This Is Public Health Book Club discussion

Here are the first set of discussion questions for The Color of Law! Our second set of questions will be posted on March 8 and will cover content from Chapters 4-8.

"The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America" by Richard Rothstein is a comprehensive exploration of how government policies, particularly at the federal, state, and local levels, systematically enforced racial segregation in housing in the United States.

Questions:
1. Before we begin our discussion on the historical factors contributing to racial segregation in housing, what are your initial thoughts or reflections on the broader issue of housing inequality and its impact on communities in the US?

2. How does Richard Rothstein distinguish between de jure segregation and de facto segregation, and why does he argue that understanding this distinction is crucial to addressing racial inequality in housing?

3. When the Richmond, California, Ford plant moved to Milpitas, white workers could buy homes near the new factory and stay employed. Frank Stevenson and several co-workers shared expenses for a long commute to keep their jobs. When factories nationwide relocated to suburban or rural areas, many (if not most) black workers lost good jobs. If they had Frank Stevenson’s motivation, their families might have been better off. Should we fault them for not being like Frank Stevenson? It is sometimes said that African Americans “must be twice as good to succeed." What are your thoughts about this?

4. In what ways did the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) contribute to the perpetuation of racial segregation through its underwriting policies?

5. How did the FHA's refusal to insure mortgages in racially mixed neighborhoods or neighborhoods with African American residents impact the ability of black families to achieve homeownership and contribute to the creation of segregated communities?

6. What was redlining, and how did the federal government and private lenders use this practice to perpetuate racial segregation in housing?

7. How did the denial of mortgage loans to residents of predominantly non-white neighborhoods through redlining exacerbate economic disparities and contribute to the devaluation of property in black communities?

1. Housing inequality is definitely something that still exists today, even if a person may not see it or realize it. From where I live, I've seen inequality as African Americans are often in the urban areas, and white people, as I am, are in those surrounding areas. It also seems more of the current housing assistance resources, such as the government, etc. are more available to provide housing support in those urban populations, rather than in the suburbs and rural areas. It's quite unfortunate that this is still a thing today, but education regarding health/housing inequality is very much still needed in areas that might not have that understanding of the housing inequalities.

2. Rothstein distinguishes de facto segregation by private practice and de jure by the law and public policy implemented by our government. This makes sense because jure, per the French-English dictionary, means several things, including juror, but also has an adjective meaning that a person has taken an oath to remain so. That definition stood out to me because it helped broaden my understanding on how de jure segregation occurs typically by someone who has been elected into higher office and has taken a sworn oath imposes. On the other hand, de facto segregation is what private practices have taken, such as discrimination imposed by companies or other private organizations, as expressed many times in the book thus far. Rothstein argues that understanding of the two is important because there's going to be many different instances of discrimination in the housing market later mentioned in the book that relate to de facto and de jure segregation in the housing market. Since both the government/public policy and private practices have played a role, it's important to understand the distinction so effective and reasonable change can be made.

3. I think we should've faulted those families for not being like Stevenson, however, been there to provide the resources for them to ensure many black workers had access to good jobs. Resources, especially around that time, seemed to have been provided on a first come, first serve basis, but they should have been accommodating to everyone. Especially given in a time where good workers were often rewarded, those workers should have had a fair chance, regardless of the color of their skin. On the other hand, there were already pre-existing biases that had occurred regarding the color of skin as this was something that had happened almost 80-90 years ago. People at the time didn't understand that African-American individuals are human and deserved to be treated as such. Fast forward to today, I do feel like we have a better understanding and treatment, and the statement that "African Americans must be twice as good to succeed" is continuing to be outdated in many areas of society, including the housing market, as there is more inclusion and understanding being built and expanded upon.

4. The FHA's policies were proposed to help market and convince the people that invested with them that they were going to be "beneficial" and "helpful" but really they were not. By declining insurance to mortgages for the African-American population and ensuring separation, it provided a means of discrimination and unfair housing, which I'll examine more in the next question.

5. The FHA's policy to refuse insurance mortgages showed separation of superiority, where one race is superior than the other. Especially since people who weren't African American residents were eligible to have insured mortgages, it shows a lack of equal quality home ownership, and contributes to segregated communities since black families were unable to get the quality housing and assistance other people were able to be provided with. As a result, there are clear indications of segregated communities because one was able to achieve a resource to make their home better than the other. It caused struggled with homeownership because black families weren't able to achieve the same quality or have access to the same resources that other families were able to. People want to have insurance with their homes especially if a natural disaster or even a fire happens, so African-American residents not being given that opportunity would not be beneficial should they face a disaster such as a tornado, fire, earthquake, hurricane, etc., since they would more than likely not have a home nor be able to rebuild/restore their home.

6. Redlining allowed denial of African American residents to not be able to get mortgages or have a hard time being able to get an accessible and realistic mortgage. It created a barrier where they would only have access to a specific area of housing whereas other groups of people have access to better housing in various areas with good quality. I thought it was interesting how private lenders took this as an "advantage" to build toxic sites, such as landfills, on areas that were often more populated with African-Americans, and the federal government was almost completely on board with it, as I discovered while reading Chapter 3. The federal government (especially organizations such as the Federal Housing Association and the Public Works Agency, in particular) had imposed policies allowing for racial segregation to occur since they had implemented many policies over decades regarding separate housing, resources, etc. for the color of each individual's skin. Private lenders also had stakeholders who relied on them to deliver the best, especially given the time and circumstances regarding racial discrimination, so it was enabled for both parties to perpetuate racial segregation.

7. It cut opportunities for African-Americans to receive good quality housing, and provided numerous economic disparities because it could deprive one's finances if one has a problem with the home or faces an economic disaster. Also, African-Americans were working at a time where they did not get paid very much, if at all, so economic disparities through this redlining were quite possible since they were deprived of resources or support. Since this was the case, the devaluation of property in those communities became a thing because they did not have the financial means or mortgage loans to be able to fix what would be needed to fix in order to make the property more valuable. It provided a contribution to an unfair and unjust society since mortgage loans were only a privilege some could assess. However, African-American residents could have had landlords, but paying rent could also be challenging since they faced financial barriers as is.

Looking forward to chapters 4-8!