. Well, there were noopportunities because the Federal Housing Administration were not
insure mortgages for African Americans, eitherin black urban neighborhoods or in the suburbs.
The banks wouldn't issue conventional mortgages toAfrican Americans. If they bought homes
in black neighborhoods, they did sowith exploitative contracts that were not insured by

(09:43):
the FHAOBA. Okay, So theywere just structurally at a financial disadvantage,
even if they were buying and notrenting, which I assumed was much more
rare. So what began to changechange? And how did the Fair Housing
Act come into play? What changesdid that put into that landscape? Well,

(10:09):
the Fair Housing Act prohibited future discrimination. It did nothing to undo the
segregation that had been created. Soto use that example again, I don't
want to belabor it, but it'strue of every suburb in this country.
You know, when Levittown or Lakewoodwere created, they were affordable to African

(10:33):
Americans, to factory workers, toreturning war veterans. The Fair Housing Act
said in the fact, okay,now you can live in in Levittown.
You know, we're not going tostop you from doing so. But they're
no longer affordable unless the federal governmentand local governments take some action to compensate

(10:54):
African Americans to subsidize them to moveinto suburb verbs are no longer affordable to
them. Of course, there aresome who who can afford to move into
them. Levittown is not one hundredpercent white anymore the two or three percent
African American. But you'd expect inthat region Levittown to be thirteen percent African
American. That's what the neighboring communitiesare. So the Fair Housing Act is

(11:20):
incapable of remedying this without explicit redressfor the past. Simply prohibiting future discrimination
won't do it. Were there otherkinds of discrimination aside from the generational ones

(11:46):
which you refer to, but otherforms of active legal discrimination that the Fair
Housing Act did not apply to,and that continued. I can give an
example a present policy that is ineffect all over the country, the credit
scoring system. It's a system wethink of as racially neutral, you know,

(12:09):
the it's not racially discriminatory in itsintent or in its design. But
how the credit scoring system works isthat, you know, gives you a
rating of your future likelihood of repayinga debt based on your past financial performance.
So if you've paid your debts ontime, you have a high credit
score. A high credit score meansyou qualify for a mortgage and you can

(12:33):
get a good interest rate. Ifyou have no credit score or a low
credit score, or you can't geta mortgage. And so it seems objective,
it seems, you know, raciallyneutral, But how it works is
it's based on only a certain typeof financial history feeds into the credit scoring
system. It's a type of financialhistory that whites are far more likely to
have than African Americans. It's thetype of financial history that comes from traditional

(12:56):
financial institutions. So if you havebank accounts with traditional banks, or credit
cards, or if you've had amortgage in the past, all of that
feeds into your credit score. Butif you live in a predominantly African American
neighborhood, no matter what economic statusof that neighborhood, you have fewer bank
branches in your neighborhood than a similarwhite neighborhood. That's what we call financial

(13:18):
redlining today, is that banks placefewer branches in segregated African American communities of
all income ranges, and so youhave less access to that traditional financial institutions.
You might rely more on a paydaylender than a credit card because you
don't have access to traditional credit cardand bank accounts. If you use a

(13:39):
payday lender and you pay back thoseloans in full on time, even with
their exorbitant interest rates, that financialhistory doesn't factor into your credit score.
Similarly, if you've never had amortgage, but you've been a rent or
your whole life always paid your renton time, that historically hasn't factored into
a credit score. So an nofault of their own or no you know,

(14:03):
no reflection of their own financial youknow, qualifications to pay back a
mortgage. African Americans are less likelyto have a high enough credit score to
qualify for a mortgage just because ofhow the credit scoring system is created.
And so there's movement now where someof the credit scoring agencies you can opt
in to have your rental payment historycounted towards your credit score. So there's

(14:26):
some changes happening nationally on this.But what we talk about in just Action
is what we need is local actionto get our local banks and financial institutions
to adjust their credit scoring algorithm algorithmsto have a more equitable outcome for African
Americans seeking mortgages. You know,it's it's fascinating to me because not just

(14:48):
even in the sense of housing discriminationor financial discrimination more broadly against people of
color. I'm just trying to remembera time and maybe maybe I'm maybe there
was a but that we as ourrepresentatives even said yes, this is the
system that we are going to usefor, you know, to determine whether

(15:09):
someone is financially worthy to take outa mortgage. Like how did how did
that even come come down? Likehow did that system like get into place.
Maybe I'm just like poorly financially schooled, but was there a time and
and and how did they determine thatthose particular essentially discriminatory standards were going to
be put in place? I meanit was was that just a product of

(15:31):
the banking system, and and andCongress just went along with it essentially,
Well, the things that le aredescribing. It's easier. You know,
there are a limited number of banksand mortgage originators that issue mortgages, and
they can electronically transmit all of themortgage history pay the history of any applicants

