NCH Headquarters Resembles a Portrait Art Gallery with a Homelessness Theme

Home » jchambers » Page 11

Over the years, NCH has had many homeless-related artwork either loaned or donated to us.   If you come visit us at our office located in the Church of the Pilgrims here in Washington, DC, you will find the following exhibits at the NCH office, and in the Church’s Bird Room Art Gallery and Pilgrimage Retreat Center.  Each year several thousand people get the chance to view our artwork.

If you are interested in checking out our artwork or borrowing our artwork for a special event, please contact us.  Also, if you are an artist who has done homelessness related artwork or know of an artist who has, please consider loaning or donating the artwork to us and or letting your artist friend know about our interest.

Portraits of Homelessness, Frank Russell.   Four paintings depicting homelessness in Baltimore grace our walls.  Mr. Russell also has loaned his paintings and drawings to Health Care for the Homeless in Baltimore.

“Giving Back”, Alan B. Tuttle—These five paintings depict the lives of homeless people with the goal of raising awareness of the problem of homelessness.  Alan resides and works in Oxbow, New York.

Home Street Home (1984), by Fran Adler and Kira Corser.   24 artworks, each with a photograph and poem.  This exhibit is a collaborative photography-poetry exhibition by photographer Kira Corser and poet Frances Payne Adler.  This exhibit was an artistic response to the homelessness crisis in San Diego in the mid-1980’s.

Homeless T-Shirt Quilts, by the late Dorothy Hand.    Since NCH’s founding in 1982, staff and board members have traveled the country to mobilize the grassroots to do advocacy on homelessness issues.   During these travels we came across a number of poverty-related t-shirts that reflect our extensive grassroots network.  As you can only wear one t-shirt at a time, we thought a better idea would be to have these cutting-edge t-shirts made into quilts.

All six quilts were done by the late Dorothy Hand, a quilter from Cincinnati.  She created the quilts in an effort to raise awareness of the homelessness issue.  Her daughter and granddaughter continue to make quilts for NCH.   So if you have a favorite homelessness/poverty-related t-shirt, please send our way.

Images of Homelessness (1999), Tammy DeGruchy (Grubbs).   The Images of Homelessness is the largest (22 portraits) ever oil painting exhibit on homelessness..  Artist DeGruchy painted the exhibit for the National Coalition for the Homeless. The exhibit raises awareness on homeless issues and represents who becomes homeless.

Tammy Grubbs now resides in Pipestone, Minnesota.   She continues to volunteer doing portraits for NCH.  Two of her paintings have been turned into posters that are available for purchase on NCH’s website.

Locked Out, Pat Apt—a 14 piece exhibit—linoleum prints (black ink on brown wrapping paper).  This exhibit seeks to explore how in a society as wealthy as ours, that allows persistent hunger and homelessness to exist.

We’re really sad to see you all go!  NCH has been lucky enough to welcome the following interns to our offices.  This group has shown an incredible level of dedication and skill in helping us to get some great work done this summer.  Thank you for all your hard work, and best of luck in your future endeavors (maybe there is another Secretary of HUD among you?!)!

Laura Epstein

Laura is a sophomore at Claremont McKenna College outside of Los Angeles, where she is studying government and religious studies. At school, Laura is very involved with Hillel and the College Democrats. She first got involved in NCH through attending Speakers’ Bureau presentations, and she is thrilled to become more involved with causes related to homelessness through her internship at NCH this summer. Outside of the office, she enjoys exploring D.C. and teaching violin lessons. She has been working on writing up hate crimes and publicizing National Hunger and Homeless Awareness Week.

Daniel Honeycutt

Daniel is a sophomore at Allegheny College in Meadville, Pennsylvania, where he is majoring in Political Science and Music. He plays trumpet and sings in many music ensembles at Allegheny, including jazz band and choir. Daniel hopes to attend law school or graduate school for Political Science following graduation. He recently moved to Maryland from much colder Maine, where he was once an intern for Senator Olympia Snowe. His previous political experience motivated him to seek out a great nonprofit to intern with for the summer, and NCH was a perfect fit. Dan is currently tracking voter ID laws for the 2011/2012 Voting Packet and updating the 2010/2011 Criminalization of Homelessness Report.

