no one travels to a city or town becausenof the wonderful homeless servicesnthey’ve heard about there. People arenattracted to a certain area because theynhear of jobs, or because they like thatnarea of the country, or because a friendnor relative lives there and likes it—notnbecause of the extensive network ofnsocial services available there for homelessnpeople.nDeveloping services for the homelessnwill not create a new problem. Atnlong last, it will start to serve a localnproblem locally, instead of shifting thenburden to urban areas like Nashville.nA group of committed individualsnand churches will begin in November anlocal interfaith effort to provide overnightnshelter and meals to people whonbecome homeless in the Murfreesboronarea. This is an example of what needsnto happen in other nonurban areas. Wencannot depend on funds from sourcesnsuch as the government. Local citizensnmust take the responsibility for othernmembers of their own communitiesnwho are less fortunate, rather thannpassing it on to the large cities. Itnappears that Dan McMurry does notnagree. I’m thankful that there are folksnwho do.n— Suzie TolmienHomeless Project CoordinatornThe Mid-Cumberland CommunitynAction AgencynMurfreesboro, TNnProf. McMurrynReplies:nMs. Tolmie is absolutely right. Wencannot depend on “funds from sourcesnsuch as the government.” If we do, thisnis what we get: a push to call all sorts ofnpeople with a wide variety of needsn”homeless,” when, in fact, they aren’t.nThis push comes because “funds fromnsources such as the government” arennow used to pay Ms. Tolmie to find thenhomeless where there aren’t any.nMurfreesboro established a smallnmission, stocked an Emergency FoodnBank, and established a Clothes Closetnfor the needy long before Ms. Tolmienwas brought in as an advocate for then”homeless” and paid with “governmentnfunds.” Naturally, there are needy peoplenhere (aren’t they everywhere?) butnthere were no street people and nonhomeless — using a realistic and meaningfulndefinition of homeless. The occasionalntransient was fed — andnclothed, if need be — put up for a nightnin the mission, and sent on his way.nFrom time to time, a wandering familyngot a gas fillup and a restaurant mealnhere, and moved on.nNow, Ms. Tolmie, in her officialnposition as “definer and locator ofnhomeless persons,” has talked localnresidents into opening up sleepingnquarters in church basements and parishnhalls for poor people who arencurrently “hanging on” as best theyncan. Housing is not their current majornproblem. Certainly these people neednsomething more than a cot in St. Rosenor a snack in St. Mark’s and a trip backnto the local jail — the pick-up andndrop-off point.nIn his insightful article, “Helpingnand Hating the Homeless,” PeternMarin divides the homeless into twongroups not so much by what they havenor do not have, nor by what causednthem to become homeless, but whethernthey are seeking to survive outsidenthe system, or struggling to get back in.nThe natural drive for most ofnAmerica’s poor is to “hold on,” and ifnthey slip, to get back up. “Bouncingnback” has been as much a part ofnAmerica’s poor as beans and biscuits.nAnd now there is a fine-mesh safetynnet, giving those who slip an additionalnbounce. But a community’s social supportnsystem has traditionally actednmore like a trampoline than a safetynnet. They slip and they bounce back,nslip and bounce back. It’s not perfect,nbut it works if it’s allowed to.nThe other group that Marin singlesnout — those seeking to survive outsidenthe system — stagger to the edge of thensafety net and jump over. When theynare gathered up in the net, they searchnuntil they find another way out. Thenone group of “homeless” bounces backn(if they are allowed to), the other groupnalways wiggles free.nUnfortunately, Ms. Tolmie, andnmost other advocates, treat both groupsnexactly alike — as Rev. Carl Resner,ndirector of the Nashville Union RescuenMission and author of Cn’sis in thenStreets, puts it, “they throw blanketsnand sandwiches at them,” and innTolmie’s case, cots as well. That approachnis helpful for the escapists; it isndeadly for the seekers. What CharlesnMurray says in In Pursuit of Happinessnand Good Government about solvingnthe teacher problem applies equallynwell to the problem of the homeless:n”[T]he task in solving the . . . problemnis not to engineer solutions but to stripnaway impediments to behaviors thatnwould normally occur.” What thisnmeans for our communities is that wenshould begin aiding our needy citizensnby helping them to solve their problems,nnot to further separate themnfrom that possibility. Whether it’s ansafety net or a trampoline — if youncatch ’em they won’t bounce.nOn ‘YankeenSlavers’nnnRe Clyde Wilson’s piece (Octobern1988), I would suppose most Americansnwho supported the Confederacynwould have seen civil war as being andefense of their way of life, whichnincluded slavery, and/or their view ofnthe Constitution. Even if the RepublicannParty had had views on slavery andnits extension to which no Southernerncould object, there were m^ny reasonsnfor at least some Southerners viewing itnas a revolutionary party, and who cannsay for certain whether even under thisnscenario a war for independence mightnnot have seemed the best choice for atnleast some Southerners?n— G. HendrynToronto, CanadanCHRONICLESnis looking for its 1989nsummer intern.nExperience on a collegennewspaper or magazinenpreferred.nPlease send resumes to:nThomas Fleming, EditornChroniclesn934 North Main StreetnRockford, IL 61103nFEBRUARY 1989/5n