anybody, they say, how could they be taking food away from children? And they cannot believe we are doing it. And now people are beginning to realize, because they are beginning to experience the impact of the cuts. They see the soup lines in their own churches and they see what comes into their health centers. And they are losing their personnel. It is hard to believe that this administration is declaring war on homeless and handicapped children. But now I think the message is beginning to seep through. People are beginning to get outraged, and I hope that rage will translate. We are determined that it will translate into, I hope, political votes and the kinds of pressure on this Congress that is going to allow you to do the job that I know those of you who are here and working for children want to do. Mr. RANGEL. It has to be a broad coalition. When our committee went to other cities, it was really fantastic to see how the system worked. There were people who were testifying that they were against the AFDC, they were against food stamps, they were against public assistance. But they could not understand why the services for their retarded kids were being cut back when they had been against all of these giveaway programs. All they wanted was a fair opportunity for their child to be able to grow up and live a normal life. Ms. EDELMAN. I think there is hope-even though the children's movement, the family movements, are very fragmented and, as you know, every program, whether it is handicapped or title I or health, has its own constituency. Perhaps now that Mr. Stockman has tried to gobble up the entire children's pie, and people are realizing that when he takes a slice out of the CETA pie he is taking a slice out of Head Start through the back door, when he cuts child care food programs, that really hurts title XX providers. And when you begin to cut broadly, that affects jobs as well as benefits for recipients. It is more encouraging to see State people and middle-class people and those with jobs sitting down together for the first time, because of the perceived threat. I think it is up to us on the outside who can hopefully provide that leadership to corral it into channels that are strong and loud and that say no to you here in the Congress. Mr. RANGEL. Thank you for the help that you have given to us over the years, and especially now. We have a panel that will be testifying next, a child care panel: Edythe Rogers, a missioner from the Richmond Urban Institute, of Richmond, Va.; and Peggy Daly Pizzo, who was the assistant director of the White House Domestic Policy Staff during the last administration. We are looking now, Ms. Pizzo, for those people who believe that you could not have a worse disaster than the last administration. Ms. Rogers. STATEMENT OF EDYTHE M. ROGERS, MISSIONER, RICHMOND URBAN INSTITUTE, RICHMOND, VA. Ms. ROGERS. My name is Edythe Rogers. I was born in Los Angeles, Calif., moved to New York at the age of 12, lived there for 19 years, moved to Connecticut, lived there for 4 years, and subsequently ended up in Virginia, where I presently reside. I am the mother of three, the grandmother of one. My children are three girls, and my granddaughter, obviously, also is a girl. I have my three daughters aged 22, who is a part-time student in a community college in Richmond, Va., where I presently reside, and have a middle daughter who attends the University of Maryland at the Eastern Shore, who is a sophomore. My youngest daughter attends Morgan State University, and is a freshman, in Baltimore. I said I was born in Los Angeles. My parents were divorced when I was 2. I was a day care child at the age of 6. After my mother went on to New York to find a job, we were left in a foster home for 7 years. I have also, therefore, been a ward of the State of California. After my mother decided to bring us together again, she brought us together in New York City, where we did not go back on public assistance, but rather, my mother was the sole support of the youngest four of us who had been in the foster home together. She worked at Macy's Department Store. I dropped out of high school in the middle of the 12th grade, got married a year later, had four children, one of whom died of sudden infant death, the only male child that I had. If it were not for well-baby clinics in the city of New York, I do not know what would have happened to all the rest of my children. Well-baby clinics not only provided preventive health care for my children but also for me. I was able to get family planning services. I also was able to get dental services while in high school at a reduced fee. I am at present a graduate of law school. As you can tell, I subsequently went back and finished my education. The difficulty that I have is that I am faced with a dilemma at this point. I would like to impress you with my scholarly abilities. At the same time, I would like to impress upon you my experiences as a mother and a single head of household. I would like to do the latter more than the former, primarily because if it were not for my children, I would not be here. Therefore, since I owe them that debt, I think that the testimony I should give before you should be that which will give you, I think, the strongest message that will allow them to be able to do what they allowed me to do; that is, to say they are able to go to school as they do now, primarily because of guaranteed student loans and student assistance. I was able to go to school because of guaranteed student loans and student assistance. I was able to finish and get a high school equivalency after separating from my former husband, almost 9 years after leaving high school. And then able to go on and be accepted and to graduate from Columbia University in the city of New York because of guaranteed student loans. Also, I was able to go on to law school and complete that because of guaranteed student loans, which I am attempting at present to repay. My present employment is that of what is called an urban missioner, which is with an organization known as the Richmond Urban Institute. The Richmond Urban Institute is a peculiar animal in that it is a kind of entity which the present administra tion claims is necessary if the kinds of things which the present policies, if fully implemented, will be able to meet the needs of the people. Therefore, I think I am especially qualified to state, it will not work. That is not to say that the feeling is not there. It is to say that there are no public moneys involved in this organization. All of the moneys under which we exist, our total operating budget, is paid for out of private funds. We are funded, in part, by a challenge grant, decreasing over a 5year period, from two sources: One, a private foundation in Arkansas; and the other, an Episcopal church in the city of Richmond. We are in the third year of our operation. This is the first of those 3 years where we will experience a decrease in operating funds. We are experiencing extreme difficulties. In spite of the support of churches in the city of Richmond, in spite of the support of the people of the city of Richmond and the metropolitan area, there just is not the money to help. The organization, although a very good idea, we do not believeor at least I do not, in my very informed opinion believe-will work if duplicated by everyone. We recently held a conference on the local metropolitan impact of the new Federal budget on the metropolitan area. This includes the city of Richmond, the counties of Henrico, Hanover, and Chesterfield. It was an effort on which I worked for 92 weeks. There was a combined and collective effort with the administration of some of those