LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
 
January 7, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Blagojevich vs. the Senate

Navel-Gazing in the Grand Old Party

Yukking It Up at the Blago Show

Gauging Obama’s Silence on Gaza

Bring In the Peacekeepers?

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Tragedy Repeats Itself

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

Finally, Democrats Move Poverty to the Foreground

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Jul 20, 2007

By E.J. Dionne

WASHINGTON—John Edwards may be running third in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, but he has already changed the national conversation on a crucial issue. Poverty is no longer a hidden subject in American politics.

Be as skeptical of Edwards as you want to be. Yes, he has had some trouble since he joined the 3-H Club—the $400 haircut, building a 28,000-square-foot house and taking $500,000 in payments from a hedge fund. Yes, he has gained political traction among liberals by saying endlessly that ending poverty is “the cause of my life.”

Moreover, Barack Obama was right to say Wednesday that his, Obama’s, early community organizing work shows that poverty “is not an issue I just discovered for the purposes of a campaign.” For that matter, Hillary Clinton began her professional life laboring to eradicate child poverty.

The difference is that by harping on the issue, Edwards—whatever his motivations—has forced Democrats to abandon their fear of being seen as too focused on the needs of the poor and has thus opened political space for his rivals.

Since the late 1980s, Democrats have been obsessed with the middle class for reasons of simple math: no middle-class votes, no electoral victories.

But focusing on the middle class is one thing. Keeping the poor in the political closet is another. Must appealing to the self-interest of the middle class preclude appealing to its conscience?

Democrats have lost enormous ground by allowing a myth to take hold that Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society was a failure. “In the 1960s, we waged war on poverty, and poverty won” is one of the most powerful bits of rhetoric in the conservative arsenal.

Edwards took on this falsehood directly in his speech Wednesday in Prestonsburg, Ky., at the end of his tour of impoverished regions. “We accomplished a lot,” he said of LBJ’s time, “civil rights laws, Medicare and Medicaid, food stamps and Head Start and Title I aid for poor schools. The Great Society and other safety net programs have cut the number of people living in poverty in half.”

Edwards understands that unless the country is given hard evidence that government can succeed, it will never embrace government-led efforts at social reform.

Yet both Edwards and Obama acknowledged the past mistakes of reformers. Edwards spoke of the failure “to recognize the importance of three things: rewarding work, creating opportunity everywhere and protecting and strengthening families.”

Obama was even more pointed in his criticism of the liberal past. He spoke of “an inability of some on the left to acknowledge that the problems of absent fathers or persistent crime were indeed problems that needed to be addressed.”

Quietly, a new antipoverty consensus—reflected in the dueling speeches given by Edwards and Obama this week—is being born.

It stresses personal and parental responsibility while also addressing economic changes that are promoting inequality. It seeks to deal with the growing isolation of the poor, the need for early intervention in the lives of poor children, and the importance of increasing the economic rewards for what is now low-wage work. Mostly out of public view, antipoverty scholars and activists have used their time in the political wilderness to figure out what actually works.

Obama, for example, praised the comprehensive approach of the Harlem Children’s Zone, developed by anti-violence activist Geoffrey Canada. It helps families from the moment a child is born. Obama also pointed to the success of programs aimed at providing new ladders for upward mobility by turning what were once considered dead-end jobs into opportunities for advancement.

Edwards put forward a pro-labor agenda to increase wages and benefits. He would also step up the recruitment of good teachers for poor children, and create 1 million housing vouchers to allow “all families—not just wealthy ones—the freedom to move to the communities they choose.”

As one of the shrewdest students of poverty once said, “the poor are politically invisible,” removed as they are “from the living, emotional experience of millions upon millions of middle-class Americans.”

Those words were written in 1962 by the late Michael Harrington in “The Other America,” the book that helped launch the War on Poverty. In 2007, the poor are less politically invisible than they have been in a long time. That gives a new war on poverty at least a fighting chance. Edwards deserves some credit for that.

E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at symbol)aol.com.