(15:56):
for a loan. There are hundredsof thousands of landlords collecting rents. Many
of them are small, mom andpop operations. Some are larger, but
none as giant as the big banks, and so it's a little bit more
difficult for the credit scoring agencies tocollect this information on rents than it is

(16:18):
on past mortgage payments. So thesystem doesn't have to be intentionally, as
Leah said, doesn't have to beintentionally racially discriminatory. But once you have
two groups of people in very differentcircumstances, if you're not careful, the
most race neutral policies can have adiscriminatory effect. And that's what Leo was
talking about, right, lazy fareisn't isn't always that fair in the long

(16:42):
run. So what are the keyfocuses of the modern movement against housing discrimination,
like, what are the things thatneed most to be changed at this
point and what has the progress beentowards making those changes. Well, we

(17:07):
write about in Just Action that weneed activated civil rights movement around the country
of local groups that are educated abouthow we came to be a segregated society
and are activated and ready to takeon issues in their own communities, advocate
for policy changes, programmatic changes,new efforts by local institutions and companies to

(17:29):
combat segregation. Now, there's noone policy or strategy that will accomplish all
of this. There's many. It'sa many layered system that maintains and perpetuates
segregation, and it's many sort ofpieces that have to be enacted and proposed
and advanced in order to undo itand to challenge it. So we described

(17:51):
dozens of policies and programs that localgroups can take on, and it sort
of doesn't matter which one any communitystarts with, because they're all going to
be necessary. But we do that. All of the policies and strategies we
discussed, they, as my dadmentioned, you know, they look to
the future to ensure that we don'tcontinue to perpetuate maintain segregated communities, and

(18:11):
they look to the past to addressthe disparities that exist today because of all
of those past government policies that createdand maintained segregation. We need to kind
of do both to tackle this issue. And then the strategies they fall into
two main categories. One is wewant to increase investments in lower income segregated

(18:32):
African American communities where the concentration ofpoverty is a direct result of government sponsored
segregation. So as a remedy tothe consequences of that segregation, we want
to help make those communities areas ofhigher opportunity, of more investments, greater
resources. And then when that happens, we understand that often gentrification results when

(18:52):
a lower income community sees greater investments, people with higher incomes want to move
in and displace or price out thelongtime residence. So those strategies should be
coupled with anti displacement strategies to ensurethat those longtime residents have a chance of
staying in their neighborhood. You know, things that help prevent unfair evictions or
or provide tenants with legal counsel whenthey're facing an eviction, or protect them

(19:15):
against rapidly rising rents. Those aresome of those strategies. And then we
also need to look at you know, segregated white communities, often suburbs,
and how do we open up thosecommunities to more diverse residents that you know,
there's a lot of strategies for doingthat as well, including you know,
we have to sort of start withzoning changes to ensure that we can

(19:36):
build more diverse housing options in thosecommunities. Instead of only large single family
homes one per lot, we needto allow more diversity of housing options,
to have more diversity of housing affordability, so then we can have more diversity
of residents in those communities. Sothat's one example of those types of strategies.

(19:57):
It's really interesting to me how oftenindividual communities, especially you know,
in suburbs, talk about, well, you know, we don't want to
build something that's you know, tootall, or that's going to block the
view, or that's going to likecreate too many traffic problems or something like
that, when ultimately what that amountsto is maintaining that single family home like

(20:22):
dynamic, which which is problematic ina lot of different ways, I mean
environmentally in addition to to anything else, but certainly means that there are fewer
opportunities for people of color to livein a community or anyone beneath a particularly
economic threshold. It just means morestratification, more discrimination, and more segregation

(20:47):
altogether. It's and yet you hearthese same things again come up and local
local committees again and again, andin many places. It just doesn't seem
to have changed in spite of theawareness of of these life larger housing problems.
Yeah, well, can I tella story, So I think it's
true. We often hear about communitiesthat block any kind of rezoning or housing

(21:10):
development because they want to hold onto that single family esthetic and the quote
unquote character of their community. Well, we researched and I interviewed people in
a community in California and Silicon Valley, a very expensive, exclusive area where
median home prices are like over twomillion dollars, very expensive place. Have

(21:32):
you know, a history like everywhereelse in the country, of government policies
that created that segregation and maintained thatexclusivity of that neighborhood. Well, a
group there started to they actually readthe Color of Law and they developed a
training workshop for members of their communityabout what they called it Color of Law

(21:52):
Menlo Park Edition, So their townwas Menlo Park. They uncovered all of
the laws, the zoning ordinances,all of the you know, local policies
and practices that created segregation in theircommunity, and that led to the affordable
housing crisis that they're in. Andthen and they built up an organization around
that training. And then a littlewhile later a local school district who couldn't

