Basic budget arithmetic suggests that House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's coming budget will be at least as extreme as his budget last year, and likely more so.
The Ryan report grimly concludes that federal programs are "failing to address" poverty. Poverty certainly remains too high. But the report seems determined not to recognize the long-term successes of existing programs even when the evidence is in plain sight.
A single number can change the public debate on an issue that seems stalled. The number is $4.6 billion, and it represents how much money taxpayers will save annually if the federal minimum wage is raised to $10.10 per hour.
Even with the crucial anti-poverty programs we have in place, these are new and emerging faces of poverty -- the very opposite of the picture of poverty Ryan paints.
Knowing that many active-duty service personnel and veterans face financial hardships, there is much we can -- and should -- do to ease that burden.
Since there is currently a rather large amount of poverty around that ideally would be rapidly alleviated, you could legitimately expect that the proposals that each side brought to the table might significantly erode the poverty under review. Sadly, however, neither set of proposals do.
While news outlets don't just invent numbers on the budget, it would not be much of a change for the worse if they did. The news stories that we saw following the release of President Obama's budget followed the same practice we have seen in budget stories for decades. They threw very large numbers at readers that no one understands.
A million fewer people received SNAP last December than in December 2012 -- the fourth straight month in which participation fell from the previous year. This is just the latest sign that SNAP, which critics claim is out of control, has begun to shrink as the economy slowly recovers from the Great Recession.
I am a little suspicious about the timing of all of these moves and wonder if it works and he is reelected, will he continue to follow the will of the voters or go back to his conservative ways?
The result of the Republican budget would be opportunity only for those who already have money. So, of course, the GOP had to try to kill a budget conceived under the proposition of opportunity for everyone.
Even when her friends use the expression, Kelly reminds them "No, you are not starving." There are people in the world who really face starvation, struggling to find food every hour of every day. "Hunger is everywhere" as she puts it. This cruel condition is one no one should go through.
Having worked to end hunger and poverty for the last 40 years, I know that the passage of a new farm bill is a time of great change -- sometimes for the better; usually, in the recent era, for the worse.
Luckily for us, our nonprofit organizations are stepping in and have created food banks to help fill the void continually shaped by Congress.
Think about this: The vast majority of prisoners get out eventually, having paid their penalty, and most emerge with no job, little or no savings, and possibly even no home.
As the White House prepares its budget proposals for the coming fiscal year and the House prepares to reject them, millions of older Americans who have lost their jobs, their unemployment, and in many cases their houses, are holding out little hope of much relief.