Elizabeth Ballinger-Dix

From Seattle, Elizabeth is a junior at Amherst College in Massachusetts, majoring in English. After graduation, she is considering work in international development or conflict resolution. While searching for a way to work on poverty this summer, she learned about NCH through her college’s Center for Community Engagement. After work she likes cooking, reading, wandering around, and talking to anyone who will give her five minutes. Her main focus this summer is updating the website.

Brooke Templin

Brooke is a rising junior at Allegheny College in Meadville, PA, majoring in English. She is also pursuing a minor in Biology. Her time at the National Coalition for the Homeless is a part of her commitment and participation in the Bonner Foundation Program, a community service based scholarship program. Brooke first became interested in issues of homelessness when the Speaker’s Bureau came and spoke at Allegheny. Since then, she worked with the Bonner Foundation at a local family services agency in Meadville that provided rental assistance. She is excited to be in Washington, DC learning about the issues and being a part of the advocacy community for people experiencing homelessness. Currently she is working on updating factsheets and the website layout. In her free time, she loves reading and exploring the many sights of DC.

Erin Linnehan

Erin is a rising senior at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts. She is a Political Science and Religious Studies double major with a concentration in Peace and Conflict Studies. At school, she is a Varsity athlete on the Women’s Track and Field team at Holy Cross, directs the campus community service organization, and sings in her college a Capella group. Erin enjoys the company of family and friends and loves to spend time playing pick up sports. This summer, she has primarily been updating the Foreclosure to Homelessness 2009 report which the organization hopes to release by next year.

Marianne DeAngelo

Marianne DeAngelo is a junior at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, TN majoring in Sociology and minoring in Communications and Studio Art. She became interested in NCH after researching hate crimes against people experiencing homelessness for two classroom speeches. At Vanderbilt, she has participated in Habitat for Humanity Spring Break, is a captain of the Club Lacrosse team, and is the Recruitment Chairwoman of her sorority. After college she hopes to find a career that relates to her interest in criminology. This summer she has been using her communications experience to improve our “Faces of Homelessness” Speakers’ Bureau.

Shane Poole

Shane graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of Pittsburgh with a B.S. in political science and psychology.  In the fall he will be entering his second year of law school at Howard University.  Shane plans on devoting his legal career to social change as an advocate for the poor.  He believes that racial unity and education are the keys for progress, and that everyone in America could be given an equal opportunity to make something out of life.  Greatly inspired by Martin Luther King, Jr., Shane understands that peace, compassion, and love must be spread to all.

The National Coalition for the Homeless would like to offer a preview of our upcoming report on the criminalization of homelessness by choosing the top ten most ridiculous anti-homeless policies enacted in cities across America. Our criminalization report will offer narratives for many more cities and occurrences than the ones listed here, as well as rank the nation’s ten “meanest” cities. This post counts down our choices for the 5 most ridiculous anti-homeless laws/actions. An earlier article ranking policies 10 through 6 is available.

10 Most Ridiculous Anti-Homeless Laws
~From 2010 through June 2011~

 5. Panhandling Bans – Multiple Cities

A rapidly increasing number of cities are designating areas where it is illegal to ask for any item of value. In Miami FL, for instance, panhandling is not allowed around American Airlines Arena and other tourist-heavy areas. Dallas TX also banned panhandling in popular tourist destinations in preparation for hosting the Super Bowl. Some cities, like St. Petersburg FL, even issued bans that cover the entire city.

Despite laws already being in place to guard against “aggressive” panhandling and asking for help clearly being a first amendment right, the courts have had mixed conclusions on these ordinances. An appellate court in New York said that such bans are unconstitutional, while panhandling bans for certain areas, such as around ATM’s and banks, were upheld in Minneapolis MN.

Oakland Park FL decided to take their roadway panhandling ban a step further: not only is it illegal to ask for anything of value, it is also illegal to give. In the name of traffic safety, anyone caught giving to or purchasing something from anybody on the road can face either a fine of $50 to $100 or up to 90 days in jail.

4. Camping Bans – Multiple Cities

Some cities, including Anchorage AK and Kansas City MO, have passed “anti-camping” ordinances and are destroying homeless camps both within metropolitan areas, such as those under bridges and in abandoned lots, and deep within parks and forests. Many municipalities interpret “camping” to mean setting up structures such as tents, while others will issue citations for simply using a sleeping bag because it provides shelter from the elements. For example, Salt Lake City UT has produced horror stories of people receiving camping citations for sitting on their backpack in a park.

