The 13 Biggest Lies Prop. N Backers Are Telling San Francisco Voters

The 13 Biggest Lies Prop. N Backers Are Telling San Francisco Voters


Proposition N, financed by downtown interests and championed by media darling Gavin Newsom, would cut cash assistance to San Francisco's poorest by 83%. Powerful interests are casting the next Mayor's race from the backs of homeless people and, if successful, hoping they can ride this hate campaign into office.
The Prop N campaign has disseminated more disinformation, twisted facts, and outright lies than we've ever seen -- meant to fool well-intentioned voters into thinking that Prop N will actually help homeless people.

Some highlights:

1. "Proposition N will guarantee services"
Nothing in this initiative guarantees services. It simply cuts poor people's income to underwrite the services they now get for free. The expected savings -- which may or may not be used for services -- is actually based on the assumption poor folks will flee San Francisco. If they don't leave, the City would only realize savings from the 40% of shelter residents that are CAAP recipients.

Such savings might be used to expand future services, but the initiative doesn't require the city to spend them on housing and treatment. Meanwhile, potentially 2,700 people are screwed. The savings will only house a fraction of the number of homeless people who will have their cash cut. For every person that has $300 taken from them, the city currently spends an additional $300 on top of that for their SRO master lease program.

Meanwhile, 3/4 of current recipients find housing on their own and survive on $395 a month. Newsom should be asking his rich buddies to develop housing, not finance a campaign to make poor people poorer.

2. "Services not cash - because we care." (Golden Gate Restaurant Association)
If proponents cared, they could spend all that money they raise directly on housing - not billboards and commercials for misleading voters. Deep corporate pockets should be funding services for poor people - not running campaigns to slash welfare benefits.

3. Surrounding Counties have already instituted this program and have been successful. (Channel 5, Bay , Gavin Newsom)
Not true - each of these counties have seen an increase in the number of homeless people (source: SF Legislative Analyst):
Alameda: Alameda has a small voucher program of 115 people with a capacity of 150. Prop N is a program for 2,700 and growing.
San Mateo: San Mateo County has a very costly voucher system for people who are housed. We don't have the current numbers, but when they started, they spent about $.50 for every $1 they gave out - OUCH. (Hunger and Homeless Action Coalition Coalition, 1994) Another big difference - homeless people get to save the money deducted from their checks for move-in costs.
San Jose: Offers full grants

4. Other major cities, such as Seattle, Chicago, and New York have instituted similar programs and have seen huge success.
These cites have nothing like Prop N, and all have seen huge increases in homelessness. All these counties implemented changes to save money - not save lives.
Chicago: Chicago eliminated their General Assistance payments in 1992, and presently sees more than 166,000 people becoming homeless yearly.
Seattle: Seattle gives the full grant to homeless people so they can save up for housing. They deduct the housing portion of the grant from those who are in housing but do not pay rent.
New York: What a sad state of affairs! 20,000 shelter beds and growing. Kids committing suicide rather then face NY's central intake system. The NY state legislature did propose a voucher-style program similar to Prop N, but it was never implemented. Homeless people get $137 per month, then $215 in cash for housing.

5. As a result of cash grants, there are over 100 fatal overdoses every year on San Francisco's streets. (Care Not Cash website)
San Francisco, which has avoided conducting a homeless deaths study since 1999, finds no evidence that homeless deaths in San Francisco are tied to receipt of cash assistance. A coming study to be published in the American Journal of Public Health also found no correlation between overdoses and receipt of cash assistance in San Francisco.

6. Chicago only had one homeless death, and the city officials were in an uproar. (Richmond Democratic Club, April 23, 2002)
Chicago just did their first pilot study, run by their Medical Examiner. As reported in the Chicago Tribune, during a five month period there were at least 56 deaths among homeless people, and these were those who died on the streets, not those who made it to the hospital.

7. Prop N does not take money away from the homeless, it just changes the way it is spent. (Chronicle op-ed by Gavin Newsom 7/15/02)
Prop N will take money away from homeless individuals, and these same people will not see any direct benefit from the removal of that cash. Welfare recipients do work for their money, unless they are disabled or in a job training. They would still have to work but only get paid 17% of minimum wage

8. Prop N will help address the homeless crisis (CNC website)
Prop N will actually increase homelessness. Homeless people will lose the flexibility to pay for cheap housing if it becomes available. They will no longer have the funds to pay for it - you have to have a receipt before you get the money. Instead, they will have to wait for "voucher" housing to come available from the Dept. of Human Services, which must contract with specific hotels to accept vouchers.

Individuals in "casual" housing arrangements will lose housing, because if they cannot produce a receipt, they will lose their assistance. In poor communities, where doubling and tripling up is a fact of life, many families fear eviction if landlords discover there are extra people in their homes. And many hotel operators refuse to provide receipts, so individuals living in those places will become homeless.

9. Impartial experts such as the Director of the Department of Human Services, and The Director of the Department of Public Health support this initiative.
These are not impartial supporters. They are appointed by the Mayor, the Mayor is in full support of this initiative, and they support whatever the Mayor instructs them. They are also violating law by using their positions to support initiatives.

10. All Homeless People are addicts.
That's really what the Prop N campaign has been implying all along, isn't it? The people who "come from out of town," and constant references to homeless deaths and overdoses. No data exists on how many people impacted by this initiative are suffering from addictive disorders. Prop N assumes no homeless person can manage their money, and that they are all addicts. Dr. Pablo Stewart, the one doctor supporting Prop N who is not being paid to do so, is a substance abuse treatment provider. Obviously, all his clients are addicted - but his colleagues at Haight Ashbury Free Clinic don't support his position.

11. This will go beyond fractious politics and finally address the issue of homelessness from sound public policy. (Newsom letter on website)
This is fractious politics! Prop N is directly contrary to the City' homelessness plan -- the "Continuum of Care" -- developed with buy-in from 225 service providers, homeless people, and concerned community members. Prop N creates a divisiveness that does nothing but prevent genuine efforts to solve homelessness from being implemented.

12. This will increase funding for substance abuse and mental health treatment and free up funds we can use for real health care.
Prop N will not directly create funds, nor guarantees those funds will be spent to solve homelessness.

13. The New England Journal of Medicine has found that cash-only systems cost lives. (CNC door hanger)
After a phone call to the NEJM, we discovered that they had made no such claim, and that Newsom has been using the Journal's trademark logo without their authorization - which, of course, is illegal.

At this writing a "cease and desist" letter from NEJM is on its way to Newsom's campaign - and all of Gavin's illegal door hangers will have to be destroyed.


To learn more and get involved, contact the Committee Against Increased Homelessness: http://www.nomorehomeless.org