Obama and Poverty

My old boss and friend Bob Dole would always say, "How easy it is for those who refuse to step into the arena to criticize those who do." How right he is.

With each passing year, the criticism of those who choose to enter the arena of national politics seems to grow in its shrillness, intensity, and rumor-based invective. As glaring examples of how bad it's gotten, one need look no further than the 2008 presidential election and the vile and preposterous charges fired by elements of the far-right, far-left and the media against Barack Obama and Sarah Palin.

As a conservative, I had and have my differences with President Obama. That said, as we enter the New Year with a new administration, I believe he deserves great credit for stepping into that arena. With that credit comes a need to speak to the promise of Barack Obama that does give me hope. From a series of lofty and flowing speeches, the words that rang most true with me were those now President Obama spoke during the campaign with regard to poverty.

As an American who grew up in abject poverty and was homeless a number of times as a child, I may not know much, but I do know this: Poverty is not a state of mind. It's real. It's relentless. It's cruel. And if you don't figure a way out, it will eventually defeat you. It will defeat you mentally and it will defeat you physically. While we can debate Mr. Obama's level of experience and expertise in certain areas, there is not a doubt in my mind that when it comes to the plight of millions of Americans at or below the poverty line, he really does get it.

He gets it for the simple reason that for him poverty is not a theoretical or academic exercise. During certain times of his often chaotic childhood, he had to deal with the pain of poverty. During remarks in the Anacostia section of Washington, DC in July of 2007, then candidate Obama reflected on that reality. "This kind of poverty is not an issue I just discovered for the purposes of a campaign. It is the cause that led me to a life of public service almost 25 years ago."

Again, no matter if we believe poverty was "the cause" or just a cause that helped lead Barack Obama into the public and political arena, it clearly played a decisive role. The question before Mr. Obama and all who fight for America's poor, is this: will it remain a cause that consumes a deserving share of his energy and talents as he confronts the myriad of other emergencies and issues that is life in the Oval Office?

In reading his two memoirs and a number of his campaign speeches, it's clear to me that the president understands that for the most part, poverty is an accident of birth that can destroy all in its path. No child deserves to be poor. No child deserves to be malnourished. No child deserves an inferior education. No child deserves to be denied opportunity. And yet, that is a sad reality of the America of 2009. Tens of thousands of innocent children suffer everyday simply because they were born.

Will Barack Obama give them and all of the 30-some million poor Americans a voice in his White House? My belief is that it is his intention to do just that. Having said that, I know that the road to hell gets longer and wider with those good intentions. Things happen. Priorities shift. Campaign promises become hindrances to the new reality.

In speaking with the truly poor, a constant complaint I've heard is that "there are not enough of us at the table. There are not enough people who suffered and overcame poverty making the policy for those now -- not living, but barely existing -- below the poverty line."

That, more than any other complaint, resonates with me. When it comes to poverty, virtually every new administration makes the same predictable mistakes that exponentially increase the misery index for the poor. One of those mistakes being the appointing of political friends, major donors, or out-of-touch Ivory Tower academics to worker-bee positions that must be filled by those who have walked the walk.

During the course of the presidential campaign, we saw signs and bumper stickers supporting Mr. Obama which read, "Imagine Hope." Unless you've been there, you would find it impossible to believe that for the truly poor, imagining hope is a luxury they can't afford. It's too painful to have that precious emotion crushed yet again. Life has beaten the hope out of countless of our fellow citizens and it's a state of being that will only be changed by action and results.

With this economic crisis battering the poor worse than any other class, I choose to believe that the soaring rhetoric of a candidate will be replaced by the actions of a president who will roll up his sleeves, learn from the mistakes of his predecessors, and start to tackle the problem one child, one adult, and one neighborhood at a time.

In this age of partisan hate-filled rhetoric, I'm siding with hope.

