San Francisco’s irrepressible former mayor, Willie Brown, was walking along one of the city’s streets when he happened to run into another former city official that he knew, James McCray.
McCray’s greeting to him was “You’re ten.”
Advertisement
“What are you talking about?” Brown asked.
McCray replied, “I just walked from Civic Center to Third Street and you’re only the tenth black person I’ve seen.”
That is hardly surprising. The black population of San Francisco is less than half of what it was in 1970, and it fell another 19 percent in the past decade.
A few years ago, I had a similar experience in one of the other communities further down the San Francisco peninsula. As I was bicycling down the street, I saw a black man waiting at a bus stop. As I approached him, he said, “You’re the first black man I have seen around here in months!”
“It will be months before you see another one,” I replied, and we both laughed.
Actually, it was no laughing matter. Blacks are being forced out of San Francisco — and out of other communities on the San Francisco peninsula — by high housing prices.
At one time, housing prices in San Francisco were much like housing prices elsewhere in the country. But the building restrictions — and outright bans — resulting from the political crusades of environmentalist zealots sent housing prices skyrocketing in San Francisco, San Jose, and most of the communities in between. Housing prices in these communities soared to about three times the national average.
The black population in three adjacent counties on the San Francisco peninsula is just under 3 percent of the total population in the 39 communities in those counties.
It so happens that these are counties where voters and the officials they elect are virtually all liberal Democrats. You might be hard pressed to find similarly one-sided conservative Republican communities where blacks are such small percentages of the population.
Certainly that would be hard to find in states with a substantial total population of blacks. In California, a substantial black population has simply been forced by economics to vacate many communities near the coast and move farther inland, where the environmental zealots are not yet as strong politically, and where housing prices are therefore not yet as unaffordable.
With all the Republican politicians’ laments about how overwhelmingly blacks vote for Democrats, I have yet to hear a Republican politician publicly point out the harm to blacks from such Democratic policies as severe housing restrictions, resulting from catering to environmental extremists.
If the Republicans did point out such things as building restrictions that make it hard for most blacks to afford housing, even in places where they once lived, they would have the Democrats at a complete disadvantage.
It would be impossible for the Democrats to deny the facts, not only in coastal California but in similar affluent strongholds of liberal Democrats around the country. Moreover, environmental zealots are such an important part of the Democrats’ constituencies that Democratic politicians could not change their policies.
Although Republicans have a strong case, none of that matters when they don’t make the it. The same is true of the effects of minimum-wage laws on the high rate of unemployment among black youths. Again, the facts are undeniable, and the Democrats cannot change their policy, because they are beholden to labor unions that advocate higher minimum wages.
Yet another area in which Democrats are boxed in politically is their making job protection for members of teacher unions more important than improving education for students. No one loses more from this policy than blacks. For many of them, education is their only chance for economic advancement.
But none of this matters so long as Republicans who want the black vote think they have to devise earmarked benefits for blacks, instead of explaining how Republicans’ general principles, applied to all Americans, can do more for blacks than the Democrats’ welfare-state approach.
Yes, I would agree that the GOP should make the case to blacks about the failure of Dem policies that were supposed to help blacks, but how about blacks do some thinking for themselves and examine the outcome of the policies against the promises of said policies? As long as blacks are content with just accepting the words that come out of Democratic pols' mouths, no amount of explanation by the GOP is going to shake them free of the Dems' grip on their votes and their minds.
Fair point. And one I'm sure Sowell would concede. But I think the central point of Sowell's article is the GOP's inability to articulate clear messages to counter the Dems' policies and approaches. He's been harping about this for years. And he's right.
Wow, I never thought I would say these words, but I respectfully disagree with Mr. Sowell. It is NEVER impossible for Democrats to deny facts. It seems as if that is all they do! Deny facts and blame everyone else for their failures.
And unfortunately, I think we all know how making the Republican case to the Black community would go:
Republicans say "Look at what Democrat policy has done to you!"
Then Democrats would scream "Racists!"
And then the Black community in unison would say "Yeah, you racists!"
One problem is in getting the message out with all the noise out there. Between the Jesse Jacksons and NAACP's telling them the exact opposite, the unions, environmentalists, and other well funded thugs blasting out lies, and the media support machine bolstering the lies, it's a tough message to get across.
