Thoughts On the Process of Civic Action
By Sen. Will Espero (`Ewa Beach, `Ewa by Gentry, Ocean Pointe, `Ewa Villages, West Loch, Honouliuli, Lower Waipahu)
About 800,000 Americans are homeless on any given night.
THINKING
How People Think Matters
How people as individuals think about homelessness, or any social issue, determines:
Whether it will be seen as a problem to be ignored or resolved
Who will be involved in resolving the issue
How the resolution will be crafted
Whether the resolution will be effective in resolving the problem
How much will be spent
How long it will take.
Political will is the willingness or indifference to an issue that determines whether there will or won’t be a government response, or what that response, if any, will be.
For example, warnings about climate change have been discussed for thirty years. Political will has increased as those who heard and were receptive to the warnings have reached positions where they have the authority to exert some influence in the business world or political spheres. Political will has still not yet reached the level where government will take decisive action on the matter, being open to and adopting solutions (except most notably in Portland, Oregon).
Causes and Symptoms
Resolving an issue requires two actions: distinguishing the symptom from the cause and accurately diagnosing the cause or causes. Multiple causes may have the same symptom.
For example, migraine headaches are the symptom of very low blood sugar, sleep deprivation, prolonged and intense stress, or a brain tumor. The doctor must accurately diagnose and treat the cause. Giving aspirin to cure a headache caused by a brain tumor won’t eliminate either the tumor or the symptom.
Be careful to craft your solution to address the underlying causes and just as careful against using a “one size fits all” approach to an issue as well. If you try to resolve the symptom, but misdiagnose the cause then treat the wrong cause, the symptom will not be eliminated. The symptom of homelessness, for example, is present in these three different regions but in each area is due to a different cause, and so requires different resolutions.
New Zealand accepted 10,000 Tuvalu natives (out of 40,000) as a humanitarian action because rising sea levels caused by global warming have flooded over a portion of this tiny nation. The homelessness here can probably be kept a temporary, reversible problem with active intervention to train and equip those Pacific Islanders with the job skills they need to work and live in New Zealand, and render assistance assimilating them in their new homeland. The question of where the other 30,000 Tuvalans will migrate to is another issue as their country vanishes underwater.
Employment barriers disappeared with national boundaries in the European Union. Workers from poorer European Union countries flocked to wealthier countries like Britain and France in hopes of better jobs and living conditions. The European Parliament is working to reverse the resulting homelessness through government policies that encourage businesses to invest in and create jobs in those poorer countries so the immigrants can stay in their homelands and work.
Neither of these solutions would work with the 63% of America’s homeless people who are on the streets due to mental illness or chemical dependence, which are chronic conditions that require caretaker action.
Thinking and Solutions
Erroneous attitudes can be obstacles to solving problems. One common attitude that people hide behind to avoid resolving the problem is the attitude that people are homeless because they lack “personal responsibility.” This hinders resolving the problem because programs based on this attitude typically require a showing of “worthiness” just to enter.
Homelessness is not a choice that rational people make–it is a situation people find themselves in when conditions turn for the worse. If homeless people met the conditions typically imposed by “personal responsibility” approaches, they wouldn’t be in this situation, and even so, there may not be any housing available for them at the time when they finally meet entrance criteria.
The most effective response has been the “housing first” philosophy, the belief that a safe, comfortable home is necessary before anyone can work toward recovery or employment. The most successful programs have been those that respect basic human dignity and help people return to normality through providing safe housing first, then resolving other problems like job skills training or mental health therapy. Helping people return to a functional condition or to their normal circumstances motivates people to take the actions they need to live a normal life.
Connecting the Dots and Thinking Out of the Ordinary
Connecting the dots means taking unrelated facts and perceiving how they could become connected to solve a problem. It may well be that the scale of the problem in light of the resources available requires “out of the box” thinking. Let’s look at some unrelated facts:
ü There are towns in the Midwestern states that offer free land to anyone who will build a home, to give the area a chance of staying alive.
ü Hawaii’s high cost of living and high cost housing market results in not just homeless but also people living in destitute conditions in industrial areas with no hope for a decent home.
ü Crowded, poverty conditions breed high crime rates, but areas with decent homes in decent neighborhoods have correspondingly lower crime rates.
