A handful of black audience members at a townhall meeting in St. Petersburg, Florida interrupted a speech by Barack Obama and held up signs that said, "What About the Black Community, Obama?" and they ask a good question. A better question is "What about people living in poverty, politicians?" Like it or not, the issues of color are intertwined with poverty, though not exclusively.
To make it more interesting, the government groups the poor into two sectors: the "working poor”—persons who, during the year, spent 27 weeks or more in the labor force (working or looking for work), but whose incomes still fell below the official poverty level and the non-working poor. The working poor made up some 7.7 million accounted for Americans in 2005 out of the total of 37 million living in poverty.
Some statistics:
Of the working poor (16 or older), 5,477,000 are White, 1,694,000 are Black, 298,000 are Asian, and 1,983,000 are Hispanic.
Of the working poor (16 or older), 29% have attained less than a high school diploma: Whites 31%, Blacks 26%, Asian 19%, Hispanic 55%.
From "A Profile of the Working Poor, 2005"
All the "Yes We Can" in the world won't add up to much, if the void between the poorest among us and the wealthiest is not closed. A liveable wage, access to health care, improvements to education in the poorest districts, promoting reduced-cost workforce childcare, and more access to affordable, safe housing are all means to closing the gap.
Showing posts with label Plan to abate poverty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Plan to abate poverty. Show all posts
Saturday, August 2
Wednesday, January 2
John Edwards' Plan to End Poverty in 30 Years
From Street Sense
Street Sense asked major presidential candidates from both parties six questions to learn how they would combat poverty if elected president. Democrat John Edwards, the only candidate to respond by our deadline, explains.
What have you done to help people who are homeless or on the brink of becoming homeless in your community?
I have organized thousands of Americans in all 50 states to join One Corps, an organization connected to my campaign that gets people involved in helping make a difference and actually doing something and taking action. Earlier this year, for instance, One Corps sponsored a National Poverty Action Week to encourage members to volunteer at homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other organizations that provide services to homeless people and to people whose housing situation is insecure. In my own community in North Carolina, I served on the board of directors of Urban Ministries, an interfaith organization that supports a wide range of services and outreach – including food, shelter and counseling – to people in need.
What is the single most important thing you will do to end homelessness if you are elected president?
While the causes of homelessness are complex, many of them are tied to poverty. The fact that nearly 37 million Americans wake up every day in poverty – 5 million more than when George W. Bush took office – is a national disgrace. I believe that what we do about this issue says everything about our character as a nation. That’s why I have challenged America to set an ambitious goal that could fundamentally change our country: eliminate poverty within 30 years and reduce it by one-third within a decade. To do this, we will need to make significant investments to reward work, expand opportunity and strengthen families. Because the issue of homelessness is too often related to mental illness, I will also create a universal health care system that treats mental illnesses every bit as seriously as physical illnesses.
More of the article here.
Street Sense asked major presidential candidates from both parties six questions to learn how they would combat poverty if elected president. Democrat John Edwards, the only candidate to respond by our deadline, explains.
What have you done to help people who are homeless or on the brink of becoming homeless in your community?
I have organized thousands of Americans in all 50 states to join One Corps, an organization connected to my campaign that gets people involved in helping make a difference and actually doing something and taking action. Earlier this year, for instance, One Corps sponsored a National Poverty Action Week to encourage members to volunteer at homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other organizations that provide services to homeless people and to people whose housing situation is insecure. In my own community in North Carolina, I served on the board of directors of Urban Ministries, an interfaith organization that supports a wide range of services and outreach – including food, shelter and counseling – to people in need.
What is the single most important thing you will do to end homelessness if you are elected president?
While the causes of homelessness are complex, many of them are tied to poverty. The fact that nearly 37 million Americans wake up every day in poverty – 5 million more than when George W. Bush took office – is a national disgrace. I believe that what we do about this issue says everything about our character as a nation. That’s why I have challenged America to set an ambitious goal that could fundamentally change our country: eliminate poverty within 30 years and reduce it by one-third within a decade. To do this, we will need to make significant investments to reward work, expand opportunity and strengthen families. Because the issue of homelessness is too often related to mental illness, I will also create a universal health care system that treats mental illnesses every bit as seriously as physical illnesses.
More of the article here.