The other problem is that the message is complicated, and voters (black, white, or purple) generally don't want to think. The emotion of well funded lies is a lot easier for the average voter to take in.
The liberal policies first introduced in broad way by Franklin Roosevelt and expanded greatly by Lyndon Johnson had lofty goals and to view it charitably were done with good intentions. The issue that we're facing is one of simple ego. It's impossible for democrats to admit that the policies that they fervently believe in have hurt the very people that they intended to help. Someone should hug them and let them know it's okay to be wrong and let them apologize for hurting the country and the downtrodden most of all.
Perhaps Dr. Sowell could do a series of commercials, airing on BET, explaining this. He has the credentials required to present the economic case, and he is not a politician looking for office, nor would he be asking for money. If the Republican Party would not fund it, or thinks that might taint it, something could be set up to collect the required funds to pay for making and airing the commercials.
I have always agreed with Dr. Sowell until now. I have heard several conservative folks telling how the Democrat policies are detremental to blacks, two of which are Hannity and Limbaugh. Those policies repress blacks and keep most of them from fulfiling their full potential. There are those who rise above the poverty and multi-generational welfare families, to be sure. However, there are not many black conservatives in those audiences, hence they don't hear the message.
I would like to hear some black conservative politicians make better gains at getting the message out, but they have a hard time getting past the "Uncle Tom" responses from a lot of the black constituency. No matter how clear the message, if the audience won't listen, the point is moot.
For once, I can't agree 100% with you. To say, "It would be impossible for the Democrats to deny the facts" just highlights the core of the political problem. Liberals deny facts daily; it's the only way they can attract anyone to vote for them.
If you mix in the entitlement culture the War on Poverty created, the nuanced eugenics of Planned Parenthood, the unintended consequences of Affirmative Action and the ignorance of campus diversity Dr. Sowell would have enough for a pretty influential book.
When someone starts out a column by saying that the high price of San Francisco housing is because of environmental rules, I have to discredit everything else he says. Market forces caused San Francisco housing prices to go up. It is a desirable place to live, so people with enough money bought up the housing stock. Sowell offers no evidence otherwise, so I'll go with the market explanation.
Dr. Sowell's arguments regarding the cost of living in San Francisco (and California in general) are fleshed out in some of his books. The mere fact that San Francisco is a desirable place to live does not mean that the cost of housing has to be high. Nearly every place people desire to live does not have such high costs. Only Manhattan compares with San Francisco in terms of market dysfunction in the US. Regulations translate into costs imposed on the market.
It seems that the point that this article (and many of the comments) is making is that blacks have been voting against their self interest for generations because they are so stupid as to believe the lies of Democrats. It is most likely that most blacks vote for Democrats is that, on the whole, democratic policies are to their benefit when compared to republican policies. Neither party can meet an entire groups' interests all the times, but in a free vote, people tend to balance things out and vote accordingly. When this happens year after year, then you know that that is the case. To continue to whine that Republicans are just no good at PR and that Democrats succeed at it because they are liars just defies common sense and insults blacks.
I suspect that the author didn't go into further detail, with regards his point of the impact of regulation on housing prices, because the explanation is lengthy, tedious, and completely unsexy.
I have an unusual, niche job; I process construction plans for government approval. My clients cover the whole array of customer types, from individual homeowners to large developers.
I assure you that Mr. Sowell is on point here.
I will try and nutshell it for you. The cost of construction has leaped over the years as a direct result of the ever mounting rules and regulations. While much of this has been driven by the insurance industry an equal if not greater burden comes from environmental policy.
Depending on where you live, the burden can be crushing for some. I happen to live in an area that has gone whole hog with environmental oppresion (the need for my services would not exist otherwise, and the cost of my services are additional to the overall cost of construction).
The general public has no idea what is happening right under their noses, until they make the awful mistake of choosing to perform any kind of construction, or are cited by local code enforcement, what a maze of regulations and fees have been created by the regulation of construction.
In my area the local building, zoning & environmental agencies, that must approval all permits, are conveniently located under one roof to make it easier for property owners to part with vast amounts of money and time.
