We urge that this committee take particular concern with the problems of the residents of State Indian reservations and allow in the Economic Opportunity Act the necessary flexibility in order to meet the needs of Indians, the oldest and today the poorest citizens of this country. In a different area is a matter which was highlighted in the socalled McCone report on the Watts area of Los Angeles. This relates to transportation facilities. It was pointed out in that report that many of the people of the Watts area, lacking a car, would have to spend several hours and several dollars in order to get a job, if they were trained and if the jobs were available. The same is true in Suffolk County. In a county which is 81 miles long and approximately 20 miles wide, there are but two east-west public bus routes, and an equal number of north-south bus routes. There are vast areas of our county, especially those areas populated by the poor, which have no means of public transportation. The cost of providing such public transportation is beyond the present capability of local town governments and of our county government. We believe that the matter of public transportation ought to be of concern to the Office of Economic Opportunity and to other Government agencies. We are encouraged by the resent grants to Los Angeles and other areas for assistance in transportation. I believe that they must move far beyond both the token efforts which have been made and begin to provide the needs of vast areas of the country, including our own Suffolk County. A further problem of the poor of Suffolk County and elsewhere in the country is the area of medical services. We are fortunate that in New York State the legislature has recently passed enabling legislation under title XIX of the so-called Medicare Act which provides for full payment of the entire range of medical services for the so-called medically indigent (defined in New York State as those persons with a net income of less than $6,000 for a family of four). Having assured payment for medical services for those persons covered by the Economic Opportunity Act, we now are faced with the problem of delivery of medical services in a county which lacks a county hospital, which has very few public outpatient clinics, which is saddled with a county medical society which has formally gone on record as opposing the State medical assistance program. We are concerned with the ways in which the Office of Economic Opportunity can assist in the coordination and the integration of medical services for the poor. We believe that the concept of multiservice center, which has become such an important part of our county program, and is, we understand, an integral part of the programs throughout the country, is an appropriate model for medical services. The special problems faced by the poor in seeking medical services demands that they not be forced to go from one office to another, from one clinic to another, from one specialist to another in order to achieve services. And we believe that it is necessary for there to be housed in convenient locations the full range of medical service. We urge that the Office of Economic Opportunity engage in programs which will promote the integration and coordination of medical services for the poor on a basis which respects their dignity and the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship. A final matter is the unavailability of Federal surplus foods for our Headstart and other programs. Surely there is no more appropriate use for such food than to feed these children. Clearly here is a matter for greater coordination between the respective Federal agencies. Let us close by emphasizing that we have touched upon but some of the issues relevant to the antipoverty program in the belief that these illustrations would offer some substance for your deliberations. We urge your careful consideration of the matters before you and call upon you and your colleagues in the Senate and the House to give no less a priority to the needs of our poor than to any other program of the Government and we affirm, that despite these shortcomings and inadequacies the program of the Office of Economic Opportunity does provide in its broad sweep and its commitments to community action the best present hope for Federal concern in meeting the needs of the poor. We in Suffolk County are pledged and committed to winning the war on poverty. We call upon you to fashion and supply us with all of the necessary tools. We will mobilize our communities to use those tools well for the good of all of our people. Thank you. Senator CLARK. How long do you think it would take to eliminate poverty in Suffolk County if you had the funds you need? Mr. Shriver said 10 years the other day for the country as a whole. Mr. SMITH. If I may, Senator, our problem in Suffolk County is that we are the fastest growing county in New York State. One reason is that we have 63 percent available land. Our county attracts migratory workers because we have a 10-month program, a 10-month working period for migrant workers, and many of these people stay. Therefore, we are attracting many, many poor persons. I might point out that-I would like to point out that our county since the 1960 census has gone up 50 percent in population. We have gone up 200 percent in welfare costs. This may give you an idea of what poverty is in Suffolk County and the trend to what it may be in the very near future. Senator CLARK. Thank you very much. Does that conclude your statement? Mr. Scorr. Yes, sir. Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Smith. Mr. KURZMAN. May I ask what kind of general community involvement you have had in your project? Mr. SMITH. We have had tremendous community involvement. For one thing, our commission is made up of one-third, one-third, onethird. We have lost members because of the loss of a day's pay. This is the issue we have brought before you. But the biggest factor is that in our country there are 10 major target areas. These 10 areas have begun to organize. We have now one center funded in one area, that is the Amityville, Copiague, Farmingdale community. But we need nine more. There are nine more target areas. The Amityville, Copiague, Farmingdale area will need more money next year to run its program. This is why we are concerned. Within these 10 target areas, two-thirds of the people are poor, running their own programs, doing their own census, formulating the ideas and hiring staff. In the Amityville-Copiague-Farmingdale center, the poor people actually hire the staff. Every one, including the cook and nurse, have to go before these people to be hired. Mr. KURZMAN. Does organized labor support this activity? Mr. SMITH. Most certainly. Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir. Senator CLARK. Thank you, gentlemen. (The memorandum with attached letters follow:) MEMORANDUM FROM ALAN GARTNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SUFFOLK COUNTY, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, ON SMALL BUSINESS LOANS IN SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. There is no win Suffolk County no small business administration center and therefore, based on small business administration regulations, there are no funds available for loans to small businesses in the county. In the past three months, I would estimate that there have been more than 20 requests for information about small business loans received by this Department. This number would be below the total number of persons interested in such programs, in that it has become known that we do not have such a program and that such funds are not available in Suffolk County. The loan requests included such business activities as a moving company, a metal stamping company, a cleaning establishment, a barber shop, a luncheonette, a beauticians' school, a fish market, a supermarket, a small dress manufacturing company, and a home repair business. I am also attaching copies of letters sent to our office earlier this year from the Small Business Administration in Washington and from the Small Business Development Center in Nassau County, both of which indicate the lack of available sources of funds from existing programs for small business loans in Suffolk County. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION OF NASSAU COUNTY, Mr. FREDERICK O. JACKMAN, DEAR MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Stephen Angell has requested that we acknowledge your letter of January 25, 1966, in reply to our inquiry, informing us that your organization approved processing by this office of applications from residents or business concerns in Suffolk County. Your letter of January 25th, as explained in our recent telephone conversation, was received after we were informed by Benjamin Goldstein, Director of Economic Opportunity Assistance, that we should not accept applications originating outside of Nassau County at this time. We cannot, therefore, process the application of Mr. Edmund Pinto, referred to in our previous correspondence, or others from Suffolk County under present rulings. You will be interested to know, however, that Mr. Goldstein expressed hope "that at some future date we may be able to extend the program to Suffolk County." Cordially yours, RALPH D. WILLIAMS, Director. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, Mr. FREDERICK O. JACKMAN, DEAR MR. JACKMAN: This is in reply to your letter of February 3, 1966, requesting information on the establishment of a Small Business Development Center in Suffolk County, New York, through which Economic Opportunity Loans may be made available. Under the present provisions of this program, it is only possible for Economic Opportunity Loans to be made in areas where there are established Small Business Development Centers to serve designated geographic areas. As Mr. Ralph D. Williams, Director of the Long Island Small Business Development Center advised you, the Long Island SBDC cannot accept applications outside of Nassau County. We regret that we must inform you that it is not now possible for us to consider the establishment of any additional Centers during the current fiscal year. Unfortunately, this means that a large segment of the population will be unable to avail itself of the benefits of this particular program. We are fully committed for the 1966 fiscal year, and the few additional Centers to be approved for 1967 will be allotted under a priority system now being worked out and which will insure that the program go to those areas with the heaviest concentration of poverty. Whether Suffolk County can be given favorable consideration for this allotment cannot be determined at this time. Under these circumstances, it is simply not possible to give you any encouragement regarding the advisability of submitting a proposal for Suffolk County. We regret we cannot give you a more favorable answer at this