Page images
PDF
EPUB

service in Vietnam. His baby son had died of a brain fever and the child was unable to be buried in a local cemetery because of racial restrictions. It is too late in this country for that kind of thing. And yet people are still saying, “Why did you identify racism? Doesn't that make things worse?”

I think we cannot begin to move in the direction we have to go in this country unless we take a hard look at ourselves. Taking that look and understanding what we see is painful. It was painful and unpleasant for us Commissioners to do so, but I think we came pretty close to the truth of the matter, and we had to say so.

But in addition to the general problem of racism, I think we ought to recognize that our present crisis has a specific historical context. A wonderful euphoria existed in this country in the late 1950's and the early 1960's when people-particularly black people all around the country-felt we had finally reached a breakthrough, a point when freedom was going to become a reality and not just a slogan of the civil rights movement. This period perhaps culminated with the march on Washington and the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Thereafter further efforts at progress were met with rather persistent and massive nonviolent and violent resistance, much of which was viewed on television all over the country by black people as well as white people. The frustration and the cynicism which developed from that helped create the present crisis.

One outgrowth of that crisis has been black power, the violent and separatist aspects of which I reject out of hand, but which also has good aspects in its insistence that black is good and beautiful and strong and in its assertion that a black man doesn't have to make himself over in the image of the white man to be a decent and good human being. That kind of self-pride is something this country believes in and it's a positive and hopeful sign.

Finally, I think a statement made by Alexis de Toqueille, a Frenchman who visited America over a hundred years ago helps explain our crisis. Commenting on the origins of the French Revolution, he said that "Evils which are patiently endured when they seem inevitable become intolerable when once the idea of escape from them is suggested."

That's what has happened in this country, and all of these forces have produced our present dilemma.

Senator PROUTY. The study I have referred to will probably be widely quoted. That's why I brought it up.

Senator CLARK. Our last witness this morning is the distinguished and capable mayor of New York, the Honorable John Lindsay.

Senator Kennedy would like to make a statement.

Senator KENNEDY of New York. I am afraid I have an appointment at 12:30, so I have to leave, but I want to welcome the mayor of our city here to the committee.

I know the very able way that he assisted and I know what an able job he did as a member of the Commission and the extraordinary amount of knowledge and information he has about the problems facing the country and on which the committee is hearing testimony today, so I want to say I will study his testimony, I welcome him here and I'm sure his testimony will be invaluable to us.

Senator CLARK. To paraphrase an old saying, I think the mayor comes to us from his recent experience.

Mr. Mayor, will you proceed in your own way.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN V. LINDSAY, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF

NEW YORK, N.Y. Mr. LINDSAY. I have with me, Mr. Stephen Kurzman, who is deputy director for operations of the Commission on Civil Disorders, on my right

Senator CLARK. We're happy to have an old friend whom we know well in the Senate, Mr. Kurzman

Mr. LINDSAY. And Mr. Jay Kriege, who's my own staff assistant in New York on this Commission. Senator CLARK. Welcome Mr. Jay Kriege.

Mr. LINDSAY. I'd like to say, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, that I'm heartened and cheered by the endorsements of the Commission's work that have come from the members of this committee this morning. Statements of approval and backing, I personally think, as the Vice Chairman of the Commission, are very important for us to have in as many quarters as possible.

After the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders completed its investigation of last summer's riots, it undertook to write a program of national action to prevent still more turbulence or bloodshed in our cities.

That program was not designed simply to forestall violence next summer, or the following summer; its objective was to attain a permanent resolution of the failings and inequities we found in a society of haves and have-nots.

In presenting that program, the Commission did not give first priority to better schools, improved housing, or a reformed welfare system. All are important, certainly, we agreed, however, that none was as important to the future of the cities as employment. Accordingly, that subject for action—the provision of more and better jobs led the list of the Commission's priorities.

In the Commission's words: “Unemployment and underemploy. ment are among the persistent and serious grievances of disadvantaged minorities. The pervasive effect of these conditions on the racial ghetto is inextricably linked to the problem of civil disorders."

The Commission's findings confirmed what I had found in the streets of New York City; that the most common aspiration among the poor of the Harlems and Brownsvilles is the independence, the self-respect and the buying power that comes with a job.

Both as the Vice Chairman of the President's Commission and as the chief executive of New York City, I commend the sponsors of this legislation and the members of this subcommittee, for their swift, intelligent response to the Commission report. In the summary of its findings, the Commission called for action corresponding to three principles :

That programs be mounted on a scale equal to the dimension of the problem;

That programs aim for high impact in the immediate future;
And that programs be undertaken with the initiative and the

imagination that can change the failure and frustration that now dominate the racial ghetto and weaken our entire society.

The proposed Emergency Employment and Training Act of 1968 is faithful, in my judgment, to those principles. It implements the Commission's call for urgency and decisiveness in meeting the challenges to the Nation's domestic life. It should be enacted promptly, for it will provide the cities with a fresh, workable mechanism for treating the roots of disorder.

As I said, the Commission found in all the riot areas it surveyed that unemployment and underemployment were common grievances, bitterly expressed. According to our data, most of the rioters were Negro males between the ages of 15 and 24. Almost all the rioters who had jobs were underemployed-in short-term, low-paying, menial positions which they regarded as beneath their education, their capacity and their dignity. More than 30 percent of those arrested had no jobs.

In the cities where violence broke out, Negroes were twice as likely as whites to hold unskilled jobs—part-time, seasonal, and “dead end." Negroes earned less than whites in all the surveyed cities, averaging barely 70 percent of the average white's income. They were more than twice as likely to be living in poverty.

The Commission reviewed our current efforts Federal, State, and local—to meet these problems. We particularly studied programs in three cities which have a reputation for reciving substantial Federal funding, but which experienced serious disorders last summer. They are Detroit, Newark, and New Haven.