Thursday, July 19
Rural/Urban: Two Views on Fighting Poverty
While I have been critical of Dems other than John Edwards on their plans to address poverty, the report by truthout's Scott Galindez, was informative with regard to Barack Obama. I think he has a good plan to address urban poverty, but his plan does not take into account the rural poor. Johnson County, for example, has a poverty rate of 15% with 7.7% living below 50% of the poverty line. Most of those people in poverty live in the rural/unincorporated parts of the county. Edwards plan takes into account all persons living in poverty.
t r u t h o u t Report By Scott Galindez
Thursday 19 July 2007
According to census figures, just under 13 percent of the US population lives in poverty. The American middle class is vastly larger and middle-class Americans, unlike poor Americans, have time and money to give to political campaigns - which is why most presidential campaigns prefer to champion middle-class causes, while paying only lip service to the poor.
That is not the case for the campaigns of former Senator John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama. Edwards recently went on an 11 city, anti-poverty tour, while Obama delivered a major policy speech on the urban poor.
Focusing on poverty issues is not new to either candidate. Obama worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, and Edwards, following the 2004 election, focused his energies on fighting against economic inequities.
Edwards and the Two Americas
In the 2004 Presidential primaries, John Edwards was languishing in the polls. He then sharpened his message; here is an excerpt from the speech that may have turned his campaign around:
"Today, under George W. Bush, there are two Americas, not one: One America that does the work, another America that reaps the reward. One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks. One America that will do anything to leave its children a better life, another America that never has to do a thing, because its children are already set for life. One America, middle-class America, whose needs Washington has long forgotten, another America - narrow-interest America - whose very wish is Washington's command. One America that is struggling to get by, another America that can buy anything it wants, even Congress and a president."
This time around, Edwards isn't playing it safe and referring only to the middle class. He launched his campaign in New Orleans's lower ninth ward; there were no balloons, no loud music, and there weren't hundreds of supporters with colorful signs. Edwards was in jeans, wearing work boots and gloves. He spoke to reporters while taking a break from cleaning up the front yard of a women's house that was damaged by Katrina. Behind him were kids wearing "One America" t-shirts.
Now a little over seven months later, Edwards returned to New Orleans to launch what the campaign is calling his "Road to One America Tour" which went to 11 cities over three days.
According to Heather McGhee, a domestic policy adviser to Edwards, they visited the home of Mrs. Sammie Henley who hosted Dr. King in 1968: "Her house was surrounded by flood waters, and Dr. King had to paddle a boat to her front porch. He famously described places like Marks as 'an island of poverty' surrounded by an ocean of American wealth. Unfortunately, it certainly still feels that way today."
Mr. Edwards's campaign platform calls for reducing the number of Americans living in poverty by 12 million over the next decade and wiping out poverty entirely within 30 years. He also recently called for raising the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2012, a proposal that goes beyond a law recently signed by President Bush raising it from $5.15 to $7.50 over two years. To view Edwards plan go to http://johnedwards.com/issues/poverty/.
Obama Would Create White House Office on Urban Policy
Senator Barack Obama worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where he said he learned firsthand "urban poverty is more than just a function of not having enough in your pocketbooks. It's also a matter of where you live - in some of our inner-city neighborhoods, poverty is difficult to escape because it's isolating and it's everywhere."
On Wednesday, Senator Barack Obama unveiled his plan to fight urban poverty. Obama pledged to appoint a Director of Urban Policy who would report directly to the president and coordinate all federal urban programs. Obama argued that today, government programs aimed at strengthening metropolitan areas are spread across the federal government - including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, Department of Labor and Department of Commerce - with insufficient coordination or strategy. He pledged to create a White House Office of Urban Policy to develop a strategy for metropolitan America and to ensure that all federal dollars targeted to urban areas are effectively spent on the highest-impact programs.
Obama went on to make specific proposals that you can read here.
He opened his speech with his own version of the two Americas:
"We stand not ten miles from the seat of power in the most affluent nation on Earth. Decisions are made on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue that shape lives and set the course of history. With the stroke of a pen, billions are spent on programs and policies; on tax breaks for those who didn't need them and a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. Debates rage and accusations fly and at the end of each day, the petty sniping is what lights up the evening news.
And yet, here, on the other side of the river, every other child in Anacostia lives below the poverty line. Too many do not graduate and too many more do not find work. Some join gangs, and others fall to their gunfire.
The streets here are close to our capital, but far from the people it represents. These Americans cannot hire lobbyists to roam the halls of Congress on their behalf, and they cannot write thousand-dollar campaign checks to make their voices heard. They suffer most from a politics that has been tipped in favor of those with the most money, and influence, and power."
