Poverty in America

Being Broke

Published June 07, 2009 @ 09:05AM PT

all the quarters...

And so, as I try to put the furniture back where it was, and wake up a couple of sleeping party guests, we can return this site to Leigh pretty much as we found it (along with a note promising to replace the broken lamp). Since Greg and Diane and I couldn't apparently solve the poverty problem in a week, there will still be plenty for Red to write about.

Just to get Leigh started, I'll hand it back to her with a pressing issue Diane touched on yesterday - the growing sense that our economic crisis has become a state-level problem, bankrupting state budgets, and causing them to cut services... often to the neediest populations, at just the worst moment.

California has, of course, become the headliner on this topic, with an enormous budget crisis that appears almost unsolvable. It's a crisis that, as far as I can tell, has felled three Governors so far, wrecked the ability of the state's legislature to get anything done, and possibly ruined the Republican party forever. As long as Republicans had a glimmer of hope of winning California's electoral votes (another legacy of Ronald Reagan), they had a much stronger map to victory in presidential contests. Since the Clinton years, that hope has largelysunk, with each successive development making things that much worse for the state party, and the national one.

The problem in California is, in many ways, anomalous to the rest of the country... yet instructive all the same; California has a huge tax base problem, caused in large measure by Proposition 13, the tax fighting measure of the seventies that simultaneously made it impossible to raise taxes, and at the same time froze property tax rates for many homeowners, making it impossible for localities to raise additional revenue on the current tax base. Then too, California is suffering under the enormous weight of the foreclosure crisis, leading the nation in bad loans, seized property, and fallen home values, married to and adding fuel to a general business downturn.

It's not surprising, then, that California's lawmakers, in Sacramento and DC have made noises about some form of "state bailout." And California may lead the way by miles, but it is not alone: across the country, rising demands for services and falling revenues have created stark budget crises in nearly every state (including, oddly, Alaska, where falling oil prices have hurt that state's ability to coast on oil company profits).

Much hand-wringing is already under way about threats - especially from Sacramento lawmakers - that enormous amounts of government services will have to be cut, including children's health insurance, school funding, and welfare programs of all sorts. Some of this, indeed, is very real, very painful, and does indeed have enormous implications.

Some of it, however, is sabre rattling; state officials are using threats to cut programs for the poor to force Congress and President Obama to act to prop up state budgeting. The Stimulus Bill, in fact, did a great deal of this, adding money to Medicaid, S-CHIP, unemployment benefits and food stamps.  That money, however, has crashed headlong into lost state-level funds that were supposed to already be in place, but have evaporated with lost tax revenues from businesses and individuals as the eocnomic downturn has deepened. (I suppose now is not the time to point out that sunny predicitons of recovery in the next few months... are probably more dreamy than reality).

Can the Federal Government really bail out the states? Largely, it seems unlikely; the needs are just too widespread, and we are, though no one wants to face it, running out of money.  Ben Bernanke's common-sense appeal to Congress to cut deficit spending was a reminder that even our government faces some limits, and we are starting to reach them.  We cannot print money endlessly, sell bonds to foreign investors forever... and not expect other consequences. There is also a longer term question of setting precedents - both state and federal officials need to understand what limits there are, and how to work within them. If e want states to take care of specific problems -like kids' health - then the right mechanism is more money targeted at that specific goal... not a generalized blank check.

In the short run, I think it's a terrible time for activists to become discouraged; now more than ever we need people who see a problem, roll up their sleeves, and get to work. If we can't count on government... then we'll have to help each other. In the long run, I think we have to agitate, forcefully for policies that work to help those of us who most need help first - people below the poverty line, people who need assistance to survive. We need to revive the sense of a common good, that we will do best when all of us have a chance.

But there's a reality staring all of us in the face - as a nation... we're broke. We overspent and now we have to deal with the wreckage of excessive debt and bad credit. And it's awful. But we can't avoid it, and we can't wish it away. So let's dive in and start doing... something.

(photo of Big Money from thievingjoker, used under a Creative Commons license from Flickr)

Share this Post

Related Posts

Comments (1)

  1. Danetta Amschler

    Eventually the party comes to an end and you reap what you sow.  Seems just about everyone is willing to admit this - and what it means to society - but the most hardcore conservatives. What got us into this mess, much like the Great Depression, was the removal of too much regulation that let us wander into too much bad business practices and even worse investing practices.  As more and more money was being siphoned off by corporations and their backers (in other words the already rich) and often using the "investments" of the middle class who'd been duped into investing in the stock market when many of them shouldn't have done so or shouldn't have so heavily invested, the poor actually became poor in all senses of reality.  Worse, the government kept buying into the old Reagan Revolution ideals of tax cuts, small government and trickle down at all costs - which meant that assistance programs were gutted, costs were shifted off of the feds onto the states (who then did their best to shift them onto counties), and taxes were shifted onto middle and lower classes.  And somehow in all this, society bought into the individualistic side of Libertarianism without ever pausing to recognize that Libertarianism ALSO has a list of individual RESPONSIBILITIES (many of them to society) - like that each always should do what they are capable of doing to help those who are in need (and without this modern air of freedom to pass presumptive judgment prior to even thinking about helping).  Which all combines to back in the 80's we bought into a fantasy that going back to relatively unfettered capitalism and low taxes would "trickle down" to such a point we let them cut the government safety nets and never donated to private ones and now that the party's over and the fantasy has proven untrue and oh-so-many levels for all of us, the safety nets that we need now more than ever almost don't exist at all.

    Guess we'll have to see if we can work together as a society after all.  Though on all too many levels I'm rather surprised that we never clear demonstrations on any large scale to show the displeasure of the poor - since we in poverty we so clearly rendered so voiceless.

    Posted by Danetta Amschler on 06/08/2009 @ 09:29PM PT

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author
NYC Weboy

NycWeboy is a New York based writer with a special interest in health care issues, gained from years of working in different settings and seeing health issues from a variety of perspectives (medical advertising, caring for disabled kids, human resources). He is also the co-author of a book chapter on occupational therapy theory and practice (which he should be revising for the next edition as you read this). NycWeboy sees himself as an advocate for informed consumers; he is especially interested in the intersections of key issues, such as healthcare and poverty, where discussions like "universal coverage" may not entirely explain the problem...or define the solution. He blogs regularly at NycWeboy.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.