While having a frank and open discussion with a group of bright and dedicated people on the topic of how to make Cleveland a better and more equitable place for all, an interesting and salient point was brought up: How much is enough?
When attempting to solve the difficult problems of systemic racism (which often causes poverty), drug abuse and other pathologies, the legitimate question is often asked, “Haven’t we spent enough on these problems (and peoples)?” The answer to that question can be as complicated as the problems themselves.
When government at various levels uses our tax dollars to redesign Public Square or put on a political convention, we can budget with some degree of accuracy; we pretty much know how much money it will take to complete the project. But this is not the case when attempting to solve societal problems. Human beings are far less predictable.
As far back as the Johnson Administration and its “Great Society” programs, we’ve attempted to devise strategies to lift all Americans up to middle class status, and for a variety of reasons, every effort has fallen short of that lofty goal.
Often the political climate changes, and an issue that’s been receiving adequate attention and funding falls out of favor as elected officials, who sometimes are tired of grappling with a particular problem, decide to move on to the next one before a workable solution has been formulated.
The mental health field is a glaring example of this kind of short attention span logic. In the late ’70s and early ’80s, thousands of patients were de-institutionalized when it was rightly concluded they could live among us in supervised group homes at a lower cost, while enjoying a better quality of life. But within a matter of less than a decade much of the funding for the group homes dried up, leaving an untold number of mentally challenged Americans sleeping on grates and urinating in doorways, sometimes becoming a danger to themselves and others.
Since our country has rarely stayed the course in terms of solving macro societal problems, we really don’t know how much it will cost to fix them. We just know that at some point we get tried of trying.
This is grossly unfair.
Take for example the opioid addiction crisis we’re currently facing, where the number of deaths nationwide is skyrocketing. It’s going to take a massive effort — and eventual decriminalization — to solve the problem. But in the short term, until there’s a bed available on demand for every addict, we’re not really all that serious about solving the problem. How much would that cost? We don’t know, since it’s never been done on a large enough scale to positively impact on the problem.
What we as a society do now is to rely on gut instincts, not empirical evidence, when we attempt to formulate solutions and deciding when to abandon the problem. But when we do this we are insuring that all of the funds previously spent on the problem have gone down a rat hole.
How can we know how long (or how much money it will take) to solve problems brought on by centuries of benign and overt racism? What will it take to solve the problems brought on by a failed 50-year war on drugs? How do we fix the fractured mental health system? What will all of this take in terms of dollars and commitment? We don’t know because we can’t know — there is no blueprint for success.
So, how much is enough? The answer is simple: As much as it takes to get the job done.
From Cool Cleveland correspondent Mansfield B. Frazier mansfieldfATgmail.com. Frazier’s From Behind The Wall: Commentary on Crime, Punishment, Race and the Underclass by a Prison Inmate is available again in hardback. Snag your copy and have it signed by the author by visiting http://NeighborhoodSolutionsInc.com
One Response to “MANSFIELD: How Much is Enough?”
Pete Zicari
Not everything requires a lot of money, but none of the problems will go away without time, effort and a lot of partial solutions. Hospitals could make a dent in future opioid abuse, for example, by making instruction in weaning oneself off pain pills a standard part of post-surgical procedures. Doctors could help by pointing people toward pain management-drug dependency programs when they request more pills. Insurers could help by funding the classes.