Twitter Facebook Facebook Facebook Facebook

NCH Members Respond to “Homeless Hotspots”

Written by NCH Staff on . Posted in Civil Rights

“Homeless Hotspots” – is this marketing campaign a friend or foe to un-housed folks? NCH has been getting a lot of requests-for-comment.  As a membership organization that advocates with (not for) homeless individuals, we depend, rely and are primarily informed by the opinions of people who are homeless. So, we asked our members for their feedback and this is what we heard.

NCH believes it should focus its time and attention on the three primary causes and solutions to America’s homelessness: affordable housing, living wage jobs and accessible healthcare. So, we asked if this was a relevant issue for us to be discussing. The response was clearly a “yes”. No matter how you feel about the issue of “Homeless Hotspots”, it’s a conversation about jobs.

Next, we asked if this was a living wage job. The general agreement was “no”. But, when we asked folks who had done similar types of “jobs”, they said that they took the work knowing how much it paid and that it was temporary. Some people used the experience just get a little spending money and others thought it might help them to get a little work experience before taking on a more permanent job. People compared it to selling streets newspapers. One “Homeless Hotspot” worker described his pay as $20 per day and $2 for each person he could get to use the serve. It worked out to about $8 an hour. So for most folks we asked, it seemed to pay close to a living wage.

Lastly, we asked if jobs like the “Homeless Hotspot” job treated homeless people as less than human, or like an object and not like a person. The responses were clear and consistent. Most people felt that being homeless in America can be, and often times is, a dehumanizing experience. Being homeless means being ignored or treated like “something” unwanted. The “Homeless Hotspot” gave folks on the streets a reason for people to talk to them.

So, NCH’s comment is that we need a lot more affordable housing, many more jobs that pay a living wage, and improved access to healthcare. Unless and until then, we’re going to have homelessness in America. “Homeless Hotspots” isn’t the answer, but it’s not the problem either. If we want to get mad, and NCH thinks we all should, let’s get mad for the right reasons and at the right people. If we’re going to end homelessness, we’re going to need much more funding and lots more new and innovative ideas.

Thanks again to all our members for making us a better organization, and thanks for your support in Bringing America Home!

Violence Hidden in Plain View

Written by NCH Staff on . Posted in Civil Rights, Hate Crimes, Report, Violence Against the Homeless

What are crimes of hate against the homeless and why does the National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH) believe it’s so necessary to invest considerable time and attention into researching this issue? Admittedly, some choose to believe that the homeless don’t deserve federal and state legal protections and some draw the hard line of choosing to believe that hate crimes simply doesn’t exist.

After more than a decade of research and analysis, NCH has proven that behaviors that begin as hurtful towards the homeless often devolve into bias motivated criminal acts of hate. We are reminded of these facts all too often, in media stories that year after year possess increasingly more brutal forms of abuse.

Hurtful thoughts and acts based on the bias of one person towards another, quickly becomes a hate crime. A hurtful video game which rewards players who beat or kill homeless characters can quickly devolve into a crime of actual physical violence and hate. The taunting of people seeking refuge from the cold can overnight turn into a bias motivated act of hate-filled violence.

NCH believes that the eradication of hate crimes can only occur if there is a complete understanding and accounting of these crimes. Furthermore, there must be a willingness to challenge the motivations of people who choose to ignore the very existence of these crimes.

Each year, NCH releases a Hate Crimes against the Homeless Report. NCH invites you to read this year’s report, Violence Hidden in Plain View, a factual accounting of bias motivated crimes against un-housed individuals in the order of their occurrence. It is also a report that, in its entirety, illustrates the deadly consequences of decades of failed housing policies and social reforms.

Guest post: What are the implications of drug testing recipients of government benefits?

Written by NCH Staff on . Posted in Civil Rights, Criminalization, Poverty

We are happy to share today’s guest post from NCH member Laura Epstein who interned with us this past summer.  Laura is currently studying Government and Religious Studies at Claremont McKenna College.

Recently, many states have introduced policies that would require drug tests for welfare recipients, as reported by the New York Times. States hope that these new policies will be more “fair” and will cut the budget. However, studies show that these policies are ineffective and hurt those who need the most help.

Though some argue that these programs are better because they restrict welfare only to those who want it enough to stop using drugs, this argument fails to take into account why those in poverty would use drugs in the first place. In the 2002 study, “Substance Use Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses” by Harold Pollack and others found that “adverse experiences, such as childhood trauma or experiences of violence, may lead some women both to seek welfare and to initiate or to increase their substance use.” Therefore, restricting welfare recipients harms more than just those who choose to use drugs; it hurts those who experience both poverty and prior abuse.

Pollack expressed his unchanging beliefs, as in a 2011 blog post he wrote, “[Alcohol and drug] disorders are important within specific populations – most crucially, welfare recipients facing child abuse or neglect issues.” Laura Schmidt, in the 1998 Alcohol Research Group study “Substance Abuse and the Course of Welfare Dependency,” had similar findings: “AFDC [Aid to Families with Dependent Children] recipients’ substance abuse problems appeared to have little effect on their future prospects for leaving welfare…. the strongest determinants of welfare dependency…correspond quite directly to…the economic hardships of single parents and their young children.” Quite simply, the argument that new welfare policies requiring drug tests just hurt those who choose to irresponsibly use drugs makes little sense.

Furthermore, the new welfare laws fail to provide means for people to have substance abuse treatment. In response to the New York Times article mentioned above, Director and President of the Legal Action Center New York wrote, “The vast majority of testing legislation also fails to allocate money for treatment, even though it is an extremely efficient use of taxpayer money.” Not surprisingly, in a 2000 study, “Sever Mental Illness and Substance Use Disorders among Former Supplemental Security Income Beneficiaries for Drug Addiction and Alcoholism, Dr. James Swartz and others found that “studies of former welfare recipients…have found that substance dependence and psychiatric illness are among the most notable barriers to gaining and maintaining employment.” Welfare reform that encompasses treatment and job training would be much more effective at improving the livelihood of those in poverty than removing all assistance from those with drug problems.

The “Housing First” method of ending homelessness also contributes to the arguments against drug testing welfare recipients. Under this method, those experiencing homelessness can begin to receive transitional housing and job training without first becoming sober. It is much easier for someone to become sober when in a hospitable environment as opposed to when living in the streets without much food or other needs. Requiring welfare recipients to first have a negative drug test is directly at odds with the successful method of Housing First. In a 2010 presentation to the Society for Social Work and Research Annual Conference, Benjamin Henwood found that “Housing First providers were able to focus more on clinical concerns since consumers and already obtained permanent housing.” Housing First programs recognize that facilitating a person’s successful recovery and employment opportunities requires assistance to put the person’s life back on track. Housing First contributes to the argument that welfare services as a whole must meet people at their level of need, including potential substance abuse.

Luckily, some of the new welfare laws have been deemed unconstitutional. However, we cannot rely on the courts to ensure that these laws do not have effect. These new laws should not pass in the first place because they disproportionately hurt those in society who need the most help in finding employment to move out of needing welfare.

*Studies show that only 20-30% of the homeless population suffers from substance abuse.  It is often the case that people believe the majority of people who are on the streets suffer from substance abuse, but lack of affordable housing remains the number one cause of homelessness. Read more from Jaqueline Dowd, Poverty Lawyer, on how advocates are pushing to make drug-testing welfare recipients illegal.


National Coalition for the Homeless | 2201 P St NW, Washington, DC 20037 | (202) 462-4822 | info [at] nationalhomeless [dot] org
© 2014 National Coalition for the Homeless | Private Policy
Powered by Warp Theme Framework