time. Sincerely, BENJAMIN GOLDSTEIN, Director, Office of Economic Opportunity Assistance. Mr. KURZMAN. Mrs. Dorothy Orr and Timothy Vincent, of the Bedford-Stuyvesant Youth in Action, Brooklyn, N.Y. Senator CLARK. Mrs. Orr and Mr. Vincent, we are happy to have you here before the subcommittee. Senator CLARK. Who is to be the spokesman? Mrs. ORR. Mr. Timothy Vincent will be spokesman. STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY VINCENT, DIRECTOR, BEDFORD-STUYVESANT YOUTH IN ACTION, INC., BROOKLYN, N.Y. Mr. VINCENT. I am the director of Youth Leadership Institute, Bedford-Stuyvesant Youth in Action. The youth range from age 17 to 23. They are labeled hard-core dropouts. It has been our observation that there is a general air of discontent among the grassroot segment of the community, because only token efforts have been made toward elimination of adverse conditions affecting them: Unemployment, poor housing, substandard city service, health, welfare, and police. The New York City Council Against Poverty, the public agency responsible for the distribution of funds to the private community action agencies, are channeling funds to projects which are basically social services in nature. Too little emphasis, and in many cases no emphasis at all, is being placed in title IV of the Economic Opportunity Act. We in Bedford-Stuyvesant feel, in order to really attack poverty, the first thing we would have to try to do is to change the attitude of the people. We have noticed on-the-job training programs that 50 percent of these in the job training programs are dropouts. It is because of the attitude of the people in our Bedford-Stuyvesant community who do not really believe, we put the emphasis on changing attitudes in the last year. Now we really are ready for action. We find it is highly impossible to have action when the funds-and I would like to state from the top administration right on down, they seem to be confused about this poverty action. It does not seem anybody knows how to handle this money. Senator CLARK. They are not so much confused-they have run out of money. It is easy to get confused, if you don't have any money to spend. Mr. VINCENT. If it is geared to the poor people, we feel that it should be directly shipped to the poor people in Bedford Stuyvesant. We find as it goes through the city administration, and you are talking about the Hatch act and all the other acts, what is happening here is that everybody really seems to be playing a little football with the money. We are saying if anybody is going to be playing football with the money, let the poor people spend the money. At least if they make mistakes with it they have had the advantage of it, the merchants will have had the advantage of it. We are probably the greatest experts on poverty. I dont' think they taught poverty in the educational system, but all of a sudden everybody is a professional on poverty. We are saying we know the attitudes in the community have to be changed. One way to do this is to build up the confidence of the people in the community. Now you can't do this, because every time you look in the paper-and they are dropouts, you say they don't read, but every time they look up it is appropriate, allocate. They don't understand what that means. They come knocking on your door thinking you have the money, and it is tied up in the city administration. They say, "The mayor approved the money. Youth in Action got the money." We have got no money yet from Federal funds since September 1965. We submitted a copy of a program that would involve the people in neighborhood elections. Right now they say we are going to get $836,000 out of a $25 million package that we asked for. Now I think yesterday they shipped in $200,000 and told us that we have to spend it by June 30 or it will go back where it came from. I don't understand all this, because it confused us. Especially, you know, you say you are trying to get us straightened out; but I think you make enemies of the people toward us who are doing the work. We are saying to the Government, and we hope the Republican Senators whom we feel definitely are interested in the change, that you see to it that we get the money directly. And also, if it is possible for us in our community to set up these corporations, to set up these ning systems, let us train our people, let us create some industries. We do not need General Motors and everybody else to set up intries to train us. You have been trying to train us. It seems it has not worked out. It looks like it is about time you let the people in the community have their own personal fight about the money, ikea and wife, and let them straighten out their own things. you find this does not work, then it is time for the legis Intonators and everybody else to say, "Look, we have given you unity to handle this money, you have not done it." like to make this statement in closing. I notice it did not Government or any other business 2 years to become perfect. sudden everybody in the antipoverty program is not perfect, as guy is taking the money, Haryou Act does this. I notice nk when the guy embezzles the money they find out who the ler is, they put him in jail, and they still collect the money. nd out who makes the mistakes, but don't attack the whole orgaon When you have these meetings, why don't you bring some he people from the street out there in here and let them be exposed because it is nice to sit up here and talk to you gentlemen. |