municipalities, and my staff time. In that effort we were able to secure in testimony for the first day in our open plenary session the secretary of human resources for the State of Virginia, Mr. Frederick Fisher, and the city manager for the city of Richmond, which is-I am sorry, which is a city manager form of government. All of those indications from those gentlemen, from informed and experienced positions, is that the New Federalism will work extreme hardships on the State of Virginia and the metropolitan area. On the second day of our hearings we talked about every one of the areas where block grants and budget cuts will be experienced. All of the experience that the people who work directly in those areas, speaking specifically now of social welfare, education, housing, and transportation, health, human services of all kinds, are that the cuts will be extremely felt, most by those who can least stand them. I am concerned not only for myself but for others similarly situated. Our situation is very difficult. Our situation will continue to become even more difficult. The people of the city of Richmond are caring people, the people of the State of Virginia are very caring people. Yet, still even though the South has two-thirds of the poor people in the country and one-half of the black poor people of the country, only 2 percent of the people in the State of Virginia receive benefits under AFDC. That kind of pattern can be repeated throughout the State, or rather the Southern States. I have with me in my testimony, which is written, which I have totally departed from, given statistics on all 11 of the Southern States. And you will see that most of the people in the South who are poor, a low percentage of them actually participate in the very programs which are being cut. This means that the impacts of those cuts will not only impact severely upon all those who have been receiving benefits up until October 1, 1981, but those who have not received it but were quite eligible even in more devastating circumstances. The reality is that the Virginia Employment Commission yesterday released its statistics which say that the State unemployment figures as a result of the present economic reality are now at 7.8 percent, and do not auger well. Also, the fact that the State of Virginia has also decreased its staffing in its employment commission offices and also administrative positions which used to serve in the very services which are being cut does not say very much about its ability to provide the services in the future with its increased State responsibilities. I have departed a great deal from what I had to say. But let me say, in summary, the impact of the proposed cuts, as we understand them, by simple arithmetic, the administration's new/old policies and proposals that affect the poor add up to a savings of Federal dollars. The economic and social cost to the South and to the Nation will be much higher. Programs for the people in the South will be especially damaged. That is because of the heavy reliance in Southern States on Federal dollars. Cutbacks will reduce existing programs in the South much more than anywhere else. In South Carolina, 74 cents of every dollar of the AFDC program is supplied by the Federal Govermment. A 10-percent reduction in this AFDC program from the Federal budget will therefore have a most severe impact in South Carolina and other Southern States. For basic necessities-food, jobs, and health care as well as affordable health care and child care-the poor, especially the black poor, are faced in Southern States where the reduction in benefits in AFDC will affect drastically as much as 6 out of 10 of our poor recipients in the 11 Southern Štates. These cuts show reduced AFDC rolls, in which less than one-half of the South's poor children, less than two-fifths of the South's poor persons, are being assisted. I ask you, therefore, to please advocate on behalf of our children, on behalf of all children, I ask you on behalf of those who very foolishly, unwisely, and out of ignorance, merely because they do not know and have not sought to know and those who do not wish to tell them because of their privileged position, that they do not know what they are doing, and please stop before they advocate before you again to cut. Some of these programs really can be better administered, but were it not for Head Start, two of my daughters would not be in college. My dream in my life was to see my daughters graduate from high school. That they have gone on to college is more than a dream come true, but a reason to work for a future which for me and America I thought unreal. In conclusion, let me thank you once again for allowing me to speak before you and also say to you that because I believe that these types of programs can work and also because I know that they do not reach enough. I am a voluntary teacher, daytime, in open high school in Richmond, Va., where I teach introductory French to 10th- and 11th-graders. I am also a part-time teacher at night in Virginia Union University in Richmond, Va., where I teach community organization and community development in the urban studies department. I also volunteer my time on voter education projects free of charge, as do many others, and that is because I believe that an enlightened, aware electorate is the best electorate to see to it that this kind of thing does not stand for long. Thank you. [The prepared statement follows:] STATEMENT OF EDYTHE M. ROGERS, MISSIONER, RICHMOND URBAN Honorable Representatives: I speak on behalf of many mothers and fathers, grandparents, and children of all origins, both inside and outside America. All of us are concerned about the new federal budget, and its impact upon our lives and the lives of our children over the next five, (5) years. The new federal budget may in fact reduce the growth of the federal budget sharply, over the next three years; it may reduce business taxes through accelerated depreciation; certainly we know for a fact that it will increase significantly the real share of the budget reserved for national defense. It certainly will also have an adverse, serious impact upon the poor, black, women, single heads of households, and other socalled minorities. In short, again we are asked to share the burden equally among ourselves; we the newly enfranchised; we the single heads of household; we the black people, we the poor and working middle class. I ask that you not only listen, but that you also hear everyone who speaks to you today. Weigh our words carefully. Balance the competing interests. Put your personal concerns as to the possibilities for your reelection other than first, and hear us, "We the people." My remarks will be brief and I trust, to the point. I have extracted them for the most part, from a well researched and documented report put out by the Southern Regional Council. The title of the report is, "The New Federal Budget and the South's Poor: More Than "Fallout...Some errors ...and Confusion" I have extracted my brief remarks from this document, because this subject in five, (5) minutes is After more than ten years of the most rapid economic activity in the region's history, Southerners remain the poorest people in the country. Only Texas, of all the southern states has a per capita income equal to the national average of $9, 521. In Mississippi, personal income per person is only 69% of the nation's, and the average person in Alabama has only 76% of the income of the average American. In georgia, the figure is 85% of the national average. Looking more closely at the southern region's income per person will show that most southern families, especially black families, have very limited incomes. |