POVERTY:
Is that the way it is?
Some things will never change
That’s just the way it is…
Is that just the way it has to be?
The Way It Is …
Bruce Hornsby
Standing in line marking time Waiting for the welfare dime
‘Cause they can’t buy a job
The man in the silk suit hurries by
As he catches the poor old ladies’ eyes
Just for fun he says “get a job”
That’s just the way it is.
Some things will never change.
That’s just the way it is.
But don’t you believe them!
They say “hey little boy you can’t go
Where the others go,
‘Cause you don’t look like they do”
Said “hey old man how can you stand
To think that way?
Did you really think about it
Before you made the rules?”
He said, “Son
That’s just the way it is
Some things will never change
That’s just the way it is.”
But don’t you believe it!
Well they passed a law in ’64
To give those who ain’t got a little more
But it only goes so far.
Because the law don’t change another’s mind
When all it see at the hiring time
Is the line on the color bar…
That’s just the way it is
Some things will never change
That’s just the way it is.
But don’t you believe them…
Poverty doesn’t have to be the way it is

CAN a law change another’s mind?

OR does it take Community Action to
change minds and conditions in the
community?
Community Action:
40 Years of History…One Mission.
Some things we’ll talk about:
OEO
War on Poverty CAA
EOA
1964
Great Society
MAXIMUM FEASIBLE PARTICIPATION
Tripartite
Green Amendment
CSA
OCS
Quie Amendment
CSBG
SEOO
Some people we’ll talk about.
Presidents during 4/5 of our forty years.
Community Action Evolved
The Community Action movement is
deeply rooted in our culture and has
its basis in philosophies that underlay
the creation of the United States of
America.
The political philosophy of the Declaration of Independence was not
new; its ideals of individual liberty had already been expressed by
John Locke and the Continental philosophers.
We hold these truths
to be self-evident,
that all men are
created equal, that
they are endowed by
their Creator with
certain unalienable
Rights, that among
these are Life,
Liberty and the
pursuit of
Happiness.--That to
secure these rights,
Governments are
instituted among
Men
Observations of
Alexis De Tocqueville


In the early 1800’s, about 55 years after the
establishment of the United States, a
Frenchman traveled America and observed a
difference between this new Democracy and
the governance of European nations.
He noted the different approach of the
peoples and how they solve problems.
De Tocqueville on Associations

“Americans of all ages, all conditions, and all
dispositions, constantly form associations.
They have not only commercial and
manufacturing companies, in which all take
part, but associations of a thousand other
kinds---religious, moral, serious, futile,
extensive or restricted, enormous or
diminutive.
“In this way they form…

The Americans form associations to give
entertainments, to found establishments
for education, to build inns, to construct
churches, to diffuse books, to send
missionaries to the antipodes; and in this
way they found hospitals, prisons, and
schools.
They form a society…

If it is proposed to advance some truth, or to
foster some feeling by the encouragement of
a great example, they from a society.
Wherever, in charge of some undertaking,
you see the government in France, or a man
of rank in England, in the United States you
will be sure to find an association.”
Democracy in America; A. De Tocqueville
Now we are use to a world with
Community Action.
We live and work in a society rich
with a range of human services and
social service projects. But what
was the environment prior to 1964?
Let’s attempt to understand what the social
service network was like prior to 1964.







Extent of poverty prior to the industrial revolution.
The industrial revolution influence.
Service systems in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s.
The programs to offset the impact of the Great
Depression.
The influences of World War II.
The contribution of electronic.
communications…radio, TV, movies.
The prosperity of the 1950’s.
Setting the stage
-Progressive EraSettlement Houses
Neighborhood Planning- Bricks and
Motar; FHA
-1950s-
Slum Clearance
****
Ford Foundation Gray Areas Projects
& Kennedy’s Committee on Juvenile
Delinquency: dealt with social as
opposed to B & M.
Increased call for civil rights
Harrington’s Other America
The transition period

