Thursday, April 21, 2016

Income Inequality: The Housing Struggle

Release Date: April 8, 2016

Marian Wright Edelman
“I was in Newark and Harlem just this week. And I walked into the homes of welfare mothers. I saw them in conditions—no, not with wall-to-wall carpet, but wall-to-wall rats and roaches. . . . [One mother] pointed out the walls with all the ceiling falling through. She showed me the holes where the rats came in. She said night after night we have to stay awake to keep the rats and roaches from getting to the children. . . . And the tragedy is, so often [poor Americans] are invisible because America is so affluent, so rich.”
 
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke these words during his last Sunday sermon on March 31, 1968 at Washington National Cathedral calling for support for a Poor People’s Campaign. Almost fifty years later questions about how much poor Americans are forced to pay for housing – and what happens when they can’t afford it – are back in the national spotlight. The new book Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City, by Harvard University sociology professor and Justice and Poverty Project co-director Matthew Desmond, is calling renewed and urgently needed attention to a tragic eviction cycle invisible to many but all too familiar to families trapped in the cruel prison of poverty.
Dr. Desmond found that in the face of stagnating or falling incomes and soaring housing costs eviction has become more commonplace in America than ever. He spent months in Milwaukee, Wisconsin living first in a trailer park and then in an inner city rooming house documenting the experiences of eight families he met. In a recent interview he explained: “Most Americans, if they don’t live in trailer parks or in the inner city, think that the typical low income family lives in public housing or benefits from some kind of housing assistance, but the opposite is true.” In reality, only one in four families who qualify for housing assistance receives it: three in four are forced to struggle on their own. Dr. Desmond says, “We’ve reached a point in this country where the majority of poor renting families are giving at least half of their income to housing costs and one in four are giving over 70 percent of their income just to pay rent and keep the utilities on.”
 
When Dr. Desmond met Arleen, a single mom with two boys, she was paying 80 percent of her income to rent a run down two bedroom apartment in Milwaukee: “I saw Arleen confront terrible situations. Should I pay my rent or feed my kids? Should I pay my rent or get the kids clothing they need for a new school year? Should I chip in for a funeral for when my sister dies?”
Arleen and her boys were evicted so many times as he followed her trajectory, they lost count. One time her son threw a snowball and hit a passerby, and that person retaliated by kicking in the door to their apartment. The landlord evicted Arleen’s family because of the damage to the door. Dr. Desmond says Arleen then missed an appointment with a welfare caseworker because the letter about the appointment went to her old address. So she got evicted from the new apartment. The crises families face trying to pay for housing are “not just a consequence of poverty, but a cause of poverty” he says. He also noted Black women are often overrepresented in eviction proceedings, just as Black men are in prison: “Poor black men were locked up. Poor black women were locked out.”
Last year, the Children’s Defense Fund included in our Ending Child Poverty Now report an expansion of housing vouchers to all households with children below 150 percent of poverty whose fair market rent exceeds 50 percent of their income. Of the nine policy improvements to alleviate child poverty we proposed, this had the single greatest impact. It would reduce child poverty 20.8 percent and lift 2.3 million children out of poverty. How then do we build the political and public will to do what works?
 
 
Dr. Desmond also met Vanetta in Milwaukee who said in a recent interview: “I grew up in every shelter, basically, in Illinois and Milwaukee. I didn’t have a stable place over my head. I didn’t have proper food, or I didn’t even know a few times how I was going to eat that night. We missed meals multiple nights, and it was hard. And all I ever wanted for my kids was not to put them through that.” Her troubles started during the recession when her hours at the Old Country Buffet were slashed from five days to one day a week. Suddenly she had to choose between paying arrears to keep the electricity on or paying the rent. Falling further and further behind, she received an eviction notice. Terrified of being homeless and losing her children, and desperate to pay the bills, Vanetta participated in a robbery. She’d been on the waiting list for public housing for two years, but after the robbery she became a convicted felon, which meant her chances of ever being approved were almost zero.
 