ü Hawaii spends a large amount of our tax dollars on aid to families in poorer areas because of the gap between what they can earn and the high cost of even the lowest priced housing.
ü The biggest obstacles to building affordable housing are the scarcity of land, the high cost of purchasing that land, the high cost of putting in infrastructure and the high cost of building homes.
One out-of-the-box option to giving people a chance at a better life may be to approach those mainland towns giving away free land and arrange to build affordable housing, then relocate our homeless or poverty level people there, with a period of rental assistance and/or subsistence support allowances. We would avoid the issue of land scarcity and purchasing land for affordable homes, and save on the costs of construction because construction workers are paid lower on the mainland. This would be one way of giving hope to people that they can have a better life. Having a decent home is a powerful incentive to recovery, giving them a new frame of mind and motivates them to do what is necessary to maintain that lifestyle.
In this scenario, health care providers and teachers, among others, would have to be recruited to provide necessary services, and if need be, the host or sending state could offer to repay student loans in exchange for serving in those towns, just as is done now for other rural areas around the country. Businesses such as KMart and Safeway would have to be elicited to serve the town, which reciprocally benefits the business by providing a new customer base. Working with employers, job training could be a component of the support services. Both states benefit: the one with the dying towns that need an influx of residents and the state with the homeless people who need a place to live that they can afford and jobs to support themselves.
Sister states working together for mutual benefit is not a new idea. Our prison crowding situation was resolved by contracting with the Corrections Corporation of America to house our prisoners on the mainland. The WICHE (the Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education) gives in-state status to students from one member state attending college in another member state when an educational program is lacking in universities in the home state.
DOING
Civil Activism
Tackling a social problem can take its toll. Your family is important. They will be giving up part of your attention, time, and energies, so it’s important to make sure they know you appreciate their sacrifice and you make it up to them whenever you can. Building those strong relationships helps give you the emotional support you need for working on your cause.
Be prepared for the long haul. If your issue involves the government in any way, remember that government moves by public consensus, and that changing the way people think takes a long time. The rail issue has been around for nearly 40 years, and there are still people opposed to it, despite the obvious need for transportation alternatives and the success of rail in other locales. Hawaii isn’t the only place where political will is difficult to garner: Seattle, Los Angeles, and other large cities took about as long, with even worse transportation congestion.
Not all issues are long term. Getting funding to combat the issue of domestic violence and putting the child abuse and neglect reporting law on the books, for example, was done at a time when social activists held office. Part-time University of Hawaii American Studies professor Neil Abercrombie was then the Chair of the Senate Human Services Committee and attorney Tony Chang was the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. A compelling coalition of social workers from several different agencies pressed upon the Legislature the need to train police officers, social workers and teachers in understanding the mental-relational dynamics of abuse and neglect, recognizing it, and effectively dealing with it, as well as the need to provide mental health services for victims and rehabilitative treatment for abusers. Dozens upon dozens of people testified repeatedly throughout that legislative Session. The receptiveness of Chairs Abercrombie and Chang to these social workers, and the strong advocacy of Senator Abercrombie got the law put on the books and the programs funded.
Partnerships and coalitions are important. As President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair have reminded others, allies don’t need to agree on every issue – they only need to agree on the issue they are pursuing together. Partnerships and coalitions are helpful. Having more people affords the option of dividing the labor involved. More people concerned about your issue gives the added numbers that government officials need to see that the issue is important to a broader section of the community, and that they should pay attention to you. Having others who share your view gives you emotional support to see you through the process. Sharing the effort gives you physical support so that you don’t always have to be in two places at one time and have back-ups in scheduling.
You may find that your partners are interested in your solution for reasons altogether different from your own. Allies with interests as diverse as reducing greenhouse gases, protecting the environment, reducing the cost of doing business, conserving natural resources, avoiding the social impact (such as Tuvalu and Indonesia being flooded over from rising sea levels), or becoming energy independent, can work together because the solutions are the same: renewable energy, reducing use, recycling. So be open to having others share in the efforts, even if their reasons for doing so are different from yours.
Partnerships are built on finding common ground and building a trusting working relationship through supporting each other, courtesy, respect for differences, mutual goals, sharing information, being responsible, and sharing credit.
