譯/聶雅真 袁兵

紐約皇后區(qū)麥斯佩斯街區(qū)的一些居民去年聽說市政府已決定將當(dāng)?shù)匾患屹e館改建成擁有110個床位的收容所時，一點(diǎn)兒都高興不起來。他們連續(xù)幾個月夜間在這家賓館前抗議，還在該賓館老板家和分管流浪者事務(wù)的專員家外面示威。市政府不堪壓力，最后不得不稍作讓步，將賓館僅做部分改建?，F(xiàn)在，只有30個無家可歸者被安置在該賓館。這些人都有工作。

[2] 1979年，一位無家可歸的老兵因?yàn)檎疀]有為他提供住所而成功起訴了市政當(dāng)局。自那以后，政府就承擔(dān)起為無力置家者提供住所的法律責(zé)任。（紐約州憲法規(guī)定：“幫助、照顧和扶助有需要的人是公眾關(guān)切的大事，應(yīng)由政府及所屬部門負(fù)責(zé)。”）近年來，無家可歸的人增多了。魯?shù)稀ぶ炖麃喣?994年任市長時，有2.4萬人住在收容所；邁克·布隆伯格2002年出任市長時，收容所收容了3.1萬人；比爾·德布拉西奧2014年當(dāng)市長時，住在收容所里的人數(shù)為5.15萬人；現(xiàn)在，收容所里的人數(shù)已增加到約6.3萬人。

[3]這比大蕭條以來的任何時候都要多，但這種比較具有誤導(dǎo)性。無家可歸的定義已經(jīng)改變。上述數(shù)字不包括露宿街頭的人數(shù)，因?yàn)樗麄冸y以準(zhǔn)確統(tǒng)計。事實(shí)上，紐約露宿街頭的人比許多小城市要少，但無家可歸的人卻多得多。洛杉磯居次，無家可歸者有4.4萬人。后面依序是西雅圖（1.07萬）、圣迭戈（8700）、華盛頓特區(qū)（8350）、舊金山（7000）。

[4] 2月末，德布拉西奧啟動了一項(xiàng)計劃，名為“扭轉(zhuǎn)無家可歸”，并宣布要在全市開辦90所新的收容所。他計劃到2023年不再把賓館當(dāng)作收容所，到2021年全部取消群居屋（由政府支付租金的私人公寓）。群居公寓并不便宜，而且居住狀況往往很差。他的目標(biāo)是，五年內(nèi)將收容所的總?cè)藬?shù)削減2500人。他承認(rèn)解決無家可歸者問題將是一場“持久戰(zhàn)”，并補(bǔ)充說，他認(rèn)為這個問題無法得到解決。

[5]這可能使人想起20世紀(jì)80年代紐約市對犯罪事件聽之任之的態(tài)度。針對這一問題，有人提出了一些建議，諸如對面臨迫遷者增加法定補(bǔ)助，或者新增一種房租補(bǔ)貼來幫助迫遷者留在自己家中。以上是州議員安德魯·海韋希的構(gòu)想，市長和幾十位議員都表示了支持。但是，除非房租大幅下降,或者制訂計劃建造更多住房，或兩者兼顧，否則紐約市無家可歸問題很難解決。

[6]在紐約，不用走多遠(yuǎn)就會看到一些人露宿街頭或沿街乞討，當(dāng)?shù)鼐用駥Υ撕苁遣粷M。一半以上的紐約選民說，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)大街上、地鐵站和公園里的無家可歸者越來越多。3月初，昆尼皮亞克大學(xué)做的民意調(diào)查顯示，96%的紐約人認(rèn)為無家可歸問題是個嚴(yán)重問題。其中超過70%的人還認(rèn)為市政府在解決無家可歸問題方面做得太少。然而，做得多意味著要紐約人繳更多稅，同意造更多房屋，接受在他們的街區(qū)建收容所，收容無家可歸者。正如麥斯佩斯街區(qū)那樣，那種做法難以為居民接受。 □

Some in Maspeth, a neighborhood in New York City’s Queens, were not at all pleased when they heard last year that City Hall had decided to convert a local hotel into a 110-bed homeless shelter. For months they held nightly protests in front of the hotel. They demonstrated outside the homes of the hotel’s owner and of the city’s homelessness commissioner. Eventually they wore down City Hall, which backed down a bit from a total conversion.Only 30 homeless men are housed in the hotel now. All of them have jobs.

[2] Since 1979, when a homeless veteran of war successfully sued the city for failing to provide him shelter, the city has had a legal duty to house those unable to afford a home. (New York’s state constitution says that “the aid,care and support of the needy are public concerns and shall be provided by the state and by such of its subdivisions.”)In recent years the number of homeless people has grown. When Rudy Giuliani entered City Hall in 1994, 24,000 peo-ple lived in shelters. About 31,000 lived in them when Mike Bloomberg became mayor in 2002. When Bill de Blasio entered City Hall in 2014, 51,500 did.The number of homeless people now in shelters is around 63,000.

[3] That is more than at any time since the Great Depression, though the comparison is misleading. The de finition of homelessness has changed. These figures do not include the numbers living rough on the streets, who are hard to count accurately. New York in fact has fewer rough sleepers than many small cities but many more homeless people.Los Angeles comes next, with 44,000 homeless, followed by Seattle (10,700),San Diego (8,700), Washington, DC(8,350) and San Francisco (7,000).

[4] Mr de Blasio unveiled a plan called “Turning the Tide on Homelessness” at the end of February, and declared his intention to open 90 new homeless shelters throughout the city.He plans to end the use of hotels by 2023 and to stop using cluster sites, private apartments paid for by the city, by 2021. Cluster apartments are not cheap and are often in poor condition. The mayor aims to reduce the overall shelter population by 2,500 over five years. He conceded that combating homelessness will be a “l(fā)ong, long battle”, and added that he could not see an end to the problem.

[5] That may seem reminiscent of the city’s fatalistic attitude to crime in the 1980’s. There are a few ideas around, such as increasing legal aid to those facing eviction, or creating a rent subsidy designed to help people facing eviction to stay in their homes. That is the brainchild of Andrew Hevesi, a state assemblyman; it has the backing of the mayor and dozens of state lawmakers.But short of a steep decline in rents, or an extensive programme to build more housing, or both, it is hard to see the city fixing its homeless problem.

[6] New Yorkers, who do not have to walk far to see someone sleeping rough or panhandling, are not happy about this. More than half the city’s voters say they are seeing more homeless people on the streets, in the subway and in parks. A poll by Quinnipiac at the beginning of March showed that 96%of New Yorkers think homelessness is a serious problem. More than 70 of them also think the city is doing too little to help. Yet doing more would require some combination of New Yorkers paying more tax, allowing more construction and welcoming homeless shelters and their occupants into their neighborhoods. As the experience of Maspeth shows, that can be a hard sell. ■