Comments

[maryyooch]

Finally! Someone finally dares speak for the poor! Now, hopefully, someone will do something about it.
Stupid Reagan and his asinine "Welfare Queen" line, only made things much worse for the poor. Now there is NO help anywhere when you have been laid off, run out of unemployment and cannot find a job.
I wonder if anybody is keeping track of all the new homeless families that are being created because the republican'ts don't want to help.

[Charger magnum]

The poor have consistently been forgotten for years by past the Administra­tion's,the­y have simply ignored the "poor"! Since,the 1970's the wages of working-people have steadily "deteriorated".
What is must disgusting, Billion's of dollars of "tax-payers" money is given to "greedy",and morally "bankrupt" Banks, Insurance- Companies,and a growing "list" of "Corporate­-special-i­nterest's,­but virtually nothing is being done for average-working Americans,or the impoverished.
It is time that Americans take back possession of their Country from the "Corporate- Elites",and the "sell-"out" corrupt "politicians!

[melpol]

Pelosi claims that zillions will continue becoming unemployed in all 57 states before the calvary will arrive. That is partially true but until that happens jobless Americans must be fed. Hunger is also rising as food prices go up. Government think tanks are working 24/7 on the solution. It is suggested that fast food chains can take the responsibility of feeding the nation. Government subsidized fast food chains could close down kitchens in most homes and eliminate hunger in America. They could provide a nutritious meal for only two bucks which would eliminate the need to pay high prices in supermarkets. The competition between fast food chains for customers would make sure the quality of food and services remained high. One fast food chain is now opening up ten thousand new restaurants and are ready to employ a million new workers. They see in the future less expensive ways of having a good meal. Eliminating the usefulness of the home kitchen is sure to anger suppliers of ovens and refrigerators but so did the suppliers of horses to pull carts. The space in homes that once was the kitchen can be turned into an extra bedroom that could be rented to a homeless person. For lazy people that are hungry a cheeseburger will only be a phone call away.

[TinaFreeman]

Wow, is that supposed to be funny?

[CVN65]

Mr. MacKinnon certainly comes in on the side of "the children" unlike those awful Republicans (who actually boil and eat them). Who can be against "the children"? Of course, no politician can vote against the welfare of "the children" and keep their position of power. Why is it that we never examine the reasons that these children are poor? It's not that the "rich" are hoarding all of the money, it is more likely that a series of bad decisions plus the good intentions of government led to personal and societal conditions that created the problem. LBJ's Great Society led to an explosion of out-of-wedlock births in the AA community. Recent studies, controlling for race, location and affluence have shown that the lack of a father, across all boundaries, is a significant factor in which children will drop out of school or be arrested. These children then grow up to be poor and repeat the same patterns. I do appreciate Doug's appeal to put more of those raised on public assistance in positions of power-they will naturally see it as appropriate to rob Peter to pay Paul. My parents were an orphan and an adoptee; they had nothing handed to them. We grew up lower-middle class but some would have characterized us as poor. All three kids grew up to go to college and become successful. We had two parents, Dad worked 50-60 hrs a week and education was the king in our house.

[Diogenes08]

Sorry Commander, but the rich are indeed hoarding all the money! Peter has been robbing Paul to pay himself forever, and the only relief Paul ever gets is when he stands up and takes some back.

The conservative agenda has always been to hoard, to take a little more, to keep it for "me and my wife, son John and his wife; us 4 and no more". The lack of character is not in the poor but in the rich. They (you!) are afraid of the barbarians at the gate even when they are your neighbors!

You take away Pell grants so only son John can go to school, without competition for grades or the fat jobs only a diploma can provide. I'm glad you got yours, but tell the truth: did your father have government assistance sending you and your sibs to college? Dental school isn't cheap. Did a lower-middle earner truly send you to school on his own?

OK, so you got a Government leg up, but along the way you learned to hoard, to fear, and now you want to deny any but your "peers" the right to compete. Those nights when you can't sleep, it isn't the absent fathers that keep you awake; it's the thought that you may not be able to keep son John's job safe from the barbarians. The fact that you bothered to blog, to explain, to make excuses, shows your sleep has been more than a little harried lately...