© 2007, Washington Post Writers Group

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Dan Uu Noel, July 26, 2007 at 9:15 pm #

A straightforward way to tackle poverty would be to refer to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights: http://web.amnesty.org/pages/aboutai-udhr-eng
It has been formally recognized by all members of the UN, owes much of its writing to the Roosevelt administration, and specifically addresses poverty in its articles 22 to 27.
All a candidate has to do to “work for the poor” is to remind us that our government gave its commitment to these rights 6 decades ago, and that now is the time to enforce them.

Report this

By Gloria Picchetti, July 25, 2007 at 6:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

How to beat poverty? henrygeorge.com Tax land, not houses, cars, swimming pools, income, sin, etc. It’s so simple.

Report this

By Skruff, July 24, 2007 at 5:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Communal-ism and communism are theoreticly the same system.

I do not believe in heaven
I do not believe in hell
I do not believe in robert Browning
and I don’t dislike people just those with Tellivision sets!

Report this

By ardee, July 24, 2007 at 4:56 pm #

#89069 by Skruff on 7/24 at 5:22 am
(Unregistered commenter)

Skruff, do we need a suicide watch?

You are correct in noting that I skimmed the surface of that communism thingie but you refer to communalism not communism in your later post.

If you have such a low opinion of people why then bother? Just your presence here makes me think that you seek a better world for all. We can, all of us, get depressed , especially when we read the ravings of so many who post here and display such a poor grasp of their subject, such little intellectual involvement in the opinions they are handed and clutch firmly.

One must follow ones ideals, or what the hell’s life worth?

“A man’s reach should exceed his grasp
or whats a heaven for?”  Robert Browning

“We must love them both,
Those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we do not share.
They have both laboured in the search for Truth,
and both have helped us in finding it.”
Thomas Aquinas

Report this

By Skruff, July 24, 2007 at 5:22 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Ardee

“communism which has never worked to my knowledge”

Actually “communism” in its true form Commune-ism worked for 10,000 years before capitalism was invented by lazy folks who stood between buyer and seller with worthless trinkets.

Marx just did what movie makers do today. Revised the idea of another.

The reason communism does not work today (From each according to ability, to each according to need) is consumate greed, a me-first attitude unparraled in history (even the ancient Romans had more regard for “community” from where the word “communism” evolved) and a lazy spoiled but aware “upper class” which has sold the idea of capitalism to a society that pushes “American Idol” to the top of the ratings.

Actually, as the poster says; “The more people I meet, the more I appriciate my cat”

Report this

By ardee, July 23, 2007 at 5:37 pm #

#88805 by Skruff on 7/23 at 5:33 am


Your assessment of the capitalist system is, as far as it goes, an accurate one. I do part company with your either or solution proposed, perhaps a bit tongue in cheek?

I can envision a system that incorporates the best of capitalism, monitored and regulated, by now we should all see the result of unchecked greed, with the best of socialism (not communism which has never worked to my knowledge). This seems to be the best solution possible with the current knowledge we possess.,

Report this

By Mstessyrue, July 23, 2007 at 3:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

I support the democratic candidates for recognizing the critical and fundamental issue of the poverty.  I especially admire their work and dedicating towards the impoverish people.  While combating domestic poverty is certainly important, we must also look beyond our lives as Americans. We—as members of the global community—face common problems and must work together as a world community to fight them.  The United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals, which call for cutting world hunger in half by 2015 and eliminating it altogether by 2025, are a good place to start thinking and acting with a global mindset.  According to the Borgen Project, whose goal is to flight global poverty, it is estimated that the expenditure of a mere $19 billion would eliminate starvation and malnutrition worldwide.  In a time when the United States’ current defense budget is $522 billion, the goal of eradicating world hunger is clearly well within reach if we act together as one world.

Report this

By Tony B., July 23, 2007 at 3:01 pm #

1) Mitt Romney pays $150/hour for make-up before every on screen appearance.
2) Millions of tax-payers dollars go to unconstitutional “faith based” initiatives.
3) Billions of tax payer dollars are spent on a private mercenary army in Iraq at the expensive of the safety and quality of life of our volunteer fighting force.
4) Dick Cheney spends $200 a minute (again our taxes) flying a jet to one of his hunting parties.

I can keep going but I think you get the idea.
Thanks, EJ.  Good post.