Police “sweeps” of homeless camps, which are intended to clear out residents and their makeshift shelters, have resulted in the loss of very important property, such as medication, birth certificates, ID, and personal mementos. Due to legal challenges nationwide, like one in Portland OR and another in Sacramento CA, many cities that perform these sweeps have instituted systems to provide warning time to campers and to retain their seized belongings for a fixed period of time. Without this process, numerous homeless victims have illegally lost what little property they had, and even with it many more still stand to lose their belongings due to the difficulty of retrieving it. Ultimately, these crackdowns on homeless camps only waste taxpayer money and cause unnecessary hardship in order to move the problem of homelessness instead of solve it by providing adequate access to housing and services.

3. Sit/Lie Ban – San Francisco, California

“Stand up for the right to sit down!” This is the rally cry of those who are protesting a San Francisco ordinance that makes it illegal to sit or lie down on the city’s sidewalks between 7 am and 11 pm. The city claims that the ordinance is intended to limit panhandling and to reduce San Francisco’s homeless population by discouraging homeless people from living there. Opponents say that it is unconstitutional to force somebody to walk and stand all day simply because they have nowhere to go. Similar ordinances exist in cities across the country, including Austin TX, Seattle WA, and Reno NV to name a few.

2. Food Sharing Limits – Orlando, Florida

Since when is it illegal to give somebody food? In Orlando FL, it has been since April 2011, when a group of activists lost a court battle against the city to overturn its 2006 laws that restrict sharing food with groups of more than 25 people. The ordinance requires those who do these “large” charitable food sharings in parks within two miles of City Hall to obtain a permit and limits each group to two permits per park for a year. Food sharing is considered to be a form of speech, but the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the ordinance still provides ample areas for groups to practice their first amendment rights because they can still share food elsewhere in the city.

The law was not enforced during the legal battle, but after the lawsuit against the city failed, Orlando began cracking down on those who chose to defy the ordinance, resulting in multiple arrests of activists from Food Not Bombs. “‘They basically carted them off to jail for feeding hungry people,’ said [Douglas Coleman from Orlando Food Not Bombs]. ‘For them to regulate a time and place for free speech and to share food, that is unacceptable.’”

Food sharing prohibitions are far from a new development and are not only found in Orlando. In 2010, NCH and the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty released a report on the growing popularity of these ordinances.

1. Sleeping Bans – Multiple Cities

Many city ordinances that ban public sleeping, like one in Santa Cruz CA, refer to all sleeping in public as “camping,” but the act of camping is interpreted in this article to be the use of personal shelter, such as a tent, and those laws are addressed in #4 of this list. Number one on our countdown is focused on ordinances that strictly ban all public sleeping outright, which includes cities such as Santa Cruz that make sleeping outside illegal in a de facto manner via a “camping” ordinance’s broad interpretation and enforcement.

No other type of law can quite compare to these bans when it comes to the overt criminalization of homelessness: it is undeniable that people experiencing homelessness are the only segment of the population commonly affected by ordinances that do not allow sleeping outside. To exacerbate the problem, many places with these laws, like Ashland OR, simply do not have enough shelter and services to offer violators.

Thankfully, courts have usually required cities with these ordinances to have enough shelter space available for every offender, as was the case in San Diego CA. But this policy ignores that shelters, which usually have curfews, tough crowds, and crammed beds, are not necessarily the most desirable places to live, so many people would much rather stay on the street than in what are sometimes “jail-like” places. And all too often the homeless have no choice: in St. Petersburg FL, those caught sleeping on the sidewalk are told that they can either go to a shelter or a real jail, denying them the option of avoiding systematic and strict harboring altogether. In the end, these policies can severely hurt people experiencing homelessness, resulting in jail time, outstanding fines, and a restriction of their freedoms.

For more information on the criminalization of homelessness, you can visit our 2009 Homes Not Handcuffs Report and our 2010 report on Food Sharing Prohibitions.

By Daniel Honeycutt, NCH Intern

The National Coalition for the Homeless would like to offer a preview of our upcoming report on the criminalization of homelessness by choosing the top ten most ridiculous anti-homeless policies enacted in cities across America. Our criminalization report will offer narratives for many more cities and occurrences than the ones listed here, as well as rank the nation’s ten “meanest” cities. This post counts down our choices for the ten most ridiculous anti-homeless laws/actions.

