Choice: It’s Being Removed From You By Local Government Under Ruse Of Receiving Billions In Economic Growth
I heard somewhere the most important verb in the English language is “choose”. After giving it some consideration, I had to agree because being able to “choose” something or have choice signals one’s ability to have self-determination – to direct one’s life according to one’s needs and desires. The ability to choose is given to man by God as one of our unalienable individual rights. We are free to choose God or not. But, as part of God’s will, we are subject to the consequences of our choices. That said, when other individuals or groups of individuals engage in actions that lead to usurpation of the choices of others, it is an attempt to enslave and subjugate everyone else to their will often using ideologies based upon discrimination.
According to a recent investigative report by Luke Rosiak at The Daily Caller News Foundation, politicians in cities and counties across the united States have begun to propose race-based policies under the justification of “equity” in order to reap billions of dollars through the local economy as a study researched by the University of Southern California predicted.
One way local governments are instituting comprehensive race-based policies is to redraw school districts in order to “dismantle schools with too many white or Asian students”. In Fairfax County, Virginia, residents discovered their local government would have no choice but to comply since the adoption of “One Fairfax” required all other policies to be filtered through the “’lens’ of race”.
The investigative report discovered the following:
“Many cities and counties are adopting radical policies that see every aspect of government operations through the ‘lens’ of race”;
“A network of George Soros-backed activist groups has worked to push these policies as the most local level of government, where there is little scrutiny”; and,
“The policies are justified by citing research attributed to the University of Southern California, which actually comes from an outfit connected to the activist groups and whose work economists say is junk science”.
According to The Daily Caller:
An investigation by the DCNF found that across the country, these changes are being pushed on local governments by a constellation of groups who share the same funders, including George Soros. One of those groups alone is active in 33 cities and counties covering 1 in 10 Americans.
A group tied to USC called the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE) functions to create research — at the behest of funders — that promises billions of dollars in economic growth. Another set of groups introduce the research to individual cities and counties, where it is used to justify a mandate to include “equity” in every government policy. The language is often vague and comprised of obscure jargon.
That’s the stage Montgomery County, Maryland, is at now, where an official sympathetic to the movement, Uma Ahluwalia, told The Washington Post: “It’s nice to throw that word, ‘equity,’ around, but what does it mean?”
Next, the government solicits and follows advice from a third set of groups — often affiliated with the others — who decode the mandate for them, proposing sometimes-radical policies they say are required to implement it.
The network of groups share funders and board members and coordinate closely, creating studies and memos that largely consist of circular references to others within their ecosystem.
Little evidence is presented that the actual policy changes will help achieve the promised billion-dollar economic transformation.
Instead, during implementation, the financial rhetoric is swapped out with the justification that the policies are a “best practice.” That means other cities that have previously intersected with the network have done it. In turn, once that city implements the prescribed changes, it is cited as a precedent to the next city where the equity groups are active, and the cycle repeats — even if the desired results never materialize.
So, under the ruse of receiving an economic windfall of billions of dollars, which the junk research cannot provide one piece of evidence this will occur, politicians, swayed by those working in their own government who are proponents of this ruse, enact disparaging policies against their constituents. In other words, elected officials, who see dollar signs instead of what is best for their constituents, enact policies to bring in an economic windfall of billions of dollars based upon research by subversive groups that have no basis in fact to prove these policies produce any economic value whatsoever.
But, how do these elected officials get suckered into creating these discriminating policies. The Daily Caller report explains using Fairfax County as an example.
Fairfax County, a wealthy District of Columbia suburb in Virginia, was sold on sweeping changes after county employees attended a 2014 conference connected to a group called the Local and Regional Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE). There, GARE helped unelected bureaucrats learn to steer the elected politicians they worked for by swapping out “politically difficult” language with the more innocuous-sounding “equity.”
“Collaborating with GARE also helped [Fairfax employees Karla Bruce and Karen Shaban] make the transition from focusing on ‘disproportionality,’ a concept and language that could be politically difficult, to a focus on equity and opportunity. As Bruce comments, ‘If we hadn’t made the shift from disproportionality to equity, we never would have gotten the elected officials on board,’” a history says.
Next, a radical activist group called PolicyLink — which pushes fringe policies such as “reduc[ing] the harm of policing … by challenging untested assumptions about the value-add of law enforcement” and asserts that things like “parks equity” are responsible for racial performance gaps — makes an appearances. PERE and PolicyLink created an online tool called Equity Atlas that runs racial statistics through a crude formula to suggest that if cities enacted unspecified racial policies, they could grow their economies by billions of dollars.
The groups showed Fairfax an extended version called an “Equitable Growth Profile.” Swayed by the promised windfall, by July 2016, Fairfax’s county board and school board enacted an unprecedented arch-policy that would control all other policies. It was a sweeping but vague manifesto, parroting the lexicon of the Equitable Growth Profile. It was called “One Fairfax.”