At the end of the 1950’s, and with the
increasing social unrest of the 1960’s,
planners and others began to question
their role as “experts” and began to
position themselves as advocates for the
residents of the low-income
neighborhoods.
Community Participation

The Housing Act of 1954 had introduced
the concept of community participation
in neighborhood revitalization projects.
This then became a strict requirement of
community development policies in the
1960’s. This was a new way of business.
The Early 1960’s…
Americans wanted more…




Kennedy was assassinated.
The country was basically prosperous but
there was an increased awareness of
inequities…in civil rights and economic
conditions; ghettos were dying and
suburbia was booming.
There was social upheaval and clash.
Americans were largely idealistic…they
wanted a better society.
De Tocqueville again
Americans:

If it is proposed to advance some truth, or
to foster some feeling by the
encouragement of a great example, they
form a society.
Enter Lyndon B. Johnson
Unconditional War on Poverty
Declared in State of Union.
President Johnson announced that his
administration was committed to wiping
out poverty in his 1964 State of the Union
Address when he said, “This
administration today, here and now,
declares unconditional war on poverty in
America.”
A Great Society…
Excerpted from LBJ speech at University of Michigan
commencement, May 1964:

“The purpose of protecting the life of our nation and
preserving the liberty of our citizens is to pursue the
happiness of our people. Our success in that pursuit
is the test of our success as a nation.

For a century we labored to settle and to subdue a
continent. For half a century we called upon
unbounded invention and untiring industry to create
an order of plenty for all of our people.
Johnson’s Great Society Challenge:

“The challenge of the next half century is whether
we have the wisdom to use that wealth to enrich
and elevate our national life, and to advance the
quality of our American civilization.”

“Your imagination, your initiative and your
indignation will determine whether we build a
society where progress is the servant of our needs,
or a society where old values and new visions are
buried under unbridled growth. For in your time we
have the opportunity to move not only toward the
rich society and the powerful society, but upward
to the Great Society.”
An end to poverty.

“The Great Society rests on abundance
and liberty for all. It demands an end to
poverty and racial injustice, to which
we are totally committed in our time.
But that is just the beginning.”
The History of Community
Action
Community Action Agency History
Is Intertwined With:

The Great Society

War on Poverty

Economic Opportunity Act of 1964
Johnson’s Vision Was A Future
That Was Different and Better.

In his mind, the challenge would consume
the next half century

1964 to 2014

Johnson proposed A Nationwide War on
the Sources of Poverty
EOA --- Most Significant Social Legislation Since
the Social Security Act.

Johnson declared the War on Poverty in his State of
the Union Address on January 8, 1964. At that time
35 million Americans lived in poverty, nearly 30%,
and about25% of black youths could expect to live
life without regular employment.

Johnson outlined his proposals in a major piece of
legislation. He proposed his vision of a Great
Society in the programs of the Economic
Opportunity Act of 1964.
Sargent Shriver Drafts EOA Legislation

In February 1964, Johnson charges Shriver
with drafting the legislation that would serve
the Great Society. The legislation passed
and was signed on August 20, 1964.

Johnson then asked Shriver to serve him in
setting up the new Office of Economic
Opportunity.
Economic Opportunity Act of 1964
Economic Opportunity Act of 1964; Public Law 88-452
August 20, 1964
AN ACT
To mobilize the human and financial resources of the Nation to combat poverty to she United States.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
That this Act may be cited as the "Economic Opportunity Act of 1964".
assembled.
FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSE
SEC. 2. Although the economic well-being and prosperity of the United States
have progressed to a level surpassing any achieved in world history, and
although these benefits are widely shared throughout the Nation, poverty
continues to be the lot of a substantial number of our people. The United States
can achieve its full economic and social potential as a nation only if every
individual has the opportunity to contribute to the full extent of his capabilities
and to participate in the workings of our society. It is, therefore, the policy of
the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in
this Nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training,
the opportunity to work, and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity. It
is the purpose of this Act to strengthen, supplement, and coordinate efforts in
furtherance of that policy.
A National Policy
It is, therefore, the policy of the United
States to eliminate the paradox of
poverty in the midst of plenty in this
Nation by opening to everyone the
opportunity for education and
training, the opportunity to work, and
the opportunity to live in decency
and dignity.
Johnson knew he was proposing
an undertaking of long duration.