Different Approaches
While there are a lot of similarities in the two plans, there is one major difference: Edwards argues providing vouchers for families to move out of impoverished communities could relieve the concentration of poverty in certain communities.
Obama argues that will only leave people behind. Obama would focus on fixing our broken urban centers.
While both arguments have merits and critics, one thing both candidates have in common is a commitment to ending poverty. What remains to be seen is if these issues will resonate with the American voters.
t r u t h o u t Report By Scott Galindez
Thursday 19 July 2007
According to census figures, just under 13 percent of the US population lives in poverty. The American middle class is vastly larger and middle-class Americans, unlike poor Americans, have time and money to give to political campaigns - which is why most presidential campaigns prefer to champion middle-class causes, while paying only lip service to the poor.
That is not the case for the campaigns of former Senator John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama. Edwards recently went on an 11 city, anti-poverty tour, while Obama delivered a major policy speech on the urban poor.
Focusing on poverty issues is not new to either candidate. Obama worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, and Edwards, following the 2004 election, focused his energies on fighting against economic inequities.
Edwards and the Two Americas
In the 2004 Presidential primaries, John Edwards was languishing in the polls. He then sharpened his message; here is an excerpt from the speech that may have turned his campaign around:
"Today, under George W. Bush, there are two Americas, not one: One America that does the work, another America that reaps the reward. One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks. One America that will do anything to leave its children a better life, another America that never has to do a thing, because its children are already set for life. One America, middle-class America, whose needs Washington has long forgotten, another America - narrow-interest America - whose very wish is Washington's command. One America that is struggling to get by, another America that can buy anything it wants, even Congress and a president."
This time around, Edwards isn't playing it safe and referring only to the middle class. He launched his campaign in New Orleans's lower ninth ward; there were no balloons, no loud music, and there weren't hundreds of supporters with colorful signs. Edwards was in jeans, wearing work boots and gloves. He spoke to reporters while taking a break from cleaning up the front yard of a women's house that was damaged by Katrina. Behind him were kids wearing "One America" t-shirts.
Now a little over seven months later, Edwards returned to New Orleans to launch what the campaign is calling his "Road to One America Tour" which went to 11 cities over three days.
According to Heather McGhee, a domestic policy adviser to Edwards, they visited the home of Mrs. Sammie Henley who hosted Dr. King in 1968: "Her house was surrounded by flood waters, and Dr. King had to paddle a boat to her front porch. He famously described places like Marks as 'an island of poverty' surrounded by an ocean of American wealth. Unfortunately, it certainly still feels that way today."
Mr. Edwards's campaign platform calls for reducing the number of Americans living in poverty by 12 million over the next decade and wiping out poverty entirely within 30 years. He also recently called for raising the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2012, a proposal that goes beyond a law recently signed by President Bush raising it from $5.15 to $7.50 over two years. To view Edwards plan go to http://johnedwards.com/issues/poverty/.
Obama Would Create White House Office on Urban Policy
Senator Barack Obama worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where he said he learned firsthand "urban poverty is more than just a function of not having enough in your pocketbooks. It's also a matter of where you live - in some of our inner-city neighborhoods, poverty is difficult to escape because it's isolating and it's everywhere."
On Wednesday, Senator Barack Obama unveiled his plan to fight urban poverty. Obama pledged to appoint a Director of Urban Policy who would report directly to the president and coordinate all federal urban programs. Obama argued that today, government programs aimed at strengthening metropolitan areas are spread across the federal government - including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, Department of Labor and Department of Commerce - with insufficient coordination or strategy. He pledged to create a White House Office of Urban Policy to develop a strategy for metropolitan America and to ensure that all federal dollars targeted to urban areas are effectively spent on the highest-impact programs.
Obama went on to make specific proposals that you can read here.
He opened his speech with his own version of the two Americas:
"We stand not ten miles from the seat of power in the most affluent nation on Earth. Decisions are made on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue that shape lives and set the course of history. With the stroke of a pen, billions are spent on programs and policies; on tax breaks for those who didn't need them and a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. Debates rage and accusations fly and at the end of each day, the petty sniping is what lights up the evening news.
And yet, here, on the other side of the river, every other child in Anacostia lives below the poverty line. Too many do not graduate and too many more do not find work. Some join gangs, and others fall to their gunfire.
The streets here are close to our capital, but far from the people it represents. These Americans cannot hire lobbyists to roam the halls of Congress on their behalf, and they cannot write thousand-dollar campaign checks to make their voices heard. They suffer most from a politics that has been tipped in favor of those with the most money, and influence, and power."