[CVN65]

Wow, you sure do assume an awful lot. For starters, Dad didn't send me to college. I worked hard in high school and got a full academic ride. For dental school, I borrowed over $100K. For my residency, I joined the Navy to help offset costs, a move that made sense at the time but probably cost me over $1million in lost salary over the long term. So, no, not a single gummint handout, grant, etc. Even the money I received during residency didn't even come close to offsetting what I was paid during my active duty time. So, no, I did it on my own and will be paying back the loans until about the time I retire, if I am allowed to do so. You speak of robbing Peter to pay Paul-what an amusing joke. Myself and those in my income level pay nearly 70% of the taxes, a good deal of which is given to other citizens in the name of compassion. Keep in mind that Robin Hood was robbing back tax money to return to tax payers, not stealing from the rich to give to the poor. As far as "hoarding money" exactly how do we do that? Investing in stocks and bonds so that companies can expand and create more jobs? Donating money to community efforts and charity? Sorry, your vision of us "happy misers" sitting in our castles simply does not reconcile with reality. Pitiful.

[Onyx335]

I know we like to talk about unwed AA's, but it is the CA's that are filling up the welfare rolls. Please know that when you cut welfare, you are not just hurting AA's but the majority CA recipients.

[CVN65]

Actually, when Bush cut welfare, he got a lot of people into work and self-sufficiency. This leads to higher self esteem, not the fake kind that a trophy for eighth place does, but the real kind. BTW, the number of whites on welfare is higher but as a percentage, blacks are more likely to be wards of the state than are whites.

[maryyooch]

You cannot live on welfare. They have drastically cut the funds since the late 80's where you cannot even rent a room in a slop house for a family of four. That is why nobody is even bothering to apply. They make it so hard for a family to receive a few hundred dollars a month, it's just not worth it. If they find out you are homeless, they take your kids away.

[PATina]

Thank you for writing this article. I was so dismayed after reading a lot of the comments on the article about limiting executive salaries. Comments disparaging people for making less than $50,000/ year (which is more than the average US salary). How do they think people families make it on minimum wage?? People actually doubting that you could find quality people to run a bank for less than 1/2 a million? What has this country become???

I totally agree w/ you that more people who have lived in poverty should be part of any administration as a voice for the poor.

[CVN65]

PAtina-Very few families are trying to make it on minimum wage. If you are in a job at minimum wage, you should not start a family. If you are in a job at minimum wage and stay there, you are not a valued employee to your employer. What are the reasons an employee would never see a raise or increase in level of responsibility? Ask an employer. The fact is that the vast majority of those working at minimum wage are either part-time workers (kids and seniors) or those just starting in a new job; very few stay at that level. I have employees that refuse to learn new skills and that is fine-they do not see the same raises that other, more valuable employees will see.

[Onyx335]

I have a question for you. What is the reason for a white man with no high school diploma making as much as a minority with a degree? I think many call it racism. Or why is it that similarly situated blacks find themselves much higher interest rates than whites? I think many call it racism. And why am I the only black person in my company for the last 8 years? I think because I am a token!

[TinaFreeman]

Do you read the freakin' papers? Did you just drop in from Mars? There are former middle-class people competing for those minimum wage jobs that used to go to teenagers.

Rent "Fun with Dick and Jane". It will be an entertaining way for you to get a clue on the job situation out there.

[RTIII]

"...and start to tackle the problem one child, one adult, and one neighborhood at a time."

Well, I sure hope he can work more efficiently than that!

I guess you don't expect much from government. I know it can work efficiently - first, you have to _believe_ it can, and then work at it, and the rest follows. Dis-belief is the surest way to failure as it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
.

[GoCards1978]

No sane person chooses to be poor. Luck, or the lack of good fortune, plays a huge role in everyone's circumstances. I had 3 careers after graduating from college 30 yrs. ago before I went on SSDI in '04. I'm disabled due to mental illness which disqualified me from long term disability from my last employer. I pay sales, gas and property taxes. I doubt the current GOP will change their tune but am grateful President Obama has walked so many miles in my shoes. Any financial assistance the government may provide goes directly into the economy so it qualifies as immediate stimulus - he gets it.

