Session: 123456789101112131415161718         Page 666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889909192939496979899 of 617

grounds that somehow or other the middle class values will rub off on the economically deprived is just outrageously wrong. It does not happen in my judgment. What happens is that the middle class, rightly or wrongly and I think rightly, recognizes that the low-income people, particularly those on welfare, have a different style of life, different feelings, a great deal of animosity, will ultimately destroy their neighborhood, cause physical attacks on their kids, the elderly and so forth, and they move out -- the middle class moves out, and ultimately that neighborhood becomes a slum. Forest Hills is the best illustration -- we could talk about that, too.

But you can't say these things today, and I'm trying very hard to say them, and I'm saying them rather softly, because my district happens to be a very radical district, and they don't like to hear this, but they don't want to have low-income projects in their area. Oh, no. The best thing that Procaccino said (and he was a number one dope) was when he referred to the people in Manhattan and maybe on the east side particularly as limousine liberals, and they are -- no question about it. They would impose standards on others that they don't want for themselves, for some philosophical concept that they'd like to see carried out. That's where we are.

Just one other thing with respect to parochial education and private schools: we have laws which say that they cannot discriminate on the basis of race. Indeed, in the city of New York the parochial schools are more integrated than are the public schools. That is to say, percentage-wise there is a better mix