Different Approaches
While there are a lot of similarities in the two plans, there is one major difference: Edwards argues providing vouchers for families to move out of impoverished communities could relieve the concentration of poverty in certain communities.
Obama argues that will only leave people behind. Obama would focus on fixing our broken urban centers.
While both arguments have merits and critics, one thing both candidates have in common is a commitment to ending poverty. What remains to be seen is if these issues will resonate with the American voters.
Time For Poverty to Eradicated
According to Time
It [Poverty] is certainly something most politicians don't talk about and most voters don't ask about. Democrats with national aspirations have been avoiding the issue for the last quarter century or so, since Ronald Reagan cast them as the party of welfare-queen-coddling big gubment. But with economic anxiety, inequality and private equity billionaires grabbing national attention, [Jonh] Edwards believes all that might be changing. Barack Obama gives a speech on poverty this week. Hillary Clinton has assailed trickle-down economics without the trickle. But no other candidate is talking about poverty the way Edwards does — at length and to the exclusion of all other subjects for three long days. From time to time he tries to link the problems of the poor to the vulnerability of the middle class at large, touting, for instance, his plan for universal health care. ("It's not just about the poor," he says in one speech during the tour. "Everybody's at risk. Everybody's vulnerable.") But mostly — remarkably — he avoids that broader argument and focuses on costly programs to help the truly impoverished: one million WPA-style "stepping-stone" jobs, guaranteed paid sick leave for everyone, a minimum wage that isn't just raised to $9.50 but indexed so it goes up automatically. More
It [Poverty] is certainly something most politicians don't talk about and most voters don't ask about. Democrats with national aspirations have been avoiding the issue for the last quarter century or so, since Ronald Reagan cast them as the party of welfare-queen-coddling big gubment. But with economic anxiety, inequality and private equity billionaires grabbing national attention, [Jonh] Edwards believes all that might be changing. Barack Obama gives a speech on poverty this week. Hillary Clinton has assailed trickle-down economics without the trickle. But no other candidate is talking about poverty the way Edwards does — at length and to the exclusion of all other subjects for three long days. From time to time he tries to link the problems of the poor to the vulnerability of the middle class at large, touting, for instance, his plan for universal health care. ("It's not just about the poor," he says in one speech during the tour. "Everybody's at risk. Everybody's vulnerable.") But mostly — remarkably — he avoids that broader argument and focuses on costly programs to help the truly impoverished: one million WPA-style "stepping-stone" jobs, guaranteed paid sick leave for everyone, a minimum wage that isn't just raised to $9.50 but indexed so it goes up automatically. More
Wednesday, July 18
Join the One Corps
As John Edwards retraces the steps of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King in the South this week on his "Road to One America tour", he reminds us all that we can help alleviate poverty in our own communities by becoming members of his One Corp. Johnson County Has one, but you can find one in your area by going to the One America blog site and signing up.
Edwards is the only candidate focused on the issues that can make a real difference in ending poverty in our country: a living minimum wage, health care for all, support for union organization and negotiation.
For our country to live up to its values, we need all Americans to be in the game.
Edwards is the only candidate focused on the issues that can make a real difference in ending poverty in our country: a living minimum wage, health care for all, support for union organization and negotiation.
For our country to live up to its values, we need all Americans to be in the game.
Monday, July 16
Road to One America Tour Begins in New Orleans
Update: Visit NPR for more on poverty.
From the Times-Picayune
Until Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards drove onto Delery Street Sunday night, the three children had been tossing a football in front of their grandmother's FEMA trailer. Flip-flops slapping on the concrete street, they ran down Delery, toward the moving huddle of cameras topped by three big fuzzy boom microphones.
"Who is he?" they asked, pointing at Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, who calmly walked in the eye of the huddle with Tanya Harris, an activist with ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
Just as the light was fading, the former North Carolina senator arrived at Delery Street in the Lower 9th Ward with two vanfuls of national and foreign reporters. The lightning-quick visit to Delery, followed by a tour of the nearby Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Charter School, were the first stops in a three-day, eight-state "Road to One America Tour" that will focus on poverty in America, one of the senator's key issues. More
From the Times-Picayune
Until Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards drove onto Delery Street Sunday night, the three children had been tossing a football in front of their grandmother's FEMA trailer. Flip-flops slapping on the concrete street, they ran down Delery, toward the moving huddle of cameras topped by three big fuzzy boom microphones.