These five anti-homeless policies are only the tip of the iceberg. Check back in with the Bringing America Home Blog next week for five even more ridiculous laws and actions that not only ignore human rights, but constitutional ones as well.

10 Most Ridiculous Anti-Homeless Laws
~From 2010 through June 2011~

10.  “Homeless Meters” – Multiple Cities

San Antonio TX, Virginia Beach VA, Anchorage AK, and many more cities across America are installing converted parking meters to collect donations for homeless service organizations. These meters are being marketed as a possible solution to panhandling by encouraging do-gooders to give their spare change to established groups instead of directly to the homeless to avoid the possibility of their money being spent on drugs and alcohol.

Donating to vetted homeless service organizations is a positive thing, so we at NCH want the placing of “homeless meter” programs on this list to not necessarily mean that we are against the use of parking meters to collect donations. But we also urge the public to be aware of the negative effects of these efforts.

Personal interaction, which these meters may eliminate, can be just as important to a person experiencing homelessness as an actual monetary donation. A short talk can go lengths and bounds to renewing a feeling of inclusion in society, a feeling that is all too often lost among the sometimes invisible homeless. Donations to service organizations are always encouraged, but we should never let these meters discourage acknowledging that those who ask for money are fellow human beings. Just as ignoring the issue of homelessness will not help end it, ignoring the people directly affected by homelessness will not help them help themselves.

9.  RV Sleeping Ban – Venice, California

In 2010, Venice CA began strict enforcement of an ordinance banning sleeping in RV’s. This action is reportedly due to resident claims of annoyance from noise and inconvenience from the bulky vehicles. But many homeless live in RV’s, and they need to be close to the city so they can access services. Not allowing them to park and sleep in the city makes getting help all the more difficult. The ordinance was enacted due to reports of some RV owners dumping their sewage in public, but this ban punishes Venice’s homeless who have to choose between living either in their RV or on the streets. This homeless population is assuredly much larger than a couple of bad apples who do not care where their waste ends up.

8.  Smoking Ban – Sarasota, Florida

A ban on smoking in some public areas in Sarasota FL may sound fine at first: after all, New York City recently banned smoking in public parks. But the real issue here lies within the City Commission’s intentions, not the validity of the effects of second-hand smoke or cigarette butt pollution. The ban was originally proposed in conjunction with park bench removal at Selby Five Points Park (#6) to discourage the homeless from using the public area. The ban was later expanded to all public parks out of fairness, but this ordinance still remains far from fair: a city-owned golf course was given an exemption because, according to City Manager Bob Bartolotta, “so many of the golfers are smokers.” What is so special about golfers that they should not be required to follow the laws that are in place across the rest of Sarasota’s public parks?

7.  Water Sprinklers – Manteca, California

“Creative” is one way to think of this method of keeping the homeless from sleeping in public parks in Manteca, CA. “Cruel and unusual” is another. In order to discourage the homeless from camping in Library Park, the city purposely changed the water sprinkler schedule so that people could not sleep in the park without an unwanted shower. The policy also includes shutting off power in the park’s gazebo to keep the homeless from using it to charge their cell phones.

6.  Bench Removal – Sarasota, Florida

In response to complaints about gatherings of “vagrants” in public parks from downtown Sarasota FL condo residents, the city decided to remove the presumed host of these gatherings: benches. Sarasota went forward with its plan to remove the benches in Selby Five Points Park in May 2011 in order to please those who pay “the highest property tax value in the county” by discouraging the homeless (and apparently everyone else) from using the park. Combined with a panhandling ban around parking meters and a smoking ban in certain public spaces, which the City Commission originally proposed to further discourage the homeless from using parks (#8), it is all too clear that the Sarasota Commissioners are willing to go to ridiculous lengths to keep their poorest citizens out of the sight of their wealthiest.

For more information on the criminalization of homelessness, you can visit our 2009 Homes Not Handcuffs Report and our 2010 report on Food Sharing Prohibitions.  Be sure to check back next week for the top 5 Most Ridiculous Anti-Homeless Laws!