In Detroit, to use but one illustration, Federal contributions to employment and manpower training programs totaled $19.6 million in the first three-quarters of 1967. Although the dollar figure is impressive, the money, it seems clear, did not accomplish enough:

Detroit sponsored 22 federally financed manpower programs, such as the Neighborhood Youth Corps. Almost 14,000 trainees were enrolled. Yet the unemployment rate at the time of the riot in Detroit was 2.7 percent for whites and 9.6 percent for Negroes. The 14,000 training slots barely matched the number of jobless whites, but more than 60 percent of all the unemployed were nonwhite.

The figures exemplify the limited reach of our existing manpower programs. They don't include enough people, and they don't lead to enough good jobs. In New York City, the resources available are inadequate, dwarfed by the magnitude of the need. We devote $1.2 billion a year on welfare, merely keeping people alive, but only $54 million on manpower training.

Every month, 14,000 new people go on the welfare rolls, yet only a fraction of that number can be drawn into job training. Clearly, we are losing the struggle against dependency.

During the first 2 months of this year our neighborhood manpower centers recruited 18,000 people who were ready to enter a job training program or begin work on a job. There were only sufficient job openings or openings in training programs for 4,000 of these individuals, which meant that 14,000 employables had to be returned to the streets with no job and no optimistic prospect of finding one.

There are 15 applicants for every opening in the city's public services career program, and 10 applicants for every spot in the

Neighborhood Youth Corps. Our heavy truck driving course alone has 500 people on the waiting list.

The Presidential Commission recommended a massive, unified manpower program to pull together the fragmented efforts now underway: to concentrate on the programs with a demonstrated capacity to create meaningful employment opportunities; and to add new programs where they show real promise of success.

PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS In its provisions for the creation of new jobs, the bill before this committee in many respects takes the direction called for by the Commission, which urged the creation of 1 million new jobs in the public sector in the next 3 years. Because of the great service needs, particularly in the urban and rural poverty areas of the country, there is a great backlog of projects for government to undertake.

The opportunities for improvements are manifest in the cities in vest-pocket parks, in improved health and sanitation services, in neighborhood fix-up and improvement programs, in police-community relations services. The Emergency Employment Act would give the creative city the tools to develop such projects.

In the field of public safety, the Commission recommended a major new effort to bridge the gap between the police and the community. The Commission called for Federal support for the establishment of community service officers in cities over 50,000. This legislation specifically mentions public safety as an area for public service employment and it would, therefore, permit the funding of such a program. The Commission felt strongly that such community service officers could be one of the most important measures that all large cities could take to ease police-community tensions. I hope that the legislative history will strongly support this program.

Jobs should be designed to provide training in particular skills. They should not be make-work projects. Our experience in New York has persuaded us of the futility of providing jobs that have neither future nor meaning to the employee.

The Commission stressed that the termination of a project and Federal funding must not be allowed to mean the end of employment. We suggest, instead, that Federal assistance be scaled in such a way that there is a phasing out period rather than a sudden cutoff of Federal financing. In this way local governments, State and city, may be able to absorb part or all of the programs. I urge you to provide such a mechanism in this legislation.

LOCAL COORDINATION Regardless of how manpower programs are organized at the Federal or State levels, most of them must be brought together in the cities. Effective manpower programing requires a unison of services, including recruitment, counseling, placement, work experience education, supportive training, follow-through and upgrading. Without a comprehensive system, the progress of an individual from unemployment to employment and on to better employment can never be assured.

This point is clearly recognized in title I of the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967, which calls for Federal funding agencies

to recognize in each community a prime sponsor with the capability for planning, administering, coordinating and evaluating a comprehensive work and training program.

The Emergency Employment Act wisely recognizes the value of this concept by directing the Secretary of Labor to provide the funds from this bill through the prime sponsors recognized under the provisions of title I of the Economic Opportunity Act. This is a rare example of the kind of coordination between different pieces of legislation and different Federal agencies which will enable cities to unify their programs. In New York City we have worked hard to develop a single agency responsible for manpower development and this provision is extremely helpful to us in bringing about coordination.

PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS

The legislation before us quite rightly recognizes the need to create jobs in the private sector as well as in the public sector. The recommendation that approximately 1 million jobs be created in the private sector is consistent with the findings of the commission, and with the program the urban coalition adopted in its August convocation. Two Thousand private employers already are involved in the Manpower Development and Training Act, and 20 corporations are managing urban training centers for the Job Corps.

These projects deserve solid support. Much remains to be done. As the Advisory Panel on Private Enterprise pointed out in its report to the President's Commission, existing programs fail to attract the greatest possible industry involvment for several reasons, among them the following:

Inadequate promotional effort to make industry aware of the programs.

The high overhead entailed in such negotiations and in running such programs.

The fear that such contracting with Government will impinge upon management's freedom to run its own operations.

REIMBURSEMENT

Even if all these objections were met, the level of Government reimbursement at present is too low to permit the hiring and training by the private sector of the hard-core unemployed.

The present rate of Federal reimbursement is approximately $1,000 per trainee in the on-the-job training program. This is not enough. The advisory panel on private enterprise told the commission that only if appropriate monetary incentives are provided by the Federal Government to defray the unusual cost of participation will a truly massive number of companies be induced to participate.

The commission recommended that this reimbursement should average at least the $3,500 called for by the President in his manpower message. The commitment of this legislation to assume these unusual overhead costs must be supported.

Unlike some of the people who come to industry lacking only in the knowledge of a specific training or trade, often the hard-core unemployed have severe health problems, cannot afford the transportation costs from home to job, have no experience in the management of their

« PreviousContinue »