Dublin Core
Text Item Type Metadata
Text
DRAFT: LEONE 6/2/67
The overriding problem of our cities is segregation by race
and income. There are no urban solutions of any validity which do
not deal directly with the questions posed by this segregation.
The facts are these: 23% of the total population of our
central cities is Negro, and 35% of these Negroes have incomes in
the poverty range. Within five years, assuming present population
trends and allowing for current levels and even greater effectiveness
of ameliorative public programs, the proportion of Negroes to central
city population will rise to 28%, with a constant percentage
remaining in poverty. By 1978, both proportions will be 35%.
By 1983, our central cities population will be 44% Negro, nearly
two-fifths of them poor.
These are percentages of the total population of all our central
cities. By 1973, at least ten of our major cities will be
predominantly Negro; by 1983, at least twenty, including Chicago,
Philadelphia, Cleveland, Detroit, etc.
To repeat, these are our projections of which will happen if
(1) present population trends continue, (2) there are no sudden and
surprising changes in public attitudes, and (3) current governmental
policies and levels of spending remain in force.
The Task Force believes that a significant change in (1) -
despite the notorious unreliability of population trends = is
unlikely. We believe that changes in (2) also are both unlikely
and unpredictable.
Given these uncertainties our report focuses on (3) - current
governmental policies and level of spending -. We recognize
Government action is only one element in the process of urban decline.
And, while it may not be a sufficient condition for turning the
tide, it is certainly a necessary one.
The sheer magnitude of the problem is staggering. Our population
models tell us that simply holding the size of central city ghettos”
to their present size will require movement of approximately 600,000
Negroes a year into predominantly white suburbs, Such a figure would
represent from ten to fifteen times the present rate of Negro out-
migration. Our crude cost calculations for providing a minimun
acceptable level of social services in all central city ghettos
indicate Federal expenditure patterns of staggering and unlikely
proportions.
We believe that to alter these projections significantly,
quantun leaps will have to be taken in public policy and levels of
spending. Yet without a massive effort disparities between white
and black, affluent and poor, city and suburb will grow larger.
The probability for potentially dangerous confrontation which divides
American society along these lines will continue to increase. We
do not presume to calculate how high that probability is but we
are quite sure that it is high enough to be cause for urgent concern,
It is apparent then that segregation by race and income in our
great metropolitan areas is outstripping whatever we are now doing
to offset it. Yet the Task Force recognizes that American society
3
in 1967 is not prepared to pay the costs of a fully integrated urban
society, We know that integration will not be possible in the life
of this Administration, but we suggest a place to start - a line
of policy which will build towards a future breakthrough.
In summary, the Task Force identifies as a problem of the
greatest national urgency the growth and poverty of central city
ghettos and the related race and income segregation in urban areas,
1) We believe that this situation already provides a driving
force in urban decline and that its importance is increased
by the unequal pattern of urban development.
2) We are convinced that a dramatic confrontation between white
and Negro, affluent and poor, growth and decline already is
building in most of our urban areas,
3) In the absence of state, Federal and local action on a wide
front accompanied by enlightened private activity, these
problems will grow larger, more dangerous to American society
and increasingly difficult to solve,
We therefore recommend a series of strategies designed to:
1. Increase individual access to jobs, education, income, housing
and other social services.
2. Increase racial and income integration in metropolitan areas,
3. Increase the proportion of middle-class population, especially
Negro, in central cities,
4, Increase the ability of new inmigrants to adjust to urban life.
Priorities
1.
The specific proposals based on these policies, indeed the
policies themselves, may often seem to be in conflict.
We believe that these coiitradictions are more apparent than
real, and that the very limits of our present ability to
achieve any of the above goals on a large scale makes it
imperative for us to move in several directions at once.
While it is clear that a large scale of effort is required we
believe that the first stage mist focus on experimentation and
refined efforts in many areas of present activity.
While a truly integrated and stable urban society is our
ultimate goal, we believe our ability in the short run to
attain massive integration is quite limited. We, therefore,
place an especially high priority on those policies designed
to create a larger middle class with a stake in the city.
We seek methods of increasing stability as the proportion
of Negroes in cities continues to increase,
As a minimum, we believe that it is a matter of the highest
national urgency to attempt to "integrate" ghetto populations
into the mainstream of American life by raising their income
levels and the level of accessible social services.
We have ordered our recommendations in response to a crude
attempt at cost effectiveness - feeling that some attempt at
systematic ordering was better than none at all.
6. We have seen no value in asking the President to spend his
urban resources, political and financial, on proposals which
are unacceptable to American society in 1967; we of course
urge him to continue his leadership in educating the American
people to the necessity of accepting our central cities ghetto
residents as full participants in American society. Only such
a development can offer hope for our cities and the people who .
live in then.
We intend our proposals as far as possible to be consistent with
the following principals:
1, Federal assistance should be tied not to institutions but to
individuals,
2. Federal assistance to state and localities should be designed to
strengthen the role of political executive wherever possible.
3. The administration of prograns should be carried out at the
lowest level possible and with the greatest flexibility possible.
4, Programs designed to up-grade ghetto life should also make a
contribution to integration - if possible.
5. New institutions should be created only under the most unusual
circumstances,
Proposals
We have divided our proposals into two sections. The second are
those which are in some ways nost desirable and ambitious but which
seem to us to be only long-run possibilities, The first are meant
to be the first stage - perhaps about five year - developments in
urban policy making.