“The challenge of the next half century is
whether we have the wisdom to use that
wealth to enrich and elevate our national life,
and to advance the quality of our American
civilization.”

The next half century, from the year of
Johnson’s speech, ends in 2014.
Although the national government’s policy to
eliminate poverty in our country, that Johnson
sought to establish through legislation, was
repealed 17 years later, many of the program
tools initiated by the Great Society legislations
continue to this day and most have expanded.
Johnson’s strategy.
Johnson proposed an expansion in the federal
government's role in domestic policy. In addition to the
Economic Opportunity Act, Congress enacted two
major civil-rights acts (1964 and 1965) and two
education acts (1965). In addition to the EOA and its
programs, legislation was passed that created
Medicaid, and Medicare.
A Federal Office Was
Established.





A cabinet level office was established, the Office of
Economic Opportunity (EOA).
This office was to coordinate all of the federal
governments anti-poverty efforts and programs.
It was also to be a laboratory for program
development.
The OEO established a direct federal – local
relationship, basically by-passing the states. It
encouraged the development of community
organizations and funded them.
Provided for State Economic Opportunity Offices
(SEOO) to involve Governors in the War on Poverty.
Programs under EOA

Some of the programs created under the
EOA were: VISTA, Job Corps, Neighborhood
Youth Corps, Head Start, Adult Basic
Education, Family Planning, Community
Health Centers, Congregate Meal
Preparation, Economic Development, CDCs,
Foster Grandparents, Legal Services, RSVP,
Legal Services, Neighborhood Centers,
Summer Youth Programs, etc.
A delivery vehicle was needed
at the local level.



The community participation and
governance model was incorporated.
Maximum Feasible Participation of the
Poor was a goal in needs determination,
program planning, program delivery and
governance.
The EOA defined a model local delivery
entity called a Community Action Agency.
And Just What is Community
Action Anyhow?

A concept.
A public or private organization.
A community process.
A vehicle to make change.
A mission.

We will explore the intent and the mission.




The Mission of the CAA
The EOA defined the purpose of a CAA. The
organizations were
“…to stimulate a better focusing of all
available local, State, private, and Federal
resources upon the goal of enabling lowincome families, and low-income individuals
of all ages, in rural and urban areas, to attain
the skills, knowledge, and motivation to
secure the opportunities needed for them to
become self-sufficient.”
A CATALYTIC MISSION

The CAA was to make the entire community more
responsive to the needs and interest of the poor by
two activities:


Mobilizing Resources.
Bringing about greater institutional sensitivity.
Many adopted the Mission.
Many community members committed
themselves to the CAA Mission in those early
days and remained with the organizations even
though wages were low.
The CAA employed many of the poor they were
organized to serve. came to work for CAAs at
low wages.
In addition to services, the CAA was an
advocate. It challenged and by-passed the
traditional systems.
1964 - 1967
In a very short time:
 OEO hires nearly 3,000 employees.
 By 1968 there were over 1,600 CAAs in over 2/3 of the counties
nationwide.
 CAAs were organized to serve single county, multi-counties or
city. Most were private non’profit but some were organized as
public agencies.
 CAAs expanded programs rapidly and set up centers in lowincome communities, reaching out to involve and train the
poor.
 CAAs pursued “maximum feasible participation” for the poor.
This often set up clashes with the establishment.
Reeled in.