Social activism works as a part-time endeavor, unless you are a paid lobbyist for an organization. You’ll need to have a decent means of supporting yourself so that you have the freedom of mind to focus on your cause.
Lastly, educating others. You’ll find that raising public awareness and educating the “movers and shakers” will be a large part of your efforts. Which brings us to…
Research
Ideas are important, and so is research.
Research will give you the information you need to show why a problem is one that should be addressed: how widespread it is, who is affected, how the issue has been handled elsewhere. It will give you information you need to answer questions the policy makers might have, to refute opposition, and to clear up erroneous beliefs. Most importantly, it will help you craft a resolution by seeing what has or has not worked and the factors that led to success or ineffectiveness.
Research may also enable you to present the issue in different angles. Take the global warming issue, for example, that was just discussed. A person who is does not care about greenhouse gas emissions may still be interested in renewable energy because he believes we should be energy independent. It may be that the entity you seek to help you with your resolution may be interested in your proposal but for reasons different from your own. Being able to argue your case in other ways can help get the approval your proposal needs.
The Three Sectors…
…Are government, private industry and individuals, and non-profit organizations.
There are times when collaboration is helpful in addressing a problem, and there are situations where a sector should not be involved.
“Government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Democratic government operates by public consensus, meaning most people have to agree on what constitutes an issue that government will address, how the issue will be resolved, and how much to spend on it. The process of garnering public consensus is time consuming and sometimes frustrating, but is an inherent part of the freedom and right that we enjoy as citizens of a democratic government.
Government provides basic services for the common good, such as highways and roads, consumer protection, public schools, disease control, emergency assistance, transportation, defense, and many others. With such a multitude of demands, government’s ability to deal with social problems is often strained.
You can bring your ideas to either the Legislature or the Governor if it’s a statewide issue. The Legislature operates on a timetable, so make sure you bring your ideas before the legislative session opens, so that those who are interested in your cause have the time to draft a bill that will be considered by the other legislators. Besides testifying at hearing, you will likely have to take the time to meet with the legislators to explain why you think a problem should be resolved and why your proposed solution will help, as well as the details of your proposal. Alternatively, you could approach the department that would be affected by your proposal. If it’s an issue for the individual counties, then approach the County Council or the Mayor’s office.
The private sector–businesses and individuals–in contrast, can choose what goods or services it will or won’t provide, and operates for profit. Because it has this freedom to select its activities and control its financial resources, it has more financial and human resources and flexibility in directing its resources than government does, and can act more quickly because it does not need to get public input or consensus. The financial resources of the private sector are often tapped through grant requests.
When you hear people complain about “government inefficiency” and “business efficiency” remember the reasons why the differences exist.
Non-profit agencies fill the gap between government and the private sector. (Non-profits are known outside of the U.S. as the “third sector” or “NGO”s – non-governmental organizations.) Non-profit agencies typically render services that cannot be done for a profit (the private sector) and are needed in the community, but not to the extent of being a fundamental service for the common good (government).
Crafting Solutions
After you’ve thought about how the problem should be resolved, and you’re ready to ask private funders or the government to help resolve it, make sure you provide this information:
· why a problem should be addressed (who it affects, how many people, what is the result of not addressing it, what are the benefits of resolution);
· a workable resolution (who will do what, what the program or project will look like, how it eliminates the causes of the symptoms you feel are problems);
· an estimate in terms of dollars and manpower needed for the resolution.
Approaching government officials is more effective when they can see that the problem is one that they should address, but even more so, one that can feasibly be addressed.
For example, every morning commuters face the “Middle Street merge” where the airport viaduct meets Moanalua Freeway. The “Nimitz flyover” was proposed to alleviate this problem, the flyover being a continuation of the airport viaduct over Nimitz Highway into town so that drivers would not need to merge onto the H-1. The obstacle to this is the cost — $250 million at the last estimate. Federal highway funds are only about $130 million per year, and are tapped for strengthening, repairing, and/or expanding existing roads, highways, and bridges, or building new ones. Coming up with the $250 million for a new flyover competes with needed maintenance and expansion on existing roads. Add to this financial obstacle the protests from commuters, residents, and businesses along Nimitz who may oppose the idea because of the great increase in noise from more cars and the inconvenience of profit loss due to construction. Lack of feasibility and political opposition can stop even a reasonable proposed solution.