Report this

By Erica, July 23, 2007 at 11:08 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

I am so so glad to hear that John Edwards is addressing the issue of poverty. It has been too long ignored on a political level and is now being brought to the spotlight. According to the Borgen Project, 78% of Americans agree that addressing poverty would reduce terrorism and many corporate leaders say that the largest untapped market in the world are the impoverished. This proves that poverty is not only a humanitarian issue, but a political and economical, with those respective benefits as well.

Report this

By Skruff, July 23, 2007 at 5:33 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

While I agree with some points from both prespectives (expressed here) I would suggest that in a capitalist system there MUST be either an “employer of last resort” where anyone can get a job which pays a living wage, or a unstigmatized benefits package for unemployed workers which includes health, housintg and food. 

The economic system known as “capitalism” in use in the USA, requires that 5% of the workforce remain unemployeed, but be equipped to work if needeed.  These people (part of the system)  need to be supported while they are doing their bit for capitalism. 

OR

we should change our economic system to one which requires full employment ....Communism,(Marx not Stalin/Lenin) for an instance.

Report this

By ardee, July 23, 2007 at 4:42 am #

#88704 by JT Lancer on 7/22 at 2:25 pm
(Unregistered commenter)

The government’s war on poverty has already proven to be a failure.


Perhaps, JT, you might expand upon this “failure”. So far all we have from you is unsubstantiated opinion. One cannot help but wonder at one who posts opinion as written in stone fact sans any sort of explanation…..

Report this

By Jeanine Molloff, July 22, 2007 at 3:21 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

While I am glad that the Dems have suddenly discovered the problems of poverty; they have failed to engage the true cause—the lack of quality jobs with liveable wages.  Most families earning wages at the poverty level don’t want charity—they want a good job with a liveable wage.  In short—they want economic justice.  Charity maintains dependency; meaningful gainful employment maintains a family.  When these candidates decide to pursue an economic policy which will encourage economic growth for main street and not merely wall street—they will get my attention.  When these candidates rewriteour many trade deals; so our workers and markets receive economic parity with other more lucrative markets—then they will get my attention.  Basically, I’m tired of pols playing the sentimental spin game.  When their actions regarding fair trade deals for our markets reflect the rhetoric—then they’ll get my vote.  Until then, sign me—impeach them all.

Report this

By JT Lancer, July 22, 2007 at 2:25 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

The government’s war on poverty has already proven to be a failure.  Just over 40 years ago, LBJ made the same vow, while establishing a plethora of new government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, etc.).  Billions of dollars have been spent in this effort; additional billions in future debt obligations have been tallied to pay for these programs - debts that will be passed on to our children and grandchildren.  Yet, this ‘war’, like every other government war, has failed. 

The best option is to allow free, peaceful people to alleviate poverty by creating goods and services while providing jobs to those in need.

Report this

By ardee, July 21, 2007 at 6:24 pm #

Johnof,

You post a quite literate and insightful treatise into several of the faults and flaws of our nation. I believe they stem almost completely from the need to increase profit every quarter, from an abiding suspicion of our government due in part to massive waste and inefficiencies and in part to propaganda and willful destruction from Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 on behalf of those who own our government.

As Skruff noted most eloquently there have been successes such as CETA, only to be made inefficient by profiteering, by those who see the tax revenues as personal fortune and those legislators who allow it.

I believe Edwards to be a sincere and thoughtful man. I would be more inclined to support him if his health care plan took the profit from the industry that has put such profit before the health of the nation. Alas he doesnt seem capable of seeing outside the box, at least on this.

I do not believe that electing any one person is the road to rescuing our nation from the forces that own it. I believe that we must change the system that allows, no encourages, massive inequalities. As more and more of our wealth migrates to fewer and fewer of us we will see that one person can do nothing. We see now, or we should, that our Legislators are bought and paid for prior to a single vote being cast for them.

Edwards is an honorable man, but he is wedded to a system that will not allow him to achieve his goals, perhaps, should he beat the odds and win the office, he might achieve some cosmetic result. But the disease that infects our body politic will remain virulent. The solution lies in the realisation that we face a generational battle, we will achieve nothing until we see an electorate sick and disgusted with bought and paid for politicos who answer to boards of directors and not we the people.