"Who is he?" they asked, pointing at Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, who calmly walked in the eye of the huddle with Tanya Harris, an activist with ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
Just as the light was fading, the former North Carolina senator arrived at Delery Street in the Lower 9th Ward with two vanfuls of national and foreign reporters. The lightning-quick visit to Delery, followed by a tour of the nearby Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Charter School, were the first stops in a three-day, eight-state "Road to One America Tour" that will focus on poverty in America, one of the senator's key issues. More
Monday, May 7
I'm a Soldier in the War on Poverty
"Nothing from nothing leaves nothing", sang the late Billy Preston.
From the Center for American Progress
Consider the following facts:
One in eight Americans now lives in poverty. A family of four is considered poor if the family’s income is below $19,971—a bar far below what most people believe a family needs to get by. Still, using this measure, 12.6 percent of all Americans were poor in 2005, and more than 90 million people (31 percent of all Americans) had incomes below 200 percent of federal poverty thresholds.
Millions of Americans will spend at least one year in poverty at some point in their lives. One third of all Americans will experience poverty within a 13-year period. In that period, one in 10 Americans are poor for most of the time, and one in 20 are poor for 10 or more years.
Poverty in the United States is far higher than in many other developed nations. At the turn of the 21st century, the United States ranked 24th among 25 countries when measuring the share of the population below 50 percent of median income.
Inequality has reached record highs. The richest 1 percent of Americans in 2005 held the largest share of the nation’s income (19 percent) since 1929. At the same time, the poorest 20 percent of Americans held only 3.4 percent of the nation’s income.
It does not have to be this way. Our nation need not tolerate persistent poverty alongside great wealth.
The United States should set a national goal of cutting poverty in half over the next 10 years. A strategy to cut poverty in half should be guided by four principles:
(1) Promote Decent Work. People should work and work should pay enough to ensure that workers and their families can avoid poverty, meet basic needs, and save for the future.
(2) Provide Opportunity for All. Children should grow up in conditions that maximize their opportunities for success; adults should have opportunities throughout their lives to connect to work, get more education, live in a good neighborhood, and move up in the workforce.
(3) Ensure Economic Security. Americans should not fall into poverty when they cannot work or work is unavailable, unstable, or pays so little that they cannot make ends meet.
(4) Help People Build Wealth. All Americans should have the opportunity to build assets that allow them to weather periods of flux and volatility, and to have the resources that may be essential to advancement and upward mobility.
We recommend 12 key steps to cut poverty in half:
1. Raise and index the minimum wage to half the average hourly wage. At $5.15, the federal minimum wage is at its lowest level in real terms since 1956. The federal minimum wage was once 50 percent of the average wage but is now 30 percent of that wage. Congress should restore the minimum wage to 50 percent of the average wage, about $8.40 an hour in 2006. Doing so would help nearly 5 million poor workers and nearly 10 million other low-income workers.
2. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. As an earnings supplement for low-income working families, the EITC raises incomes and helps families build assets. The Child Tax Credit provides a tax credit of up to $1,000 per child, but provides no help to the poorest families. We recommend tripling the EITC for childless workers and expanding help to larger working families. We recommend making the Child Tax Credit available to all low- and moderate-income families. Doing so would move as many as 5 million people out of poverty.
3. Promote unionization by enacting the Employee Free Choice Act. The Employee Free Choice Act would require employers to recognize a union after a majority of workers signs cards authorizing union representation and establish stronger penalties for violation of employee rights. The increased union representation made possible by the Act would lead to better jobs and less poverty for American workers.
4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families and promote early education for all. We propose that the federal and state governments guarantee child care help to families with incomes below about $40,000 a year, with expanded tax help to higher-earning families. At the same time, states should be encouraged to improve the quality of early education and broaden access for all children. Our child care expansion would raise employment among low-income parents and help nearly 3 million parents and children escape poverty.
5. Create 2 million new “opportunity” housing vouchers, and promote equitable development in and around central cities. Nearly 8 million Americans live in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty where at least 40 percent of residents are poor. Our nation should seek to end concentrated poverty and economic segregation, and promote regional equity and inner-city revitalization. We propose that over the next 10 years the federal government fund 2 million new “opportunity vouchers” designed to help people live in opportunity-rich areas. Any new affordable housing should be in communities with employment opportunities and high-quality public services, or in gentrifying communities. These housing policies should be part of a broader effort to pursue equitable development strategies in regional and local planning efforts, including efforts to improve schools, create affordable housing, assure physical security, and enhance neighborhood amenities.
6. Connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth with school and work. About 1.7 million poor youth ages 16 to 24 were out of school and out of work in 2005. We recommend that the federal government restore Youth Opportunity Grants to help the most disadvantaged communities and expand funding for effective and promising youth programs—with the goal of reaching 600,000 poor disadvantaged youth through these efforts. We propose a new Upward Pathway program to offer low-income youth opportunities to participate in service and training in fields that are in high-demand and provide needed public services.
7. Simplify and expand Pell Grants and make higher education accessible to residents of each state. Low-income youth are much less likely to attend college than their higher income peers, even among those of comparable abilities. Pell Grants play a crucial role for lower-income students. We propose to simplify the Pell grant application process, gradually raise Pell Grants to reach 70 percent of the average costs of attending a four-year public institution, and encourage institutions to do more to raise student completion rates. As the federal government does its part, states should develop strategies to make postsecondary education affordable for all residents, following promising models already underway in a number of states.
8. Help former prisoners find stable employment and reintegrate into their communities. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. We urge all states to develop comprehensive reentry services aimed at reintegrating former prisoners into their communities with full-time, consistent employment.
9. Ensure equity for low-wage workers in the Unemployment Insurance system. Only about 35 percent of the unemployed, and a smaller share of unemployed low-wage workers, receive unemployment insurance benefits. We recommend that states (with federal help) reform “monetary eligibility” rules that screen out low-wage workers, broaden eligibility for part-time workers and workers who have lost employment as a result of compelling family circumstances, and allow unemployed workers to use periods of unemployment as a time to upgrade their skills and qualifications.
10. Modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a coordinated system that helps workers and families. A well-functioning safety net should help people get into or return to work and ensure a decent level of living for those who cannot work or are temporarily between jobs. Our current system fails to do so. We recommend that governments at all levels simplify and improve benefits access for working families and improve services to individuals with disabilities. The Food Stamp Program should be strengthened to improve benefits, eligibility, and access. And the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program should be reformed to shift its focus from cutting caseloads to helping needy families find sustainable employment.
11. Reduce the high costs of being poor and increase access to financial services. Despite having less income, lower-income families often pay more than middle and high-income families for the same consumer products. We recommend that the federal and state governments should address the foreclosure crisis through expanded mortgage assistance programs and by new federal legislation to curb unscrupulous practices. And we propose that the federal government establish a $50 million Financial Fairness Innovation Fund to support state efforts to broaden access to mainstream goods and financial services in predominantly low-income communities.
12. Expand and simplify the Saver’s Credit to encourage saving for education, homeownership, and retirement. For many families, saving for purposes such as education, a home, or a small business is key to making economic progress. We propose that the federal “Saver’s Credit” be reformed to make it fully refundable. This Credit should also be broadened to apply to other appropriate savings vehicles intended to foster asset accumulation, with consideration given to including individual development accounts, children’s saving accounts, and college savings plans.
Our recommendations would cut poverty in half. The Urban Institute, which modeled the implementation of one set of our recommendations, estimates that four of our steps would reduce poverty by 26 percent, bringing us more than halfway toward our goal. Among their findings:
Taken together, our minimum wage, EITC, child credit, and child care recommendations would reduce poverty by 26 percent. This would mean 9.4 million fewer people in poverty and a national poverty rate of 9.1 percent—the lowest in recorded U.S. history.
The racial poverty gap would be narrowed: White poverty would fall from 8.7 percent to 7 percent. Poverty among African Americans would fall from 21.4 percent to 15.6 percent. Hispanic poverty would fall from 21.4 percent to 12.9 percent and poverty for all others would fall from 12.7 percent to 10.3 percent.
Child poverty and extreme poverty would both fall: Child poverty would drop by 41 percent. The number of people in extreme poverty would fall by 2.4 million.
Millions of low- and moderate-income families would benefit. Almost half of the benefits of our proposal would help low- and moderate-income families.
That these recommendations would reduce poverty by more than one quarter is powerful evidence that a 50 percent reduction can be reached within a decade.
The combined cost of our principal recommendations is in the range of $90 billion a year—a significant cost but one that could be readily funded through a fairer tax system. An additional $90 billion in annual spending would represent about 0.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, which is a fraction of the money spent on tax changes that benefited primarily the wealthy in recent years. Consider that:
- The current annual costs of the tax cuts enacted by Congress in 2001 and 2003 are in the range of $400 billion a year.
- In 2008 alone the value of the tax cuts to households with incomes exceeding $200,000 a year is projected to be $100 billion.