Many big city Mayors and other local politicians
complained that the CAAs needed to be controlled.
Many were challenging the existing power structures
and, by offering jobs to neighborhood people,
disrupting the hold that patronage exerted on
neighborhoods.
Counties and other units of government were not
happy that they had no say in which agency became
a CAA or that they could not control the boards.
As a result of these complaints, Congress amended
the EOA.
Green and Quie Amendments
Green: in 1967 stipulated
that local elected
officials had authority
to designate the official
CAA for their areas.
Most were certified but a
few big cities took
control and replaced
the existing CAA.
Quie: in 1967 stipulated
that 1/3 of board must
be composed of elected
officials and 1/3 would
be private sector
representatives. This
limited “maximum
feasible participation”
of the poor on the
boards to 1/3 of the
membership.
US Poverty Rate Prior and
After EOA Passage











1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
22.4%
22.2 < recession year
21.9
21.0
19.5
19.0 < Johnson’s Great Society begins
17.3
14.7
14.2
12.8
12.1
US Poverty Rate After EOA
and CSA Passage










1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
12.6
12.5
11.9
11.1
11.2
12.3
11.8
11.6
11.4
11.7
< recession year
< recession year
< recession year
< individual benefits level off, decline
Poverty Rate After CSBG Passage









1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
14.0 < Reagan-era cuts in individual benefits
15.0 < recession year
15.2
14.4
14.0
13.6
13.4
13.0
12.8
US Poverty Rate After CSBG













1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
13.5 < recession year
14.2 < recession year
14.8
15.1
14.5
13.8
13.7
13.3
12.7
11.8
11.3
11.7 < recession year
12.1
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, P-60 series.
Lesser support begins - 1968
The Great Society program made significant
contributions to the protection of civil rights and
the expansion of social programs but critics
increasingly complained that the antipoverty
programs were ineffective and wasteful.
Only 4 years old but the CAA network was
experiencing growing pains and lessen
commitment from President Johnson.
The Nixon years…
The Nixon years presented a strange
mixture for the EOA, OEO, and
Community Action.
Nixon attempted to develop a
guaranteed minimum income for low
income people, de-fund the
Community Action Agencies and
dismantle the Office of Economic
Opportunity.
Nixon transfers OEO programs

Nixon transfers a number of programs
from OEO to other federal departments to
administer. Also proposes no funding for
CAA section of EOA.
Polar opposites at OEO
1969-Nixon appoints Donald
Rumsfeld as Director of the
Office of Economic
Opportunity. Rumsfeld
surprises and is basically
supportive of OEO and
works to improve its
efficiency. Rumsfeld hires
Dick Cheney and Christy
Todd Whitman as
assistants. Rumsfeld
publishes CAA mission
guidance.
1973-Nixon appoints Howard
Phillips as OEO Director.
Phillips sends telegrams to
CAAs telling them to
complete affairs and close
down by June.
Phillips was unsuccessful, due
to court rulings, and the
President does not take
Phillips recommendations to
veto EOA legislation to
heart. Phillips resigns 1974.
Rumsfeld Document


Let’s look at the guidance issued by
Donald Rumsfeld on the role and
purposes of a Community Action
Agency;
Are they valid and applicable today?
Nixon side tracked.


Nixon develops Public Employment
Programs, price controls and becomes
distracted by Viet Nam and Watergate
probe. Nixon does not veto EOA but does
not support increases in funding for key
programs.
Nixon resigns and Gerald Ford becomes
President.
During President Gerald Ford’s administration, the
OEO was terminated and replaced by the
Community Services Administration. This
diminished the agency’s presence. It no longer
was in the Executive Office but was slated to be
transferred into HEW.
Ford self described himself as a domestic
moderate and fiscal conservative. The CAA were
not a priority for him and he paid more attention to
the complaints against CAAs from local politicians.
Overall funding of CAAs was basically flat or
below inflation during this period.
Community Services/ Community
Action: A rose by any other name?
Rose
Rose
Change in Legislation Title prompted
confusion about agency Mission.