Report this

By farmertx, July 21, 2007 at 2:14 pm #

Deborah
If we had a President, instead of what we have, multi tasking would be possible.
Any bill that is passed by Congress to help the working poor will be vetoed by the Shrub; or he could sign it amongst much fanfare and then issue his signing statement (in secret), nullifing the bill.
That is why I said they must go before anything else can be accomplished. Not because I think everyone can wait, but because they will wait until his type is history.

Report this

By johnofportland, July 21, 2007 at 9:32 am #

Assessment of John Edwards:

Go straight at them.  Eschew any advice from Wall Street chameleon Robert Rubin (union-killing shill for NAFTA, GATT, etc.); speak Keynesian economics again.  Seek new, innovative solutions – not stock reprises of old routines; that’s the pattern of alcoholics and addicts.  Emphasize us, we the people, community, public issues, human rights, common sense, and the common good.  Corporations must pay their fair share to support the system that enabled their success; stop treating them as “individuals” in the legal system; hold executives and stock holders accountable and responsible for their actions and results.  Protect the planet.  Educate the children – dump top-heavy Trojan Horse Standards obstacles; eliminate public subsidies (vouchers) for boondoggle separatist, preferential, and elitist “home” schooling; insist upon a democratic education, scientific rationalism, and the rule of law.  Call the generation to service: “Let’s get our hands on these problems and solve them.  We can do it, if we stop procrastinating and move on.”  Tell Republicans they can worry about haircuts, dirty words, and hurting people by making money from wage slavery, exploitation, and violence.  The rest of us will go to work to fix the nation’s pressing, and now critical issues (thanks to Republican neglect, abuse, misuse, cynicism, and outright theft).  We can’t let the Republican monarchists kill the real American dream: a better life for all our people, children, our posterity, and ourselves.  We’re not in this life for the next quarterly report, we’re here to build a lasting nation that we can be proud of again; and that means saving it from the Republican cabal that brought us this fiasco, before it collapses us in an economy of chaos, disorder, destruction, and death, as they smugly profit on our bones.

How’d that be?  I fully support John Edwards for President.  We need to give him an overwhelming majority in both houses of congress, too, or we will spend generations undoing the harm of the Bush administration and their corporate neocon masters. If we want positive change in America, John Edwards the man we should back, and help to win in 2008.

Report this

By Skruff, July 21, 2007 at 8:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

“Poverty” is a word which gets the attention of middle-class, middle-aged Suburbanites who want it stopped at the limits of Basking Ridge, Shaker Heights, Marin County, and Scarsdale.

Most white middle-class workers see “poverty” as the provence of Newark, Patterson, Harlem, Compton, East St. Louis, and Detroit. 

BUT they are also leary (having tried this before) of give-aways, affirmative action programs, and Governmental sponsored “wars” on poverty which become (with new elected office-holders) wars on the poor.

I remember in Worcester Massachusetts’ Main South Neighborhood in the 1970’s the program which actually improved lives the most was the now villified CETA program.  This was the employer of last resort. If you had no job, were alcoholic, on drugs, and ready to be tossed by your landlord, CETA would hire you, and pay you for work which could be done around AA meetings, therapy appointments, job training excercises, and even courses in English, Math, or parenting.

I found, from being a facilitator for C.E.T.A. that the absolute best social program ever invented was a job! 

I hear no candidate INCLUDING EDWARDS & OBAMA talking about the road to security through work.

I have seen Housing voucher, food stamp, and welfare check abuses.  Abuses meaning People who needed not getting and people who don’t need getting. Dispite Reagan’s contention, I never saw his “welfare queen” I did see kick-backs, pay for change, and 1/2 off food stamp purchases. I also saw landlords “double renting,” and pay for name schemes

Until people see the reasons for poverty, the issue will not be addessed realisticly. Some $400 haircut guy will tell voters how much money he’ll throw at the problem, and everyone will go “what courage, he adderssed the issue of poverty.”