By Daniel Honeycutt, NCH Intern

With so many college students flocking to D.C. for internships, it is no surprise that organizations choose to have conventions geared toward young adults in D.C. over the summer. In the past month, I had the fantastic opportunity of attending the 2011 College Democrats of America Conference, from June 16-19, and the Center for American Progress’s Campus Progress National Convention on July 6. At the conferences, I learned about ways to take action on progressive causes and publicized National Hunger and Homeless Awareness Week to college students.

National Hunger and Homeless Awareness Week, from November 12-20, 2011, is an NCH-sponsored event that I have been publicizing as part of my internship here at NCH. During the week, groups have the opportunity to coordinate events related to issues of hunger and homelessness such as hosting a Speakers’ Bureau panel, creating a tent city on campus, or lobbying elected officials. This summer, I have reached out to religious groups, community service groups, and college campuses to see if they can involve more groups in hosting their own awareness weeks. To enhance outreach efforts, I talked to many college students at the conferences I attended to encourage them to learn more about the awareness week by signing up to receive an organizing manual. Due to the close ties between democratic/progressive causes and issues related to poverty, students were extremely interested in becoming involved with our awareness week. Furthermore, because many of the democratic/progressive clubs that students are involved in have a low profile on campus or are faced with many apathetic student bodies, I encouraged students to bring awareness weeks to their campuses because of the innovative leadership and outreach experiences the week presents.

In addition to reaching out to students to participate in National Hunger and Homeless Awareness Week, I attended seemingly countless panels and keynote addresses, including hearing from people such as former President Clinton, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and author of Nickel and Dimed Barbara Ehrenreich. As well as learning about cool projects and ways to take action that I will take back to my college campus, I was able to look at many issues through the lens of the relationship to homelessness. For instance, Representative Donna Edwards (D-MD) spoke about how when she was younger, she almost lost her house because she racked up hospital bills that she never would have incurred had her job provided her with healthcare or a high enough wage for her to buy her own coverage. For the conferences as a whole, one of the biggest topics was voting rights. ID laws and other requirements not only negatively affect the homeless, they also restrict the ability of college students to vote. It was so interesting to make the connections and to see how various groups are fighting the new voting laws. I also attend a panel directly related to poverty, with representatives from low-income student groups, Center for American Progress’ poverty reduction program (half in ten), and others. It was inspiring to hear how different organizations tackle the issues of poverty.

I absolutely loved attending the conferences because not only did I learn more about issues that I care about, but I was also able to talk with so many other students about how they are making positive social change and relate their experiences to mine here at NCH.

By Laura Epstein, intern

“If you have to show a picture ID to buy Sudafed, if you have to show a picture ID to get on an airplane, you should show a picture ID when you vote.” This is South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s justification for a new bill in the state that requires voters to produce photographic identification at the polls. Signed into law on May 18th, the bill also requires voters to produce a voter registration card, and one containing a photograph can be acquired for free with a birth certificate or passport.

South Carolina is far from alone in passing this measure. As of date, fourteen states have passed laws requiring photo identification, with sixteen more having other proof of residence voting requirements, such as presenting a credit card, utility bill, birth certificate, or paycheck if the voter does not have another form of identification. The stated goal of most supporters of this kind of legislation is to reduce voter fraud by making it more difficult for people to vote more than once in an election or for non-citizens to vote.

This trend is only becoming more and more widespread: according to The Brennan Center for Justice, “at least 37 states are considering or have considered voter ID and/or proof of citizenship” bills in this legislative session alone. The graph below shows the astounding recent increase in photo ID legislation passage:

These measures may in fact disenfranchise many American citizens who would otherwise be able to vote. A New York Times Editorial arguing against this type of legislation cites a survey by the Brennan Center for Justice which finds that 11% of American citizens who are of voting age (21 million people) do not have up-to-date photo identification, with that percentage being significantly higher among those with low incomes (15%) and African-Americans (25%). Furthermore, this was a phone survey, so the nation’s entire homeless population was, in all likelihood, not remotely accounted for in the results. If anything, these percentages are likely to be higher among the entire American electorate.