The Legislation changed from
Opportunity to Services;
This may have been a compromised
national political emphasis for
survival but…
Community Action Agencies were
continued in the legislation with
original structure and role.
Problems with identity:



Many CAAs do not use the term
Community Action in their “title” or
corporate name;
are known in their community by
their programs and not their
mission;
Causing a disconnect and
undermining their resource
development efforts.
Carter years



Carter appointed Graciela Olivarez as Director of the
Community Service Administration. Olivarez was the
first woman Law graduate from Notre Dame.
The CAA network received bad press and scrutiny
during this period due to the flamboyant travel and other
practices of some CAA executive directors. Olivarez
worked to resolve the issues that were bringing
unfavorable attention and to strengthen leadership of the
local CAAs. An effort to improve planning and
accountability, GPMS was rolled out.
CAA involvement with Weatherization and solar
greenhouse projects began during this period.
A network under attack again.
Regan’s first budget intended to
eliminate CSA and funding for CAAs.
Previous attempts to eliminate the
program had not been as successful
as the Regan Administration’s effort.
Regan personally had dislike for
Legal Services and the “Great
Society Programs.” This was not
only a philosophy but resulted from
the period that Rumsfeld had been at
OEO and Regan was CA Governor.
Regan’s Omnibus
Reconciliation Act ends CSA


The House of Representatives supported Regan’s
proposed budget and zeroed out CSA and
Community Action funding.
The National Community Action Foundation, through
its director, David Bradley, and support of key
Senators, negotiated a compromise with the
Administration. The EOA was repealed, CSA was
eliminated and programs were assigned to various
federal departments. Funds in the resulting
Community Services Block Grant were to be
administered by the States and an office was created
in HHS to transfer funds to States.
Community Action Agencies Retained.
90% of the funds in the Community Services Block Grant were to
be used at the local level by CAAs.
The eligible CAAs were the same organizations previously eligible
under OEO and CSA determinations and had as their purposes
the functions assigned to CAAs by the EOA. They were
“Grandfathered.”
States had the responsibility for monitoring CAAs and could
spend up to 5% of the State’s CSBG allocation for
administrative purposes. The remaining 5% was designated for
State discretionary anti-poverty funded activities. Any portion
of the two 5% pools not spent for their purposes would revert
to the CAA eligible entities or be returned unspent.
Idealism of the 60s diminished by the
conservatism of 70s set the stage for
changes in the 80s.



Although there were many programs developed
under the “Great Society” they were not income
transfer programs. They were designed to attack
causes of poverty and provide opportunities.
In the 70s public attitudes and political attitudes
moved toward blaming the poor for their problems.
The poor were more and more portrayed as lazy and
a tax on the broad public.
Regan advocated practices that would require
people to work for their assistance and also caused
employment programs to become targeted to those
with most skills and not those with most need.
Although slow, public policy
shifts.

In the 80s and into the 90s public welfare policy and
politics became more focused on supposedly
changing values and family behaviors

The new focus became encouraging education,
marriage and work.

The safety net of AFDC was reconsidered and
increased connections to employment and
employment supports began to be developed.
Personal Responsibility becomes “catch phrase.”
The 90’s
President Bill Clinton’s
administration
implemented the most
significant changes in
welfare policy since the
Great Society.
Newt Gringrich, Speaker of
the House, supported the
largest increase in
Community Action funding
ever while supervising the
cuts in many other federal
social programs.
Through all, CAAs continued
to perform.
Though CAAs failed to be expanded by the Nixon,
Ford, Carter or Regan administrations (and fought
for their very continuation) the CAA network has
proven to be committed and adaptable.
The CAA network has been a major local implementer
of government programs but have also developed
local programs and have long standing local
community support.
CAAs continue to be service providers, social
entrepreneurs, advocates and collaborators.
Presentation created by
John A. Wilson
President, Progress Resources, Inc.
© 2004