In that final Sunday sermon Dr. King reminded us: “Ultimately a great nation is a compassionate nation. America has not met its obligations and its responsibilities to the poor. One day we will have to stand before the God of history and we will talk in terms of things we’ve done. Yes, we will be able to say we built gargantuan bridges to span the seas, we built gigantic buildings to kiss the skies . . . It seems that I can hear the God of history saying, ‘That was not enough! But I was hungry, and ye fed me not. I was naked, and ye clothed me not. I was devoid of a decent sanitary house to live in, and ye provided no shelter for me.’” Dr. King said, “this is America’s opportunity to help bridge the gulf between the haves and the have-nots. The question is whether America will do it.” For millions of Americans, including all those who still can’t afford decent shelter for their families, that question remains unanswered.

4 comments:

  1. "And the tragedy is, so often [poor Americans] are invisible because America is so affluent, so rich.” -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

    When Dr. King was alive he worked tirelessly to combat various inequalities that plagued America. He was a major advocate for poor and homeless people. The above mentioned quote was delivered 40+ years ago and still today we are weighed down by the same social inequality and lack of compassion.

    As a New York City transplant I understand the struggle to find adequate and efficient housing in NYC. I am a single person with sufficient income and even I am struggling to secure housing. What is worrisome for me is that this problem has been continuing for a long time and the government has yet to intervene. Children all over the country are not only becoming homeless but they are also being displaced from school because of homelessness.

    "Should I pay my rent or feed my kids? Should I pay my rent or get the kids clothing they need for a new school year? Should I chip in for a funeral for when my sister dies?” These are a series of conflicts that families struggle with daily. I would love to see CDF Freedom Schools Social Action day focus on affordable housing and gentrification. We need to act before this problem becomes bigger than it already is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. After reading MWE’s child watch column the following statement struck accord with me on a personal level: ‘Dr. King said, “This is America’s opportunity to help bridge the gulf between the haves and the have-nots. The question is whether America will do it’.

    Massive waves of disinvestment and reinvestment have brought a sea change to Oakland; my city is at a crossroads it cannot ignore: economic growth creating opportunity or communities of gentrification. Over the past 10 years, Oakland has mainly gotten the spillover of people moving in to commute to tech jobs elsewhere in the Bay Area. Oakland has long been at the center of a national conversation about equity, but it’s quickly becoming a more enticing beacon for venture capitalism than for social justice; currently, I am seeing a cycle of segregation.

    And yet…now that Oakland has been “discovered,” it’s entirely reasonable to take a moment to consider exactly who will win and who will lose from the coming East Bay tech boom. Conventional wisdom says there is a magic wand that can be waved to make all social and economic ills disappear: Attract more companies and jobs. No matter the cost. Economic development across the U.S. has devolved into this single, simple-minded notion. However, this is not the case in Oakland and many urban communities plagued with plenty of problems, high crime rate, troubled schools, and inept political leadership.
    In other words, there could be economic development policies that focus on raising the standard of living and the career prospects for people already living in urban communities and neighborhoods in Oakland.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Im sad to say nothing in this article is surprising or new to me. I know people living in these conditions, and experienced a few of them myself. In addition to the high cost of rent, the materials used to build a lot of these rented homes are sub par, or improperly constructed, improperly sealed. That lets in rodents and pests, which can make tenants sick without knowing it, making work and school harder.

    What it makes me think of though, is how people just want to kick these people out of their homes, instead of addressing the injustices and disparities. Raise local rent, make renting harder, refuse to receive tenants who get housing assistance, so young people, usually white, can come in and pay for the "experience" of such a "raw" area. I cringe when I hear the words "up and coming" in relation to a neighborhood. I know what it means. It means that a year or two from now, the old residents of the neighborhood will start to feel unwelcome in their own homes. They will be viewed as an inconvenience, while trying to make ends meet. And developers will claim they are improving the neighborhood, while pushing them out. Real improvement would involve bringing in resource that benefit the current residents of the community. Job trainings, small businesses, more grocery stores, financial management classes. Real improvement would require having actual conversations with the very people they want to kick out, and seeing how they can empower them.

    The fact that this is not the case brings the faulty ideal of the "American Dream" into harsh light. This nation's top developers are more concerned with dollars, of course, than the people they are building around. And the nation's poor and economically disenfranchised are expendable.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Eric, I think that you hit the nail on the head. The have and have not's is something that we focus on in Freedom School. We build up community leaders and children who believe they are an have not. It is simply amazing what servant leadership can do for a person. I speak personally when I say before Freedom School I was sometimes in doubt of myself. The opportunity to now serve and be a beacon of light is something irreplaceable.

    ReplyDelete