In theory, making photographic identification free, as some of these laws also do, should make it easy for citizens to acquire one and be able to vote. However, it is not that simple. Although most of these state laws have alternatives to using identification on election day, such as provisional ballots and affidavit forms, many of them still put a de facto price on voting for those who simply do not have the means to easily obtain a birth certificate, find out their Social Security number, or to make a trip to the DMV for a state-issued ID, such as the impoverished, disabled, and homeless. The key problem here, as was outlined by Professor Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School in a NPR discussion on the topic, is that “it takes ID to get ID.” Even if finances are not an issue, which they certainly are for individuals and families experiencing homelessness, it can still be “quite difficult to round up the documentation necessary to get documentation. It ends up a little bit of a bureaucratic cycle,” possibly causing voter apathy.

Overall, this legislation puts even more roadblocks in the way for the homeless to vote than there already are. Even though its supporters may indeed have the noble intention of reducing voter fraud, the issue of fraud itself is virtually “nonexistent” according to the New York Times. Regardless of how large or small of a problem voter fraud actually is, the large possibility remains that a surprisingly large number of Americans, at least 21 million, stand to effectively lose their vote if this legislation spreads nationwide unless they acquire a photo ID, which is certainly easier said than done for our marginalized populations, including the homeless.

To find out your state’s current voter identification laws, you can visit the National Conference of State Legislatures voter ID page. Also, New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice has an up to date report on the progress of voter ID legislation by state.

By Daniel Honeycutt, Intern

Check out NCH’s useful one pager of key findings and statistics from the report:

On June 14, 2011, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development released its 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress. The report details statistics of the homelessness population and examines the progress/usage of HUD initiatives. NCH created an overview of the most important facts from it, which you can see here.

Hate exists in American society.  Sadly, some individuals act upon hateful urges and cause harm to innocent human beings; harm ranging from minor assault to brutal death.  In an effort to curb hateful violence, Congress and many State governments have enacted statutes that increase punishment for those acts targeted at individuals because of such individual’s status.  The intent of such laws, and the punishments attached, are to send a message to society that our criminal justice system does not tolerate hate.

Unfortunately, the federal government and most States do not categorize homelessness as a protected status from hate.  This means that in most places in America a “homeless hater,” unprovoked, could attack a homeless person sleeping on a bench, and when being tried for the crime, the hater would be punished for the action, but not for the motive of action.  Not punishing a person’s reason for acting sends the message that the act is wrong, but the motive behind the act is acceptable.

On August 9, 1999, in Seattle, Washington, three young men beat and stabbed David Ballenger, 46, to death.  David had no valuable possessions to steal.  David was not involved in drugs, or the associated violence. And David did not verbally or physically entice his attackers. David was simply murdered because he was homeless. In fact, a Seattle newspaper quoted one of the perpetrators boasting that there was “one less bum on the face of the earth.”

The attack began as a verbal barrage, the young men criticizing David for not being able to make a living.  When David walked away, his attackers followed and began beating him.  Resisting, David escaped, but the young men found him, elevated the violence, and stabbed the helpless David Ballenger to death.  This senseless murder is not the only instance of inhumanity toward the homeless in Washington.  In fact, according to the National Coalition for the Homeless, between 1999 and 2009 there were 21 reported incidents of violence directed at homeless individuals, 12 of which resulting in death.

Over a decade after David Ballenger’s brutal murder, on January 10, 2011, Washington State Senator Scott White (D-Seattle) introduced legislation in response to the violence toward the homeless.  White’s legislation seeks to include offenses that were intentionally committed because the defendant perceived the victim to be homeless to the criteria for aggravating circumstances under which an exceptional sentence above the standard range may be imposed.  On March 2, 2011 the Senate passed White’s bill with a vote of 49 – 0. The bill was then sent to the House, and the following month the legislation was passed 92 – 1 (Republican Jason Overstreet was the sole dissenter; Republican members Terry Nealey, Kevin Parker, Jay Rodne, and Charles Ross, abstained from the vote) Finally on April 15, 2011, almost 12 years after the brutal murder of David Ballenger, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire signed White’s bill into law, making offenses committed because a victim was homeless an aggravating circumstance.

But what does this really mean once we climb past the legal jargon?