[babaann]

The "new deal" CCC is a good example of a program that helped the poor. Not only did these guys have jobs that provided income for their families, but they also received schooling to read and write, plus job skills.
My dad learned carpentry.

[Victoria59601]

Saving America

I have continued to see bail out nation with all these bailouts. God has said that looking after the poor society will change any economic crisis. Please, Please change the USURY policy to a rate of 4.5% APY retrospective on all financial transactions for a period of 3 to 5 years. This will create disposable income for 90% of the population. Banks will start lending because they are forced to lend monies to get their returns. Together with this the addition of a maximum of $12.00 service fees per month may be rendered on any financial transaction.

Until the poor people of the US are helped this crisis will continue on and on. Banks are lending Yes! to the fortune 5000 companies with credit rating of AAA thru AA.

Thanks for listening

Denis & Victoria de Charmoy

[Aaror]

Unfortunatly, if you try to help the families of children suffering from poverty, there are a lot of people who will call it welfare and talk about unwed mothers having children to increase their monthly checks...
There is a solution that would help children that can't be assailed.
Free preschool and kindergarden, combined with free meals at those programs for anyone who requests it. In certain neighborhoods it can be for anyone who does not opt out, if the entire area is below the poverty line.
If you provide education early, and at least 2 good meals from 3 years old on, a lot of the problems for kids in poverty would be helped. I adknowledge that this does nothing for homelessness, cold, lack of coats, lack of toys, computer access, etc. but making sure children are not hungry would be a start.

[ndem]

Obama not only understands poverty and lived near and surrounded by it (Indonesia, child of a single mom, etc.) he also had a mother who was a pioneer in the work of microcredit, lending to the poor. Reading his memoirs reminds us how we are so lucky to have a new President who understands deeply from experience what it means to live in abject poverty. Let's invite people such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus to DC to confer with Obama about a way out of poverty for the poor in America...­which unfortunately includes more and more of us!

The fastest way towards poverty is to become a single mother...l­et's support education and job training for these women!!!! It works! i lived with teen mothers for five years and saw the reality!

[FireDog]

After working full time for more than 30 years, I retired early on disability and now receive monthly social security checks and a small pension. I don’t make enough annual income to pay income taxes but I do buy goods, services and pay property taxes and sales tax. I am just fine, can not complain and am grateful for my monthly checks. I live very modestly but I have enough and even though I barely make it most months I am not living in the debilitating hopelessness that many people do who are much less fortunate than I.

However there are many who are validly disabled and yet don't qualify for SSDI and have to live in dismal scarcity. My 40 year old son is one of them. A science major in college, he was injured at work at age 33. He did received a settlement check for his injuries and so purchased a modular home in a rural area. During his life time, he had not worked enough hours to receive social security even though he put in more than ten years. He now lives on SSI - only about $650 a month. He owns his home outright so is not paying rent; this works against him and qualifies him for just $80 a month in food stamps. I have to help him financially to be able to afford to eat.

Our system for qualifying for SSDI and food stamps is flawed - I see first hand how it

[FireDog]

I do not get how tax cuts help anyone but the well to do and a business is just going to increase its bottom line.

After working more than 30 years, I retired on disability and now receive monthly social security and a small pension. I don’t make annual income enough to pay income taxes but I do pay property taxes and sales tax. I am just fine, can not complain and am grateful for my monthly checks. I live modestly but I have enough. I barely make it most months but still do not experience the debilitating hopelessness that many do who are much less fortunate than I am.

I like the way Obama quoted the Bible when he said he does believe he is “his brother’s keeper”.

[ouroborous]

Just a thought, but perhaps the mounting criticism of politicians is due to the more and more unseemly way in which they lie to and cheat the American public.

Sometimes the most obvious answer is the correct one; perhaps the criticism is warranted.

[BARRISTER]

McKinnon for Secretary of HHS