(22:17):
hold onto teachers because they couldn't affordto live anywhere nearby, So thirty percent
of teachers left the district every year. They had a vacant site in Menlo
Park and they wanted to build affordableteacher housing on it, and some residents
you know in the area opposed it. They put a measure on the ballot
that would have blocked that housing developmentand any other has caused so many problems

(22:38):
in a community. I mean,you know, they're they're undesirable types really
altogether, teachers, right, theyreally threatened the character of a community,
right They So this group that waseducated and starting to organize around these issues,
they could see that this was anotherpiece in a long history of policies
that kept their community segregated, exclusive, out of reach for teachers and other

(23:03):
you know, working families. Andso they went door to door and a
campaign to defeat this measure. Theytalked to residents all over their community,
people who they didn't expect to supportthem, you know, actually did because
they saw how their community had becomeso exclusive and they wanted more diversity.
They wanted more accessibility. They endedup defeating the measure. So we hear

(23:26):
a lot about you know, whatare called Nimbi's not in my backyard,
folks who oppose this kind of housingdevelopment and win. But I want to
lift up more of the stories ofthe times when they're you know, people
oppose those that opposition to support affordablehousing or to support more housing development,
and they win because there's actually moresupport out there than we might think.

(23:48):
We just have to reach those peopleand organize and come out to support the
housing that our communities need. No, you're here, you know, and
you mentioned Menlo Park. I thinkof if I'm remembering correctly, there was
a story that we were talking abouton the show a few months ago in
which I think it was Steph Curryand is why Steph Curry of the Golden

(24:11):
State Warriors was opposed to affordable housingin Atherton, where he and his wife
lives. So I'm thinking, youknow, if somehow we can get a
copy of just Action into their handsand the color of law outlining the history
and the action steps needed to betaken, maybe that that nimbi attitude would

(24:33):
be a little less prevalent. BecauseI think people need to be reminded,
Hey, you know this is thisis stuff that impacts all of us,
and it makes our communities worse,and it makes the society, you know,
just weaker. And if you createan environment in which people can have

(24:56):
that same access to the you know, the generational wealth, you know engine
that that is like you know,home ownership and they and they can do
that, then it really pays dividendslike generations down the line. I mean,
yeah, I mean, we seewhat impact that it is has had

(25:18):
negatively, Let's get that going ina positive direction. Leah and Richard Rostein.
They are the authors of Just Action, How to Challenge Segregation Enacted under
the Color of Law. Richard Rothsteinis also the author of The Color of
Law Forgotten History of How our Governmentsegregated America. Is there anywhere else that

(25:41):
that people can go to find outmore about your your work, your your
books, et cetera. Yeah,we have a website, Just actionbook dot
org where you can find out everythingabout our book and our appearances around the
country. Also, there you canfind a link to our substat column,
which is a free newsletter that we'rewriting to continue to the conversation around these

(26:03):
issues. It's just action dot substackdot com. Perfect. Thank you so
much for these wonderful books. Thankyou so much for the work that you
do on these really important issues.And Leah and Richard Rossi, and thank
you for being with us today onFace Palm America. Thank you so much.
We're going to be back in amoment and read a message from one

(26:26):
of listeners to Face Palm America.I'm Bewolf Rocklin. This is Face paulm
America. Face Paul America. I'mBeawolf Rocklin. Facepaulmamerica dot com is where

(26:47):
you can go for more information onthe show. And if you want to
reach us by message or you canget your voice on the show, you
can message us at two zero twosix five six six two seven one.
I want to read this message fromBob in San Jose. He's a listener
to the podcast. We had someexcitement today in East San Jose. Kamala

(27:10):
Harris was here to speak about women'shealthcare rights, but she was greeted by
protesters who want the ethnic cleansing inGaza to be stopped by the Biden Harris
administration. So that's, you know, it's interesting and I heard recently where
Nancy Pelosi was confronted by protesters wantingto in the genocide in Gaza, and

(27:37):
she told them to go back toChina where their headquarters. Was very strange.
I didn't realize that China was secretlyorganizing protesters against the genocide in Gaza.
Very interesting, Bob, thank youfor that update. I really hope

(27:59):
that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris willtake action to stop this. I'm not
holding my breath, but I trulyhope that they will. And again,
if you want to send a messageto us here at the show. Two
zero two six five six six twoseven one is the number to do it
at. I want to thank AceElson and Roosevelt Hine, who are the
producers of this program. And untilnext time, enjoy the day, Share

(28:30):
this episode with a friend online.Please do it helps us