I have been in this buisness for the last 20 years and have watched the growth of the monster. I could go on for hours and still not be able to tell everything that there is to tell.
Suffice it to say, that the additional costs that result from massive amounts of regualtions that seem to flow continuously from government agencies, have a direct and heavy impact on the cost of housing. In my area the additional costs average about $10-$30 per square foot. That is significant!
On top of all that, there is the issue of property rights. Let me be the one to tell you that you don't have any!
Blacks are not concern about politics. Deep within the black communities, there are despair and hardship. The people are limited, by economical constraints to see day-to-day and no further. Politicians on both sides know that exploiting blacks reaps no serious repercussions. So, for voting purposes, Democrats perpetuate the "racist" white man theme. Moreover, they take black votes for granted and make no effort in keeping. If this nation of white predominance did not blatantly display racism against people who are non-white, the nation would be bastions in defense of character. There is a guilt factor that pushes back the Republican leaders to defend their character. There are fears among white Republicans, no one wants to be labeled racist. Also, fear is the dismantling of ‘unearned white privilege’ deeply rooted in this nation. It is getting by without true merits. America's heritage is racism and it has been difficult to move away from this. It is prevalent to pretend that this nation has rigid itself of racism by using the yard stick of electing a black president of the United States and other lesser high level positions. Black people are not interested in making a more informative vote since they have learned to live in a nation that does not fully accepts them.
morris21654: In normal circumstances, when the price of something goes up, people race to create more of it on one side, and to find alternatives on the other.
Both of these options are foreclosed on in cities like San Francisco. It is very hard to build new houses. Sub-dividing existing housing is often illegal. All new housing that is built has to meet extensive zoning requirements such as minimum square footage and other things that drive up the cost. Zoning regulations also take huge swaths of potential land out of the equation by declaring them "parks", "green zones", "buffers". All so that the people who already have houses can look at something other than someone else's house.
Mark Phillips: Since you are so convinced that Democratic policies actually benefit blacks, it should be trivial for you to name a few. On the other hand, thinkers such as Dr. Sowell have written entire books detailing precisely how these same policies are bad for blacks, and for poor people in general.
Don't pull a liberal and beleive that just by insulting those who disagree with you have proven anything.
Mr. Sowell does not mention that there has been significant declines in the Black populations of every city in California,(as well as every major city outside the South) including GOP friendly cities of Santa Ana in Orange County and San Diego, which has a similar Black demographic to San Francisco.
The real reason for the exdous of Blacks from the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles was the housing boom of 1990-2008 where new homes couldn't be built fast enough, where the values of existing homes shot through the roof and the easy availability of adjustable rate subprime loans that tempted anyone with a pulse to buy a new home in the inland communities of the Bay Area and LA.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Bay Area and LA Blacks had the options of paying high rents or buying overpriced, 50-100 year old homes with high down payments in overcrowed, congested and crime ridden cities with poor schools; or buying brand new homes 90 miles away from SF or LA in communities with new schools, low crime and plenty of parking. These homes could be bought with no down payment and mortgages on these new homes were often much less than what was being paid for a mortgage or rent in SF or LA. Many Blacks saw these homes as an investment since housing values were virtually increasing daily during the first few years of the last decade. A home in West Sacramento, 90 miles from San Francisco purchased at $125,000 in 2000 was valued at $350,000 in 2006. Those smart enough sold and made money, many others however refinanced, getting loans on the new value of their homes. The housing bust happened in 2008 when interest rates/mortgates went up and housing values dropped like a rock. That West Sacramento home is worth $100,000 today. The areas near SF and LA where many Blacks relocated to in the 2000s now have some of the highest foreclosure rates in the country.
Sowell also failes to understand the law of supply and demand in the Bay Area, home to some of the highest paid people in the country working at Twitter, Facebook, Oracle and other tech companies. What is the incentive to build apartments renting for $900 when there are many people willing to pay 2-3 times more for that same apartment?
"Do a little digging into Woodlands, Texas. (Hint: Houston has no zoning.)"
Last I checked, people want to move to Texas. Not so with San Francisco (for a detailed analysis of Dr. Sowell's opinion on San Fran housing, morris21654, read his books).