Our recommendations could be fully paid for simply by bringing better balance to the federal tax system and recouping part of what has been lost by the excessive tax cuts of recent years. We recognize that serious action has serious costs, but the challenge before the nation is not that we cannot afford to act; rather, it is that we must decide to act.
From the Center for American Progress
Consider the following facts:
One in eight Americans now lives in poverty. A family of four is considered poor if the family’s income is below $19,971—a bar far below what most people believe a family needs to get by. Still, using this measure, 12.6 percent of all Americans were poor in 2005, and more than 90 million people (31 percent of all Americans) had incomes below 200 percent of federal poverty thresholds.
Millions of Americans will spend at least one year in poverty at some point in their lives. One third of all Americans will experience poverty within a 13-year period. In that period, one in 10 Americans are poor for most of the time, and one in 20 are poor for 10 or more years.
Poverty in the United States is far higher than in many other developed nations. At the turn of the 21st century, the United States ranked 24th among 25 countries when measuring the share of the population below 50 percent of median income.
Inequality has reached record highs. The richest 1 percent of Americans in 2005 held the largest share of the nation’s income (19 percent) since 1929. At the same time, the poorest 20 percent of Americans held only 3.4 percent of the nation’s income.
It does not have to be this way. Our nation need not tolerate persistent poverty alongside great wealth.
The United States should set a national goal of cutting poverty in half over the next 10 years. A strategy to cut poverty in half should be guided by four principles:
(1) Promote Decent Work. People should work and work should pay enough to ensure that workers and their families can avoid poverty, meet basic needs, and save for the future.
(2) Provide Opportunity for All. Children should grow up in conditions that maximize their opportunities for success; adults should have opportunities throughout their lives to connect to work, get more education, live in a good neighborhood, and move up in the workforce.
(3) Ensure Economic Security. Americans should not fall into poverty when they cannot work or work is unavailable, unstable, or pays so little that they cannot make ends meet.
(4) Help People Build Wealth. All Americans should have the opportunity to build assets that allow them to weather periods of flux and volatility, and to have the resources that may be essential to advancement and upward mobility.
We recommend 12 key steps to cut poverty in half:
1. Raise and index the minimum wage to half the average hourly wage. At $5.15, the federal minimum wage is at its lowest level in real terms since 1956. The federal minimum wage was once 50 percent of the average wage but is now 30 percent of that wage. Congress should restore the minimum wage to 50 percent of the average wage, about $8.40 an hour in 2006. Doing so would help nearly 5 million poor workers and nearly 10 million other low-income workers.
2. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. As an earnings supplement for low-income working families, the EITC raises incomes and helps families build assets. The Child Tax Credit provides a tax credit of up to $1,000 per child, but provides no help to the poorest families. We recommend tripling the EITC for childless workers and expanding help to larger working families. We recommend making the Child Tax Credit available to all low- and moderate-income families. Doing so would move as many as 5 million people out of poverty.
3. Promote unionization by enacting the Employee Free Choice Act. The Employee Free Choice Act would require employers to recognize a union after a majority of workers signs cards authorizing union representation and establish stronger penalties for violation of employee rights. The increased union representation made possible by the Act would lead to better jobs and less poverty for American workers.
4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families and promote early education for all. We propose that the federal and state governments guarantee child care help to families with incomes below about $40,000 a year, with expanded tax help to higher-earning families. At the same time, states should be encouraged to improve the quality of early education and broaden access for all children. Our child care expansion would raise employment among low-income parents and help nearly 3 million parents and children escape poverty.
5. Create 2 million new “opportunity” housing vouchers, and promote equitable development in and around central cities. Nearly 8 million Americans live in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty where at least 40 percent of residents are poor. Our nation should seek to end concentrated poverty and economic segregation, and promote regional equity and inner-city revitalization. We propose that over the next 10 years the federal government fund 2 million new “opportunity vouchers” designed to help people live in opportunity-rich areas. Any new affordable housing should be in communities with employment opportunities and high-quality public services, or in gentrifying communities. These housing policies should be part of a broader effort to pursue equitable development strategies in regional and local planning efforts, including efforts to improve schools, create affordable housing, assure physical security, and enhance neighborhood amenities.
6. Connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth with school and work. About 1.7 million poor youth ages 16 to 24 were out of school and out of work in 2005. We recommend that the federal government restore Youth Opportunity Grants to help the most disadvantaged communities and expand funding for effective and promising youth programs—with the goal of reaching 600,000 poor disadvantaged youth through these efforts. We propose a new Upward Pathway program to offer low-income youth opportunities to participate in service and training in fields that are in high-demand and provide needed public services.
7. Simplify and expand Pell Grants and make higher education accessible to residents of each state. Low-income youth are much less likely to attend college than their higher income peers, even among those of comparable abilities. Pell Grants play a crucial role for lower-income students. We propose to simplify the Pell grant application process, gradually raise Pell Grants to reach 70 percent of the average costs of attending a four-year public institution, and encourage institutions to do more to raise student completion rates. As the federal government does its part, states should develop strategies to make postsecondary education affordable for all residents, following promising models already underway in a number of states.
8. Help former prisoners find stable employment and reintegrate into their communities. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. We urge all states to develop comprehensive reentry services aimed at reintegrating former prisoners into their communities with full-time, consistent employment.
9. Ensure equity for low-wage workers in the Unemployment Insurance system. Only about 35 percent of the unemployed, and a smaller share of unemployed low-wage workers, receive unemployment insurance benefits. We recommend that states (with federal help) reform “monetary eligibility” rules that screen out low-wage workers, broaden eligibility for part-time workers and workers who have lost employment as a result of compelling family circumstances, and allow unemployed workers to use periods of unemployment as a time to upgrade their skills and qualifications.
10. Modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a coordinated system that helps workers and families. A well-functioning safety net should help people get into or return to work and ensure a decent level of living for those who cannot work or are temporarily between jobs. Our current system fails to do so. We recommend that governments at all levels simplify and improve benefits access for working families and improve services to individuals with disabilities. The Food Stamp Program should be strengthened to improve benefits, eligibility, and access. And the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program should be reformed to shift its focus from cutting caseloads to helping needy families find sustainable employment.
11. Reduce the high costs of being poor and increase access to financial services. Despite having less income, lower-income families often pay more than middle and high-income families for the same consumer products. We recommend that the federal and state governments should address the foreclosure crisis through expanded mortgage assistance programs and by new federal legislation to curb unscrupulous practices. And we propose that the federal government establish a $50 million Financial Fairness Innovation Fund to support state efforts to broaden access to mainstream goods and financial services in predominantly low-income communities.
12. Expand and simplify the Saver’s Credit to encourage saving for education, homeownership, and retirement. For many families, saving for purposes such as education, a home, or a small business is key to making economic progress. We propose that the federal “Saver’s Credit” be reformed to make it fully refundable. This Credit should also be broadened to apply to other appropriate savings vehicles intended to foster asset accumulation, with consideration given to including individual development accounts, children’s saving accounts, and college savings plans.
Our recommendations would cut poverty in half. The Urban Institute, which modeled the implementation of one set of our recommendations, estimates that four of our steps would reduce poverty by 26 percent, bringing us more than halfway toward our goal. Among their findings:
Taken together, our minimum wage, EITC, child credit, and child care recommendations would reduce poverty by 26 percent. This would mean 9.4 million fewer people in poverty and a national poverty rate of 9.1 percent—the lowest in recorded U.S. history.
The racial poverty gap would be narrowed: White poverty would fall from 8.7 percent to 7 percent. Poverty among African Americans would fall from 21.4 percent to 15.6 percent. Hispanic poverty would fall from 21.4 percent to 12.9 percent and poverty for all others would fall from 12.7 percent to 10.3 percent.
Child poverty and extreme poverty would both fall: Child poverty would drop by 41 percent. The number of people in extreme poverty would fall by 2.4 million.
Millions of low- and moderate-income families would benefit. Almost half of the benefits of our proposal would help low- and moderate-income families.
That these recommendations would reduce poverty by more than one quarter is powerful evidence that a 50 percent reduction can be reached within a decade.
The combined cost of our principal recommendations is in the range of $90 billion a year—a significant cost but one that could be readily funded through a fairer tax system. An additional $90 billion in annual spending would represent about 0.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, which is a fraction of the money spent on tax changes that benefited primarily the wealthy in recent years. Consider that:
- The current annual costs of the tax cuts enacted by Congress in 2001 and 2003 are in the range of $400 billion a year.
- In 2008 alone the value of the tax cuts to households with incomes exceeding $200,000 a year is projected to be $100 billion.
Our recommendations could be fully paid for simply by bringing better balance to the federal tax system and recouping part of what has been lost by the excessive tax cuts of recent years. We recognize that serious action has serious costs, but the challenge before the nation is not that we cannot afford to act; rather, it is that we must decide to act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)