Pardon me if I wait for the big picture before my “wow”

Report this

By ardee, July 21, 2007 at 5:52 am #

Citizen Defender,
Your assessment of the control of our economy and our lives is an accurate one, yet I believe it to be an unconscious sort of control. Profit motivates, and anything that increases profit is desireable, thus we get such as you have deliniated.

Thus, to effect change we must look beyond individual candidates to achieve a transcendance over profit before people. It is a sick and sorry system under which we toil, and it is this system that we must work to alter.

Report this

By John F. Butterfield, July 20, 2007 at 10:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Grover Norquist drowning New Orleans in his bathtub, and the Bush oil theftcapade in Iraq are good examples of the workings of neocon government. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are examples of how democratic government can work.

Report this

By CitizenDefender, July 20, 2007 at 8:02 pm #

The “War on Terror” is motivated by the North American Union, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers and the New World Order, the Freemasons agenda, NAFTA, CAFTA, the Project for the New American Century, the Federal Reserve, and International Bankers.

There is an Elite few who are responsible for fuming every war that the United States has found itself in. The Federal Bank and the New World Order have been created to rob the world of its freedoms. George and DICK know this.

I believe most are familiar with all of these references. Woodrow Wilson lamented in 1916, “The growth of our nation and all the activities are controlled by a few men.” He was referring to the Central Bank later to become the Federal Reserve. Any plot intended to rob somebody is a criminal act. So it is with the Federal Reserve.

Whitehouse actions go well beyond Corporate Greed and have placed the wage earning class into the flip side of Open Markets creating greater poverty for America.

Warrantless wiretaps, sneak and peak policing, extraordinary rendition, the Real ID Act, RFID technology use, torture of detained people, cameras at every big intersection, downward looking satellites means only one thing, lost Freedoms. None of what I just mentioned makes Americans any safer.

The Bush administration is despicable. They have taken away nearly all our freedoms as a result of the staged 9-11 event. Who is investigating the World Trade Center attack? The 9-11 Commission’s conclusions are a farce.

If the Congress and Senate do not have the guts to do the right thing and impeach both Bush and Cheney then we need to vote all of them out of office.

Because the Bush administration gained the Presidency through vote tampering in both the 2000 and 2004 elections a Recall Petition against Bush and Cheney should be acted on by the House, Senate and the Supreme Court of the United States.

Over 200 years ago Thomas Jefferson wrote:
“If the American people ever allowed the banks to control the issuance of their currency, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied.”

The Federal Reserve issues money with interest. That money is created from nothing, not based on a Gold or Silver standard. The $1 bill is worth about 3 cents.

One last thing, if you believe there is a separation of Church and State just listen to Bush talking about his mission for God.

Who owns your money? http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2005/09/09/who_owns _the_federal_reserve.htm

Report this

By rylly, July 20, 2007 at 7:10 pm #

Funny how shocked people were when Edwards had the nerve to actually break the news to the nation that we had millions of citizens in deep poverty.  They tried to shame him and silence him and at last they’ll have to join him in this real cause.
Edwards may not have the big money people in his pocket, but his messages are starting to gain momentum, poor folks have the vote too and its time to pay attention.
Have we had enough of the too rich for too long?

Report this

By Deborah, July 20, 2007 at 6:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

As much as this issue needs addressing, among hundreds of others that have been ignored by the current crop of Congress Critter’s, more attention needs to be focused on getting these two (Shrub/Shootist) out of office now, not next year.


*****
As an unemployed American without health insurance (and with a minor child) I’d like us to multi-task.

Work on poverty AND oust Bush & Co.

Report this

By THOMAS BILLIS, July 20, 2007 at 4:54 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

First time in print that the republicans bullshit about LBJs war on poverty is just that complete bullshit.Every black middle class conservative should have a picture of LBJ in their living rooms.Sorry to just comment on such a small piece of the article but it is something I feel very strongly about.

Report this

By farmertx, July 20, 2007 at 4:30 pm #

As much as this issue needs addressing, among hundreds of others that have been ignored by the current crop of Congress Critter’s, more attention needs to be focused on getting these two (Shrub/Shootist) out of office now, not next year.
The longer these two are allowed to roam free, grazing on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the less of this country that will be left.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
Season's Greetings From Truthdig
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.