ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

Mr. ADLERMAN. $52?

Miss THOMPSON. Yes, roughly.

Senator MUNDT. $52 for what?

Miss THOMPSON. A family of four would be eligible with a cash down payment of around $8 be eligible for food stamps that would give them purchasing power of around $52.

Senator MUNDT. For how long?

Miss THOMPSON. A month.

Mr. DUNNE. Then they get housing and clothing.

Miss THOMPSON. No, as far as housing and clothing, I don't see us having any responsibility for clothing. Housing-the only way we could help in housing would be to give one cash grant to provide rent for a month in advance. Now this would be with the understanding that they would have a place to live, could provide for their families if they had this one cash grant. But there could be one only. This is provided under our crisis assistance grants.

The CHAIRMAN. How much would that cash grant amount to? Miss THOMPSON. There is no ceiling but the average grant does not exceed $100.

The CHAIRMAN. So that you do have the authority and you do contemplate the possibility of having to give that assistance also?

Miss THOMPSON. That is right, which would be money for rent and utilities. If someone could find a place to live if they had this cash outlay but it can only be done one time.

Senator MUNDT. One time for 1 month?

Miss THOMPSON. For 1 month, that is right. They can receive a cash grant for 1 month out of 12. So that it means that whatever they needed at that particular time we would make the cash grant cover. If they lose their shaving kit, tooth brushes, something of that sort, it could include a small amount for incidentals.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Was that originally designed as a crisis assistance grant?

Miss THOMPSON. Yes, it is.

Mr. ADLERMAN. If the people came in on the march and set up a town or shanty town, something of that sort-I am wondering whether or not the crisis assistance grant can be interpreted to include people who come in with the intention of making a demonstration.

Is this a crisis?

Miss THOMPSON. I don't think the crux of it is whether they come for a demonstration. I think the crux might be that they are ineligible because they have no landlord and they are not paying rent.

For example, we give the money for rent with the understanding that either we pay the landlord directly or we are in touch with the landlord and we are sure that the person is going to pay a landlord for shelter.

Now if they are living in a tent city, for example, I would notI mean, I don't imagine they would be paying any rent, therefore, I don't believe they would be eligible on that basis.

You are not ruling them ineligible because of the reason for their being here. You are ruling them ineligible because it is not a normal situation of having to pay rent to somebody for space.

If they wanted to go out and rent a shelter and deal with a real estate person, then I think we would have to look at it very carefully and this could be a legitimate request.

Mr. ADLERMAN. How long could that continue?

Miss THOMPSON. One time.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Suppose they stayed on beyond that one time? Miss THOMPSON. That is not our responsibility. We can only make the one cash grant.

The second thing, it could happen if they decided to live here, they are going to make this their abode, then they would be eligible to apply for one of our regular relief programs and we would have to accept the application and we would have to review it carefully to see if they meet the criteria.

Mr. ADLERMAN. To meet the criteria all they have to do is say they intend to live here?

Miss THOMPSON. They would have to be poor and we assume they are, they would have to have children under 18, and they would have to have some permanent residence and show some evidence of planning to remain in the District of Columbia permanently.

Senator CURTIS. If they have no children under 18 these marchers who come in here will not qualify for this?

Miss THOMPSON. No. Any able-bodied man who is unemployed but employable would not be eligible. We are thinking primarily of families, heads of households with children.

Senator CURTIS. Are you going to construe that to mean-if someone leaves his family behind and comes to Washington, whose word are you going to take that he has some kids somewhere under the age of 18?

Miss THOMPSON. If they apply for assistance here they must have their children with them and they must show that they are the parent or the legal guardian of these children to be eligible. So they could not leave their children in another State, and be eligible unless they are old and disabled.

Senator CURTIS. Is this a contingent requirement for all you are going to do-housing, food and everything else for these marchers? That they have to have children?

Miss THOMPSON. No; they don't have to have children to apply for old age assistance or aid to the permanently and totally disabled. Senator MUNDT. To get benefits, they do?

Miss THOMPSON. Yes; benefits under aid to dependent children they would have to. We would not provide benefits to an able-bodied man who was employable.

Senator CURTIS. Is it anticipated that this is going to be a family

march?

Miss THOMPSON. Well, it is advertised generally as a mothers' march with others protesting the amount of money for AFDC mothers. Mr. ADLERMAN. Have you had conversations with any of the people in charge of this march?

Miss THOMPSON. We have had some, not too satisfying. But it is our understanding that in most cases the bulk of the people will be young people, high school, young college students, plus some others. Mr. ADLERMAN. Whom did you talk to?

Miss THOMPSON. We talked with a couple of the persons sent here by Dr. King to contact the local agencies to see how much the churches would help.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Could you tell us their names?

93-450-68

Miss THOMPSON. I can't offhand remember the names. There have been two or three in the city at the same time.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Was Anthony Henry one of them?

Miss THOMPSON. Yes, he was one and Bill Moyer was the other. Mr. ADLERMAN. Is Anthony Henry one of those that you spoke to? Miss THOMPSON. He spoke to a group-the National Association of Social Workers. I heard him speak there.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Did you have any conversations with him then? Miss THOMPSON. Not personally.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Did he tell you they intend to camp-in on the Mall?

Miss THOMPSON. All he gave was some of their plans. He did not divulge all their plans. Tentative plans called for a camp-in on the Mall. The whole focus of their plan was to dramatize certain inequities as far as benefits to the poor people were concerned, one being the lack of proper housing, therefore, a camp-in would demonstrate the types of shanty towns in which many of them lived.

Another of his proposals was that I day they would descend on the Welfare Department, the local Welfare Department, as well as HEW, and a large number would make application for benefits to demonstrate, again, what they considered the inadequacy of welfare grants. Their plans are to highlight and dramatize as many of these deficiencies as they can. It is important for publicity purposes and just to draw attention to these particular issues.

