iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

The Poorhouse: Aunt Winnie, Glenn Beck, And The Politics Of The New Deal

The Poorhouse

First Posted: 12/29/2010 2:01 pm Updated: 04/ 2/2012 10:44 am

An employee of Associated Charities, a private organization dedicated to alleviating poverty in the District of Columbia, met an old black woman carrying a basket of cinders near the dump in Southeast D.C. on a bitterly cold day in December 1896.

The woman "could not give street and number, but could 'fotch' the agent to her place," according to a case study labeled "Aunt Winnie" in one of the organization's annual reports from near the turn of the century. "Old age, with a heavy load on top and a strong wind blowing, made the walk a trying one. At last the 8x10 cabin was reached. In it was a stove in many pieces held together with wire, a bedstead with rags for mattress and rags for covering. From the leaky roof the floor was wet through and through."

Aunt Winnie, the report said, had no income save the 50 cents she made every two weeks for taking in wash. In summertime she raised herbs and greens, but in winter she "suffered for food and fuel." Her children had all been sold away to slavery, and a nearby niece was too poor to offer any support. Her neighbors helped, providing money for the stove and cot, and a "colored friendly visitor was found to carry broth and other comforts to her." The neighborly charity wasn't enough to persuade the agent, who was essentially a private sector version of a social worker, that the old woman should be on her own.

"In the fall of '98 agent asked her to go into the almshouse, but she would not consent. During the storm in February '99, she was kept from perishing with a great effort. Every visit, and they were many, had to be made through snow up to the waist. It was during these visits that the promise was made that before another winter she would take refuge in an almshouse."

When the weather warmed, Aunt Winnie backed off her promise to go to the almshouse. The social worker started to play hardball.

"It would be hard to say which, the agent or the applicant, suffered the more, because through all this distress had sprung up a loving confidence and perfect trust that seemed cruel to deceive. Attention and assistance were withdrawn gradually."

It worked: In July, Aunt Winnie relented and said she'd go to the almshouse as soon she could sell her cabin. Nobody would buy it, so the social worker told her to tear it down and sell it for kindling. At 2 p.m. on Aug. 23, 1899, the social worker showed up in a wagon.

"[S]he was sitting on her trunk, without a stick of the cabin to be seen. Without a murmur she dropped a courtsey to the bare spot where once stood the cabin and turned away. After an affectionate separation in the almshouse the agent came away feeling that for such a balmy day in August it was a trying task to perform, but for winter's blizzards, a blessed relief. In case of her death a promise has been made to her that the general secretary of the Associated Charities will keep her body from potter's field."

Aunt Winnie, whose story is preserved in the archives of the Historical Society of Washington, had been sent to an American institution that was by then some 300 years old and went by a variety of names: the county farm, the poor farm, the almshouse or, most often, simply the poorhouse. She would probably have been surprised to learn that more than a hundred years later, after the virtual eradication of elderly poverty, a powerful political movement would materialize with the mission of returning to the hands-off social policies that made the poorhouse the nation's only refuge for the jobless, the aged, the infirm and the disabled.

That movement's most outspoken proponent is Fox News host Glenn Beck, who doesn't merely pine for the pre-New Deal era in general, but regularly prevails upon his audience to recognize the particular genius of some of the period's presidents, whose ideologies of inaction he holds up as the American ideal.

Democratic President Grover Cleveland is one such hero. When Beck and guest Joseph Lehman were discussing the proper roles of welfare and charity this summer, Lehman noted that one "extreme [position] is, you've got welfare only as a last resort and all assistance is private."

It wasn't too extreme for Beck. "And this is where we actually were a hundred years ago," Beck said, rightly thinking -- or not -- of people in Aunt Winnie's situation.

"We used to be here. In fact, Grover Cleveland has this excellent statement. In 1887, President Cleveland said, 'Though the people may support their government, the government shall not support the people,'" Lehman responded.

"That's great," said Beck.

While lifting up presidents like Cleveland, he wants to tear down their successors. At Beck University, he offers a course titled "Presidents You Should Hate." Part one focuses on Woodrow Wilson, part two on Franklin Roosevelt.

Until those men rose to power, the political field belonged to politicians in the command of business. Cleveland, however, is a distant second in the Beck view of the world to Calvin Coolidge. Beck told his audience this August that Coolidge was Ronald Reagan's favorite president, and that he was "one of best presidents I think we've ever had that you don't know very much about."

Coolidge earned his place in Beck's heart for refusing to send federal help to the Gulf region during the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927. "And under 30 feet of water, hundreds of people died. This is the Katrina of the 1920s," said Beck. "And, to show you the difference in how far we've come with progressives, at the time that this happened, nobody was standing on their roof with signs saying, 'Help me.' They were helping themselves."

Whatever the victims of the flood may have done, Wall Street certainly helped itself during Coolidge's reign from 1923 to 1929. The Dow ran from under a hundred to a high of nearly four hundred. Corporate profits and consumer debt soared. Coolidge slashed taxes. By 1929, the top 0.1 percent had income equal to 42 percent of all Americans and held 34 percent of all the savings -- while eight in ten had no savings at all.

Those eight-in-ten people without savings had no cushion against the economic crashes that relentlessly afflicted the economy and had no relief against the one calamity that is entirely foreseeable: old age.

"Most people, unless they were well-to-do, had two options," said University of Pennsylvania historian Michael B. Katz. "One was living with their kids, the other was the poorhouse."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
An employee of Associated Charities, a private organization dedicated to alleviating poverty in the District of Columbia, met an old black woman carrying a basket of cinders near the dump in Southeast...
An employee of Associated Charities, a private organization dedicated to alleviating poverty in the District of Columbia, met an old black woman carrying a basket of cinders near the dump in Southeast...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13,006
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (167 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:51 PM on 01/23/2011
"people who've exhausted 99 weeks unemployment benefits, who Beck says his viewers should be "ashamed to call ... Americans"

Kind of clear who to be ashamed of here and it isn't the unemployed. Whatever happened to the Good Samaritan?

So where is the training they need and where are the jobs they need or basic health care they need to get off the unemployment role?

Who is offering that?

Business and industry cannot or will not do it any time soon. They are getting by on less for many reasons or going out of business and now the cities and states are doing the same thing.

Until that dilema gets solved, more and more join the ranks of the long term unemployed every day. Just ignore it and think it will go away? "Americans" should not ignore it. For their own good if nothing else.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
08:01 PM on 01/13/2011
nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republican­­s controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislatio­­n to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republica­­n) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulation­­s. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­ly ki//ed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republican­­s voted against it. It was later filibuster­­ered by the Republican­­s and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www­­.house.go­v­/frank/a­rt­icles/2­009­/03-18­-09-­antid­ote_r­epub­lican-­amn­esia.ht­ml
http://www­­.ft.com/c­m­s/s/0/87­80­c35e-7e­91-­11dd-b­1af-­00007­7b076­58.h­tml?nc­lic­k_check­=1
http://www­­.presiden­c­y.ucsb.e­du­/ws/ind­ex.­php?pi­d=24­851
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
08:00 PM on 01/13/2011
3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­­ly killed the bill:
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
08:00 PM on 01/13/2011
3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­­ly killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republican­­s voted against it. It was later filibuster­­ered by the Republican­­s and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www­­.house.go­v­/frank/a­rt­icles/2­009­/03-18­-09-­antid­ote_r­epub­lican-­amn­esia.ht­ml
http://www­­.ft.com/c­m­s/s/0/87­80­c35e-7e­91-­11dd-b­1af-­00007­7b076­58.h­tml?nc­lic­k_check­=1
http://www­­.presiden­c­y.ucsb.e­du­/ws/ind­ex.­php?pi­d=24­851
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:59 PM on 01/13/2011
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:59 PM on 01/13/2011
nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt h.o.rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republican­s controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislatio­n to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republica­n) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulation­s. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequent­ly killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republican­s voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republican­s voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republican­s voted against it. It was later filibuster­ered by the Republican­s and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www­.house.gov­/frank/art­icles/2009­/03-18-09-­antidote_r­epublican-­amnesia.ht­ml
http://www­.ft.com/cm­s/s/0/8780­c35e-7e91-­11dd-b1af-­000077b076­58.html?nc­lick_check­=1
http://www­.presidenc­y.ucsb.edu­/ws/index.­php?pid=24­851
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:58 PM on 01/13/2011
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:58 PM on 01/13/2011
Frank
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:56 PM on 01/13/2011
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt ho..rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:56 PM on 01/13/2011
nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt ho..rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republican­s controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislatio­n to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:56 PM on 01/13/2011
nov52011 Wrote
 
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt ho..rney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
 
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
 
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republicans controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislation to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republican) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulations. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequently killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republicans voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republicans voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republicans voted against it. It was later filibusterered by the Republicans and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www.house.gov/frank/articles/2009/03-18-09-antidote_republican-amnesia.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elfish
07:55 PM on 01/13/2011
nov52011 Wrote
> how about putting barney Frank in jail and end the
> discussion­. Hes the cause of all this.. If he wasnt horney
> we wouldnt be in this mess
Another Republican trying to Make Barney Franks the scapegoat.
1. 2001 to 2006 - The republicans controlled the White House and the congress for six years and never passed a single piece of legislation to regulate FANNIE and FREDDIE or the financial sector.

2. In 2005, Mike Oxley (Republican) and Barney Franks authored H.R. 1461 to regulate Fannie and Freddie and tighten banking regulations. The bill had wide support from both parties and passed the House 331 to 90, a veto proof majority.

3. It went to the Senate under S. 190 sponsored by McCain, Dole and Sununu.

4. On October 26, 2005 the White House came out publicly and Bush opposed the Bill. The Senate subsequently killed the bill:

5. When the Democrats took power of the congress in 2006, the republicans voted against every attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie. In March 2007 Franks authored a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it passed with all Democrats for and 103 Republicans voting against it. It was the only regulatory bill Bush signed.

6. Later Franks tried to pass a bill to restrict subprime mortgages. All democrats voted for it and 127 Republicans voted against it. It was later filibusterered by the Republicans and d.ied in the Senate.

http://www.house.gov/frank/articles/2009/03-18-09-antidote_republican-amnesia.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851
02:01 AM on 01/03/2011
Finally finished reading all 5 pages of this story and have to say that Grim and Delaney did an excellent job in bringing in current information about Social Security and its history - how we treated those without in the years prior to 1935. Very well done - kudos!!

If anyone hasn't read it through, I cannot stress enough the important points that it brings up about the fact that SS IS funded through 2037 and "Social Security's actuaries reported this fall that after 2037, payroll taxes would be sufficient to pay nearly four-fifths of benefits through 2084"!

Why is everyone ignoring the facts and insisting that it's insolvent? It's because the forces that want to scrap the program entirely are gathering power and Democrats are running scared behind them as they let that boogeyman, Deficit Reduction, become their new master. They become the willing dupes of the Republicans to change their thinking and voting about the most basic rights of Americans: to be able to live decently and not go back a hundred years to the Poorhouse.

As much as I admire Pres. Obama, how he handles SS will be the single greatest issue (along with Medicare/health care) that he faces. His commission on the deficit has already been extremely troubling and doesn't bode well. These attitudes that somehow there will be those "undeserving" who get help are ridiculous and have no place in trying to get the country back on its feet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MiddleMolly
Working to better the USA!
07:45 PM on 01/04/2011
Good comment. There is a story on Huff Po today about social security, and the righties are out in force over there demeaning this program.
11:16 PM on 01/04/2011
Thanks for the heads-up, will take a look at it!
08:26 PM on 01/01/2011
To go from a welfare state to outlawing poverty is extreme. I believe there is a happy medium. We need to show people how to help themselves and that is about it. Maybe I am sheltered but I believe that education is the only help people need, once they know how to get to the end result the rest is up to them. If they don't use that knowledge that is up to them too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arts4u
It's better than a reality show.
01:45 AM on 01/02/2011
Yes, no offense, but you are sheltered. Highly educated people are out of work in droves as well. Even those with PhD's. This problem has been brewing for years and has only increased in recent years. During the Bush administration only 3 million jobs were created and 5.5 million were outsourced to other countries. During the Clinton administration over 23 million new jobs were created here.

During 2010, only 743,000 primarily part-time, temporary jobs were created in the US and over 1.4 million were outsourced.

This is an uncontrolled outsourcing problem.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MiddleMolly
Working to better the USA!
07:46 PM on 01/04/2011
I haven't checked in on this thread for a few days, but thanks, Arts4U, for making the points I wanted to make.
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
04:09 PM on 01/01/2011
There's never been any doubt that the right wing wants the United States where it was 100 years ago.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
flyingonclippedwings
08:28 PM on 01/01/2011
There's a lot of teapartiers and republicans that have been wanting to go back to where you have to be a property owner in order to vote and that it should be one household per vote, meaning the man would be the voter. According to them, single mothers/welfare recipients are the cause of the problems in this country. I see them as a result/effect instead of a cause.