“Research institutes PolicyLink and the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity at the University of Southern California studied the economic impact of inequity in Fairfax County. It found that the county’s gross domestic product would have been $26.2 billion higher in 2012 if its racial gaps in income were closed,” Fairfax said on its web page explaining the policy’s goal.
The policy required every other county policy to be drafted through the “lens” of racial “equity” in order to do away with differences in wealth and achievement throughout the 1.2 million-person county.
The policy is seven pages long and uses the words “race” 12 times and “equity” 24 times. “‘One Fairfax’ can only be realized with an intentional racial and social equity policy at its core for all publicly delivered services. A racial and social equity policy provides both the direction and means to eliminate disparities,” it said.
After economic and academic arguments attributed to a university led to a vague policy, the complexity of the network of interconnected groups allowed those to be subtly switched with activism when it came time to telling the county what this equity policy should actually mean in practice.
All-In Cities, a group created by PolicyLink, soon said it “began advising the county in formulating a vision for how best to enact the One Fairfax policy, and making the critical shift from policy adoption to implementation.”
Using a chart to show how this is working to implement “race-based” policies, it is being identified as “The ‘Equity’ Industrial Complex”. The interactive chart allows one to isolate a groups immediate connections when hovering over a circular item in the chart.
What is all of this based upon? “The Equity Atlas’s methodology — the promise of billions of dollars that underlies all of these changes — appears to amount to asserting that if all white people continued to earn the same amount of money, but all racial groups who earn less than them began earning the same amount as them, the city’s economy would be larger.” However, there is no substantial evidence to even hint that this would be the case. It is based upon assumption and supposition.
Richard Vedder, an economist with the Independent Institute, told the DCNF, “There’s no discussion of how you’d attain equal incomes, its just saying assume equal income. There’s no evidence provided about how to get there. If this approach is valid, why don’t we just say we want to triple the incomes of minorities instead of double, and raise the GDP even more?”
“The whole idea is sort of bizarre. I don’t see how you could equalize income without causing dislocation to the economy,” he continued. “If you make the wages of blue-collar workers equal to white-collar workers, the white collar workers either demand that their pay increase, or they leave. If we dropped money out of airplanes, the nominal number of dollars in circulation might rise, but you’d have inflation.”
“And it doesn’t look at factors most directly intertwined with differences in income, underlying characteristics like single-parent households,” Vedder added.
So, what does all of this have to do with “choice”. It’s simple. When one contemplates where one wants to live or decides to move when choosing to take a better job, it is prudent to look at various neighborhoods that meet a set of needs and desires. If you have children, school districts are very important if you do not homeschool your children or even send to private school. Closeness to your workplace, shopping venues, churches, etc. are all factors to consider when choosing a home and residence – even county and municipality are a choice since one may prefer a small town over a big city.
In Fairfax County, the residents (various races) who bought homes in areas “zoned to schools with high test scores”, claimed their property would devalue by hundreds of thousands of dollars and that local minority activists were not requesting school rezoning based upon race.
Landsburg said, “It is more like junk ‘close-your-eyes-and-wish.’ Worse yet, what they’re wishing for is not just a distant pipe dream; it’s demonstrably impossible.”
PERE’s premise appears to suppose that minorities doing service industry jobs and manual labor will move into white-collar or management positions without anyone else moving into those jobs to replace them, he said. Regardless of the race of the people doing the jobs, economies can’t function without people doing jobs like “building factories or assembling cars or growing corn,” Landsburg continued.
“In a world where your wages are not tied to the value of what you’re producing, people are going to choose to forgo useful labor in order to perform worthless tasks like writing nonsensical ‘studies,’” he joked to the DCNF. “In that world, there will be less for everyone.”
Basically, local governments, 33 cities so far, are using their residents as experimental rats for the pleasure of some “national group”. This means local government removing choices from individuals and the community to implement the whims of these subversive groups under the ruse of receiving billions of dollars in economic growth that could pad the government coffers.
In Seattle, Washington, the city paid PolicyLink in 2014 to advise on incorporating equity into the growth scenario model. The suggestions by PolicyLink were implemented by Seattle. The result was an increased gap in test scores between black and white students in the city while no billion-dollar wealth growth was realized. These policies resulted in a negative impact, negating the choices of the city’s residents, all for the love of money.
And, back to the issue of choice. The first choice is to choose God or not. By rejecting God and choosing to worship the worthless dollar, these city and county governments will subject the residents to the consequences. Residents then can choose to vote with their feet and move. However, be warned. This process is occurring all across the country, meaning we as citizens need to scrutinize our local government under a microscope, holding their feet to the fire as never before and ousting those who seek to remove our choices.
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media