Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Feeding Homeless Apparently Illegal in Raleigh, NC (w/MAJOR update at 4:43 PM) [View all]freshwest
(53,661 posts)102. Better to end homelessness. The current situation is due to Reagan era actions.

FDR's campaign trip to Pittsburgh, PA, during which he dedicated the Terrace Village housing project on October 11, 1940.
FDR and Housing Legislation
In his State of the Union Message of January 6, 1937, President Roosevelt spoke of the urgent need for the new Congress to address the housing situation:
There are far-reaching problems still with us for which democracy must find solutions if it is to consider itself successful. For example, many millions of Americans still live in habitations which not only fail to provide the physical benefits of modern civilization but breed disease and impair the health of future generations. The menace exists not only in the slum areas of the very large cities, but in many smaller cities as well. It exists on tens of thousands of farms, in varying degrees, in every part of the country.
Two weeks later, Roosevelt made the point more succinctly in his Second Inaugural Address:
"I see one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished. . . . The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.
FDR then worked behind the scenes with lawmakers and administration officials on the housing bill. Issues such as financing of projects, caps on costs per unit, and the staffing and governance of the proposed housing authority were sorted out in conferences held at the White House. With the major concerns of various Congressmenincluding Rep. Steagallresolved, the bill finally went to a vote. President Roosevelt signed the Wagner-Steagall Housing Act into law on September 1, 1937.
The new law established the United States Housing Authority (USHA) that provided $500 million in loans for low-cost housing projects across the country. Under the new law, the USHA acted as a loan granting agency to state and local housing authorities to build low-cost housing in both small and large urban areas. The USHA was empowered to advance loans amounting to 90% of project costs, at low-interest and on 60-year terms. By the end of 1940, over 500 USHA projects were in progress or had been completed, with loan contracts of $691 million. The goal was to make the program self-sustainable through the collection of rents: one-half of rent from the tenants themselves, one-third paid by contributions from the Federal government; and one-sixth paid by annual contributions made by the localities themselves. During World War II, the USHA was instrumental in planning and constructing housing for defense workers.
To Franklin Roosevelt, adequate housing was not just a need, but a right. The Wagner-Steagall Housing Act of 1937, along with other New Deal housing and mortgage initiatives, brought greater economic security to hundreds of thousands of Americans. In his January 11, 1944 State of the Union address, FDR declared a second Bill of Rights that included the right of every family to a decent home.

I watched these public projects, which in my city were in good shape, and all but one of the city's public hospitals all sold off to developers in the era of Reagan. That reduced health care and housing to the poor. I know that some were in bad conditions in other places, which spurred part of the changes.
It was the beginning of chronic homelessness for many people. And by putting the problems of anyone up for public ridicule as Reagan did with the welfare queen meme, his anti-union, anti-civil rights agenda, add deregulation, and we have this problem continuing to fester.
Where I live, there is a good deal of subsidized housing that does not depend on large projects being built, and it works better than nothing. I'm not sure what's going on in Raleigh, but listening to Reverend Barber, the GOP has cut everything.
With all due respect to private charities, it is the lack of affordable, free or subsidized housing with unemployment payments and other social needs that need to be addressed. There is no lack of housing but there is NIMBYism.
We should not just be having the homeless fed while they are still left homeless as if we didn't know any better. I see communities that have banished those without homes, and others who grant them the right to be homeless without being bothered. What I want to see them not be homeless, period.
It is sad to think we are reduced to cheering a daily hand out to the homeless that equals the price of a cup of coffee and a sandwich. Such nominal efforts show a good heart but do not solve the problem.
Don't get me wrong, I've been homeless. When the big churches would not help me, a small one did give me coupons to get fast food meals. I am grateful for that to this day. Also, my situation was temporary and I was between places to live for a while.
Fortunately I did have a vehicle and people do live out of their vehicles. The church that gave me the coupons also told me where to park, as none would allow me to park overnight since their insurance didn't allow it. The woman pastor told me of a quiet state rest area with a bathroom and highway patrol office there for my safety. I was touched by her heartfelt concern after being dismissed by other churches and scared. It was also in late November and the autumn rain and gales were in full force.
And I was not asked anything by the police at the rest area until my second week. Then a patrol officer came to tell me kindly that they did not allow people to stay there permanently. I said I had found a place to stay and would be moving on as soon as it was available, which was true. The officer said alright and good luck.
Money exists to house people, but this is NOT the America of FDR. The will of Amercans to take care of strangers as a matter of human dignity seems to have left us years ago. Charity is an optional act and people should have rights, not live off the whims of others. We have been taken over by Randians who see nothing wrong with this state of affairs.
JHMOs.
P. S. About half the people in the USA are recieving sufficient services to not be homeless, without meals, or healthcare, all paid by the federal government and the states that are committed to doing so. We need more humane representatives in every state that this is not the case. The purpose of Social Security, Disability, unemployment payments and all the other programs prevent homelessness and chaos in millions of lives everyday of the year. Those stories are not brought up, they are taken for granted. We must extend these, not let the states get away with leaving their citizens without jobs, food, health care and housing.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
102 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Feeding Homeless Apparently Illegal in Raleigh, NC (w/MAJOR update at 4:43 PM) [View all]
OneGrassRoot
Aug 2013
OP
It's bad enough the being poor is a crime in our country, now helping the poor can get you arrested
Heather MC
Aug 2013
#32
That would have been an excellent decision. WTF is wrong with this country? nt
Mnemosyne
Aug 2013
#37
I agree that use of the word "handout" is a poor choice of words. But especially
totodeinhere
Aug 2013
#63
Yep...I was just about to get a bunch of us, find the poster, take him/her out back and shoot them
BlueJazz
Aug 2013
#84
Actually opposition from business owners is very common in a lot of areas.
totodeinhere
Aug 2013
#45
Sadly Raleigh is not the only jurisdiction that has passed anti-homelsss laws.
totodeinhere
Aug 2013
#49
I wonder if there is anyone willing to be arrested for feeding the homeless there?
Dustlawyer
Aug 2013
#17
The officer was explaining that he was not forbidding the free exercise of religious charity
kenny blankenship
Aug 2013
#18
Just out of curiosity, what would they charge you with in Springfield or Joplin, MO if
HardTimes99
Aug 2013
#50
Well in Springfield, I think it was said to be $100 dollars to the one giving help.
Lady Freedom Returns
Aug 2013
#62
I was curious as to what statute (law) those being cited were being charged under, as it seems
HardTimes99
Aug 2013
#85
If the churches intrude on government business they should lose tax exempt status.
Nuclear Unicorn
Aug 2013
#20
So it's come down to this. The powerful/corporations beat the public down into the gutter then...
BlueJazz
Aug 2013
#21
They used the same language and imagery for those unfortunate enough to have
HardTimes99
Aug 2013
#53
I am just plain too angry to comment. Where's the cop with the gallon of milk?
marble falls
Aug 2013
#55
While he's in the middle of a stop and in front of folks he was keeping from getting their own.
marble falls
Aug 2013
#74
Would it be possible to stage a boycott of businesses in the area whose owners have complained?
Samantha
Aug 2013
#61
Searching Google News comes up empty but a general search of the entire web will get you
totodeinhere
Aug 2013
#73
“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
Fire Walk With Me
Aug 2013
#86
"Raleigh mayor pledges to find solution after police stop charities from feeding homeless"
WorseBeforeBetter
Aug 2013
#100
Better to end homelessness. The current situation is due to Reagan era actions.
freshwest
Aug 2013
#102