Practically, the passage of Washington S.B. 5011 (White’s bill) means that if an offense against a person was intentionally committed because that person was perceived to be homeless (the aggravating circumstance), courts will have the option to impose tougher penalties (the exceptional sentence).  However, before a Judge can make a decision regarding the exceptional sentence, the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the aggravating circumstance exists.  S.B. 5011 did not create the concept of increased punishment for certain acts.  Rather, it added homelessness to an already lengthy list of other aggravating circumstances existing in Washington State criminal law.  This statute does not create homelessness as a protected category from hate, but it is a step in the right direction.

by Shane M. Poole

Jazz singer, Madeleine Peyroux, is a long time advocate and philanthropist of organizations fighting to end homelessness. She was born in Georgia, but grew up in the cities of New York City and Paris. She was inspired to start singing at age 15 after being inspired by the street musicians in the Latin Quarter of Paris. One year later she joined the Lost Wandering Blues and Jazz Band and toured Europe. In 1996 she released her first album, “Dreamland” and since then has released an addition three albums.

To pursue the playing of music as a career soon after, was for me a continuation of my time in those streets, with the families I had created and the echoes I had left behind.”

The singer, songwriter and guitarist has been compared to the likes of Billie Holiday. She has preformed all around the world. She has toured with big names, like Sarah McLachlan, but has also headlined her own tours around the country and world. Starting in 2005, Peyroux began adding a $1.00 surcharge to her concert tickets to raise money for local homeless organizations. Her efforts have raised thousands for organizations like Real Change in Seattle, Street Roots in Portland and the Emergency Family Assistance Association in Boulder, among many others. She is a strong supporter of the work of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

In addition to her philanthropic commitment, she was recently featured on a CD compilation called “Give US Your Poor.” The album features musicians, such as Bruce Springsteen, and collaborations with currently or formerly homeless musicians. The proceeds from the album benefit the national awareness campaign, Give US Your Poor. Madeleine Peyroux is a musician dedicated to making real change.

By Samantha McClean, Former NCH Intern

*Photo used with permission from Madeleine Peyroux

The National Coalition for the Homeless firmly believes in protecting homeless people against hate crimes committed by housed persons simply because of the victim’s real or perceived homelessness. Through legislation, the state of California has been working to pass important legislation in order to advance this effort. Assembly Bill 312, introduced by State Representative Bonnie Lowenthal (D-54), is being considered by the State Legislature, and just two days ago it passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill would specify that crimes against the homeless rendered because of the person’s real or perceived homeless status would be considered a crime discriminatory in nature so victims would have the ability to sue in civil court for increased reparations. In short, the bill would add homelessness as a characteristic to the Ralph Civil Rights Act, which now protects from hate crimes those targeted for factors such as race, sexual orientation, and political affiliation, but not housing situation.

History

AB 2706, introduced last year by Bonnie Lowenthal, was a very similar law, which last year the California Assembly and Senate passed, but Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed it. He stated, “Poverty unlike race, gender, national origin and disability, is not a suspect classification” (see Senate Judiciary Committee bill analysis below). However, under California law, political affiliation was already protected on the same level as race, religion… in the Ralph Civil Rights Act. Political affiliation, like homelessness, tends not to be an inherent characteristic like race or religion, so homelessness should be a protected status as well.

One of the reasons the homeless should have further protection is because of the demonstrated necessity to it. Prior to AB 2706, California in 2001 passed SR 18 which required an examination of hate crimes against the homeless. The results of it, along with our report of “Hate Crimes Against the Homeless,” pointed to many ruthless hate crimes against the homeless. Because of this, along with Democratic Governor Brown in power, it seems more hopeful for the bill to be ratified this year.

Process

In order for the bill to go into effect, it must pass through all of the various levels in the California State Assembly and Senate. The bill has already passed through the Assembly, and two days ago the bill passed, by a 3-2 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee referred the bill back to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where it now awaits passage. If this happens, the bill must then pass the Senate floor and Assembly floor in order to go to Governor Brown. Last year, AB 2706 passed the Senate with a 21-13 vote and a 51-26 vote in the Assembly.

Effect

The bill, if passed, would not only help to increase reparations for homeless people who are attacked, but it would also serve as a deterrent to those housed individuals committing the crimes. Though some debate exists over whether violence against the homeless should be put on the same plane as violence against homosexuals or people of a certain race, we believe that crimes against the homeless, committed because they are homeless, deserve to be treated more seriously than crimes without aggravating circumstances.

Take Action

Read the bill and follow its status.

Read the Senate Judiciary Committee bill analysis from June 7, 2011.

Contact members of the Senate Appropriations Committee about the bill.

Laura Epstein, Staff