Senator MUNDT. Did he say how long they intended to stay?

Miss THOMPSON. He indicated it was completely flexible. They might come and stay for a short period of time. In fact, the way he explained it was that not any group would remain for a long period of time but there would be groups coming and going.

As some groups left, other groups would arrive. The way he explained it, it sounded more like transient group who would come in and stay for a couple of weeks possibly, and then go back home and be replaced.

Senator MUNDT. For how long a period?

Miss THOMPSON. He said they could go on all summer and into the fall of the year and as long as it was required to get their story told and get some results.

Senator MUNDT. They are planning for a longtime siege?

Miss THOMPSON. This was the implication; yes, sir.

Senator CURTIS. Did he reveal who was going to pay their expenses for coming here?

Miss THOMPSON. This question was asked. His answer was that they were working with churches and local organizations and were trying to collect enough money to bear the expenses and make the march financially self sufficient.

The CHAIRMAN. Can we suspend a moment and let us hear the Secretary. I know he is anxious to leave.

Mr. Secretary, I have discussed this with you in telephone conversations. You know generally what we would like to find out as a committee, although this is not an official session. This is a conference, a roundtable discussion, to find out what is in the making, so to speak, what the plans are, how the situation is to be dealt with, so that Congress and we who have the duty in this committee to study the matter at the Government level, may at least acquaint ourselves in a prelimi

nary way with enough information to make a determination whether we should proceed further officially or whether we should take action

I want to express my deep appreciation to you and to Miss Thompson for your cooperation in coming to help us.

We have a responsibility here, too. We are just trying to get ourselves advised and informed as much as we can about the true situation

now.

Thank you for coming.

Senator JAVITS. Would the Chair yield for 1 second?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed.

Senator JAVITS. This is without regard to how the person feels about the march or right of these people to come and demonstrate and seek redress for their grievances.

The whole inquiry of the Chair, as I understand it, is directed to how the Government departments will function, facing a practical situation of many, many people coming into the District with certain declared plans?

The CHAIRMAN. Everybody has his own feeling about it. Some approve and some don't. I think whether you approve or don't approve as a Member of Congress, the public is entitled to know how the Government is going to react and what the plans are to handle the situation.

Senator JAVITS. That is what I understood.

Senator MUNDT. I might add, there are some very practical problems involved. Some people are writing me that they are planning to come here with their kids in the summertime. Some are coming for conventions. They want to know if it is a safe place to come, if there is room for them to come. We don't know much about it and we are just in the process of learning.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, for coming. Will you just advise us as you see it what the responsibility of your Department is and what your problems are, and how you plan to meet them based upon the general information that we all have from public news communications? Add any information from any other source that you may have about the conditions that you will confront and how you propose to meet them.

STATEMENT OF HON. STEWART L. UDALL, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY BERNARD R. MEYER, ASSOCIATE SOLICITOR, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Secretary UDALL. Senator, the responsibilities of my Department are limited. We do have jurisdiction over the park areas of the District of Columbia in one sense, as I am sure the members of the committee are fully aware.

I know Senator Mundt is, because he is on the Appropriations Committee.

We not only have the national Mall, one of the major national parklands, but in one respect we are the custodian of the city parks in the city.

We maintain them and I think this is appropriate because this is the Capital. Therefore, to the extent that these activities may in

volve uses or proposed uses, permitted or unpermitted, of these national parklands, my Department is involved.

My Department also has a relatively small police force, the National Capitol Park Police. As I recall, our complement is something in the order of about 275 policemen. We are not large as compared with the Metropolitan Police of the District. But we do police our parklands. Therefore, we will undoubtedly have some involvement in this matter. All that I personally know and the only contacts, as I understand it, Senator, that have taken place at this point with my Department are two separate conversations, with Dr. Walter Fauntroy, who is the local representative of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

The CHAIRMAN. Did he speak to you in his official capacity as a member of the City Council or as a member of this organization? Secretary UDALL. I have had no discussions with him. He has talked with my people at a much lower level. I believe with Mr. Nash Castro, who is with the National Capitol Regional National Park Service, and with one of our lawyers.

He has not come close to my level in terms of discussion. The summary of discussions that I received would indicate that up to this point these have been very preliminary. There has been no application for a permit to use any parklands. There has been a discussion merely of what parklands we had and might be available.

I believe my people have made clear what our procedures are with regard to use of these parklands. We do have a regular system for the issuance of permits for demonstrations, and rallies.

For example, the 1963 march on Washington was one where, as I recall it, a permit was issued.

The CHAIRMAN. Who issues the permit?

Secretary UDALL. It would normally be issued by the National Park Service. They are the managers and custodians of the parks. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, it is under your jurisdiction? Secretary UDALL. That is right.

Senator MUNDT. Last summer I drove up around Dupont Circle. They said it was a kind of "hippie haven." I drove around the circle. There were many people there. Do they have to have a permit in that park? Is it under your jurisdiction?

Secretary UDALL. It is under our jurisdiction. We have had some rather ticklish problems there. The people gather in the evening and they mingle. It is within their constitutional rights to be there. The main problem we have had there is caused by the large number of people who congregate there. In fact, this has caused a few tense situations. Mostly, however, it is merely a matter of keeping a close eye on the area. It does not present the type of situation where a permit is necessary.

Senator MUNDT. You don't have to have a permit, for example, to sit on a green park bench in Lafayette Park?

Secretary UDALL. That is right.

Senator MUNDT. If there are a thousand of them crowded in, do they have to have the same permit? How does that work?

Secretary UDALL. I would say from my knowledge of this, and I only get involved in these situations where there are some overriding policy considerations. A permit is required if there is some specific purpose for which a group wants to meet.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »