| Making a huge jump through time and space, I take you to the late 80's in San Francisco. A sharp recession had hit California with a vengence. When the homeless situation in San Francisco got to be too much, SF Mayor Frank Jordan's "Matrix" program threw hundred of homeless people out of San Francisco. Many bought Bart tickets with their savings and moved to Berkeley, where the climate was better, the politicians more liberal, and the People's Park Battle was still raging. Things got bad enough downtown that Berkeley's voters sponsored a referendum (Proposition "O") to outlaw aggressive panhandling within ten feet of a business or ATM machine. Due to the usual rhetorical blurring of boundaries, being in favor or the "anti-panhandling" measure because equated with being hateful and insensitive to the homeless, by means of the assumption that panhandlers are by and large homeless. The implication was that by hurting panhandlers, you are hurting the homeless. To counter the anti-homeless/free speech accusations, a rider providing funds for a new homeless shelter was attached to the proposition.This made both sides happy. The re-worked Proposition "O" passed partly because it included a generous outlay of funds to build and fund homeless shelters, and partly because many voters were sick and tired of being panhandled. No sooner did the referendum become law, than a lawsuit by the ACLU blocked the enforcement of the law. To date, the City of Berkeley has spent hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of dollars in legal fees, fighting the ACLU and other groups who are obstructing potential enforcement of this law. The issue has deeply divided the already polarized, overly political, and generally irritable Berkeley population. The anti-panhandling portion is still legally blocked and unenforcable. Meanwhile the shelter has been built and operational for five years. That's Berkeley politics: hijack the oppositions votes, and use litigation if that fails. Speaking freely of the first ammendment, did you know that Berkeley's claim to fame, "Free Speech" is not extended to anyone who happens to disagree with the PC Status quo? Jesus, one of the most famous homeless people in history (though not a panhandler himself), had the following advice on poverty and wealth: "And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him: You lack one thing: go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come follow Me." (Mark 10:21 RSV) |
| Panhandlers in Berkeley, however, are not *all* homeless, nor are homeless people all panhandlers. Indeed, many homeless people would rather not be humilated by having to beg for money, and most do not do it. It gives homeless people a bad image. So why do panhandlers do it? Because they know that they can prey on your sympaty for the truly needy. Some people panhandle to get money to buy addictive drugs and alchohol. Some do it to be cool as do thrill seeking punks from the suburbs, and fraternity party goers who dwell on Telegraph Avenue. It can be argued that many of Berkeley's panhandlers are professional panhandlers, although there is currently no panhandling union or panhandlers association. Whatever the reason, panhandlers can make a stroll through the downtown into a very unpleasant and guilty experience, typified by.a sarcastic "God Bless You!" response to anyone who decides to not part with their "spare change". In the mid 90's, Berkeley's downtown was in a dismal downward spiral which only recently reversed itself when the City decided to start spending money to make Shattuck Ave. a more attractive place. After all, there were thousands and thousands of students with pockets full of money walking through the downtown each day. But what really turned Berkeley around was the technology-led economic boom, which inadvertantly caused Berkeley's downtown to improve dramatically. To be fair, some credit must be given to the good work by the City of Berkeley. However, the "long boom" New Economy now seems to be impoding, which does not bode well for Berkeley's downtown plan. Hopefully we've learned something from the past, and can find a way to help people help themselves, before the next wave of homelessness arrives. On a personal level, after witnessing shockingly severe poverty and homelessness in India, Egypt and Southeast Asia, I have a hard time feeling sympathetic to Berkeley's well-fed down-and-out. (Especially those able bodied young people with leather jackets and purple hair). Instead, I will donate money to organizations that seek to help the poor of the world through education, better nutrition and better housing. Please don't encourage panhandling. Give money responsibly: to charities that help. If you are interested in helping the homeless, please read the 54 ways to help the homeless. More Berkeley Rants.... |
 |
| Downtown Berkeley and the Anti-Panhandling Law, a Free Speech Statement By Doug Smith |