L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 49, June 30, 1999
Death of a Small City
by Michael W. Gallagher
Special to The Libertarian Enterprise
Government constantly tells us that it is there to help the poor.
With cities, it says that it is there to help poor cities, and
therefore their residents. However, while doing all of this
promising, it sometimes forgets to admit its own participation in
urban destruction. The following is a true illustration.
Montgomery County is the richest county in Pennsylvania, and one of
the ten or twenty richest in the United States, according to the last
census. It includes part of the area known as the "Main Line", home
to members of the Dupont family, many of the Pews, (Sun Oil), and, in
general, enough "old money" to refinance the national debt. It also
includes a borough named Norristown.
Incorporated in 1824, Norristown is the county seat of Montgomery
County. It is 3.2 square miles in extent, with a population
officially listed at 30,000, and with more accurate estimates
reaching 36,0000. Sited on the Schuylkill River, Norristown was a
prosperous mill town in the last century. Of course, like most old
mill towns in the northeast, it fell on harder times after the Second
World War, as jobs went south, and later overseas. Its shopping
districts eventually lost out to shopping centers and, later, to
suburban malls. The wealthier citizens moved to places like Plymouth
Meeting, or Radnor. Still, it remained a working-class town, with
people secure in their roots in the community, proud of their homes,
and happy with their lives. The town was relatively stable, and had
chances of eventually reviving itself, as other, similar, communities
in the Philadelphia area have done. Until government destroyed the
Montgomery County, like most counties, has traditionally been run by
its more wealthy and influential members. The ruling members of the
party in power come from places like Radnor or Villanova. They do not
come from poorer towns, like Norristown Why is that a problem?
Because richer communities traditionally dump their problems on the
poorer ones. For example, police in richer towns run the vagrants out
of town, often transporting them to poorer towns, even though that is
illegal in Pennnsylvania. Of course, that sort of thing has gone on
for many decades, and only adds up to a small number of people. The
big numbers come from systematic dumping, of a kind that takes
so-called "anti-poverty" programs to arrange.
"Section 8" is the common name given to a part of the federal poverty
laws, which pays private landlords to house public housing clients.
The "client" receives a welfare voucher which entitles him or her to
receive a subsidy equal to 80% of their rent. The subsidy is paid
directly to the landlord, rather than to the client. The program is
administered by the county in which the housing exists, which also
sets the value of the subsidy the subsidy is limited by federal law
to an amount equal to 80% of the community average. The clinker in
this case, however, is that the county government determines how the
average is calculated. In Montgomery County, the county itself is the
sample "community". In other words, they take the average of rents in
the entire county, and set the subsidy limit at 80% of that average.
So, a landlord in a town where rents are lower can actually get more
for his or her property from Section 8 than from the open market.
Further, there's the question of where the community and county allow
properties to register for Section 8. In Montgomery County, a county
thousands of square miles in extent and with hundreds of thousands of
citizens, more than 50% of the Section 8-approved properties are
located in the 3.2 square-mile area of Norristown. Almost all of the
rest are in two other towns, Pottstown and Lansdale. If someone falls
on hard times while living in one of the wealthier communities and
applies for Section 8 benefits, they are quietly told to move to
Further, since the county administers the other anti-poverty
programs, and since county leaders do not want them in their own back
yards, they put them somewhere else. Guess where. So Norristown, and
to a lesser extent, Pottstown and Lansdale, get all of the welfare
offices, the legal aid offices, the "anti-poverty" programs, etc. So
the clients and potential clients have an even greater reason to
settle around Norristown. So many things that others do not want have
been put in Norristown that someone nicknamed the borough
"Nimbytown", i.e., everything that someone said "Not In My Back Yard"
about, ended up in there.
Because of all of this, the children with the most problems end up in
the Norristown Area School District. The citizens most likely to
become involved with the police (and thus drive up the cost of police
services) end up in Norristown. Crime increases almost exponentially.
Drug dealing has become almost rampant in the business districts
after dark, as has prostitution. (There are almost no real businesses
still open after dark in the Borough, with the exception of a few
pizza shops and mini-marts and a lot of bars.) In general, the
business districts are failing. Though Norristown is the county seat,
with the county courthouse and offices here, even law firms are
leaving for the outlying communities. Individuals who had lived in
the Borough their entire lives, whose families have lived there for
generations, became afraid, and moved away. Real estate prices have
dropped in the borough over the last ten years, (while going up in
nearby communities), making more properties available for "investors"
(read "slumlords") to purchase at bargain rates, and subdivide and
turn into cheap apartments and rooming houses many eligible for
Section 8, of course. It becomes a vicious circle. The heads of
county government are happy, of course. All of the problems they wish
to avoid at home they dump in Norristown. So, government has worked
for them. They have used the power of government to make their own
lives more comfortable and secure. Of course, the people of
Norristown have seen their homes drop in value; they are afraid to go
out after dark; they have had part of their lives stolen from them.
I will be the first to admit that things like Section 8 were created
for all of the best reasons. It was done with a sense of charity, and
a desire to help people. However, intent matters not; results count.
The results are that poor people have been concentrated largely in a
few towns, taking them away from potential jobs and
opportunities-which they want just as much as you do. Because a
proportion of the poor are, statistically, more likely to become
involved in crime, such as drug use, the crime rates in those towns
go up. There is not enough money for schools, and so education of the
young suffers (Pennsylvania still funds their public schools
primarily through local real estate taxes). Though real estate prices
have gone down, taxes and user fees for resident homeowners have
continued to go up, to try to fund services, (primarily police and
schools). More residents give up and move away if they can manage to
sell their homes, and absorb the losses involved. Business and wage
taxes go up even more, so more businesses leave. You develop a
vicious cycle of tax increases, followed by income losses, as
businesses and individuals move out. But the wealthy and powerful do
not have the poor in their neighborhoods and schools. They do not
have to increase their taxes, to pay for the education of the poor.
They do not have to pay to put more police on the streets, to prevent
increases in crime. (In fact, one of the richer townships in the
area, Worcester Township, does not even have a police department,
preferring to have the State Police protect them, for free). In
places like Montgomery County the "anti-poverty" programs like
Section 8 have helped to ghettoize the poor, and insulate the
powerful from the results. And because they are not directly
affected, those in power have no interest in changing the status quo.
And so Norristown slowly dies. And nobody there wins.
to return to the previous article, or
Table of Contents
to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 49, June 30, 1999.