Hillary Clinton op-ed: ‘My plan for helping America’s poor’

Hillary Clinton has an op-ed at the New York Times today discussing her economic plans for America’s poor. Hillary Clinton: My Plan for Helping America’s Poor:

The true measure of any society is how we take care of our children. With all of our country’s resources, no child should ever have to grow up in poverty. Yet every single night, all across America, kids go to sleep hungry or without a place to call home.

Data Point: In a recent report from Feeding America Food Insecurity in The United States, Arizona’s rate of 26.8 percent was the third-highest in the nation for childhood food insecurity in 2014. The national rate that year was 20.9 percent. Apache County had the worst ‘food insecurity’ in the state at 41.5 percent of children in Apache county.

Screen Shot 2016-09-21 at 1.42.55 PM

We have to do better. Advocating for children and families has been the cause of my life, starting with my first job as a young attorney at the Children’s Defense Fund, and if I have the honor of serving as president, it will be the driving mission of my administration.

The good news is that we’re making progress, thanks to the hard work of the American people and President Obama. The global poverty rate has been cut in half in recent decades. In the United States, a new report from the Census Bureau found that there were 3.5 million fewer people living in poverty in 2015 than just a year before.

Median incomes rose by 5.2 percent, the fastest growth on record. Households at all income levels saw gains, with the largest going to those struggling the most. The census report makes clear that when hard-working Americans get a small boost — like food stamps and health insurance thanks to the Affordable Care Act — they can climb out of poverty.

But make no mistake: We still have work to do. Families across the country were devastated by the Great Recession.

Nearly 40 percent of Americans between the ages of 25 and 60 will experience a year in poverty at some point. The best way to help families lift themselves out of poverty is to make it easier to find good-paying jobs. As president, one of my top priorities will be increasing economic growth that’s strong, fair and lasting. I will work with Democrats and Republicans to make a historic investment in good-paying jobs — jobs in infrastructure and manufacturing, technology and innovation, small businesses and clean energy. And we need to make sure that hard work is rewarded by raising the minimum wage and finally guaranteeing equal pay for women.

If we want to get serious about poverty, we also need a national commitment to create more affordable housing. This issue doesn’t get much election-year coverage, but it’s a big deal to the 11.4 million American households that spend more than half their incomes on rent. Too many people are putting off saving for their children or retirement just to keep a roof over their families’ heads.

My plan would expand Low Income Housing Tax Credits in high-cost areas to increase our affordable housing supply, and fuel broader community development. So if you are a family living in an expensive city, you would be able to find an affordable place to call home and have access to the transportation you need to get to good jobs and quality schools.

We also need to ensure that our investments are reaching the communities suffering the most from decades of neglect. We have got to acknowledge that even though poverty overall has fallen, extreme poverty has increased. Tim Kaine and I will model our anti-poverty strategy on Congressman Jim Clyburn’s 10-20-30 plan, directing 10 percent of federal investments to communities where 20 percent of the population has been living below the poverty line for 30 years. And we’ll put special emphasis on minority communities that have been held back for too long by barriers of systemic racism.

This is actually not a new proposal from Clinton. Almost a year ago she penned an article in EBONY in which she outlined a plan to strengthen communities of color. (h/t Nancy Le Tourneau, Political Animal blog).

As president, I will continue my life’s work focused on creating opportunities for children and fairness for families. We need to expand access to high-quality child care and guarantee paid leave so parents at all income levels can balance their jobs and lives. And we will work to double investments in Early Head Start and make preschool available to every 4-year-old because our children deserve the best possible start in life.

Donald J. Trump has a different approach. He divides America into winners and losers. And he doesn’t seem to spend much time worrying about people in poverty. In fact, his economic plans would overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest Americans, and would include an estimated $4 billion tax cut for his own family just by eliminating the estate tax. [See, The biggest beneficiaries of Trump plan to erase ‘death taxes’ may be families like his.] He has actually said that wages are too high. One independent economic analysis [Moody’s Analytics] revealed that with Mr. Trump’s proposals in place, our economy would fall back into recession and inevitably push more families into poverty.

This November, the American people will have to choose between an economy that works for everyone and an economy that benefits the well off at the expense of everyone else. The choice couldn’t be clearer.

Nancy Le Tourneau at the Political Animal blog notes, Clinton Puts Fighting Poverty Back on the Agenda:

While income inequality has been a focus for liberals for a few years now, most of the remedies discussed tend to focus on going after the 1%ers and/or ways to help the middle class. Very rarely does anyone talk about lifting up those who are living in poverty.

* * *

This comprehensive anti-poverty agenda is just one of the ways that Hillary Clinton is running on the most progressive agenda we have seen in decades from a major party candidate. It is important to keep in mind that reducing income inequality requires that we lift up those on the bottom and find ways to include those who have traditionally been left behind.

On another topic, this week Hillary Clinton also has a lengthy essay at Mic.com, Hillary Clinton: Here’s What Millenials Have Taught Me. It’s worth the read.

7 responses to “Hillary Clinton op-ed: ‘My plan for helping America’s poor’

  1. “This comprehensive anti-poverty agenda is just one of the ways that Hillary Clinton is running on the most progressive agenda we have seen in decades from a major party candidate.”

    In other words, Hillary intends to raise taxes as high as she posibly can. See? A liberal’s dream candidate.

    • Spoken like someone who eats whenever he wants and can afford good quality food including fruits and vegetables at all times. Not everybody can do that, Steve. We have a responsibility to the people if the U.S. To make sure that everyone has food, and healthcare. You know it’s part of that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” without food, without healthcare there can be no life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness.

      • TS, I would like to offer you a quick overview of how government programs work.

        If Congress allocates $100 in funding for anythin, before it leaves Washington the Agency that disburses the money takes $20 to pay for its salaries, overhead, etc. The States Agency that receives and passes on the funding does the same and another $20 is gone. The County receives the funding from the States and takes another $20 for the same reasons. The Agency that actually delivers the service receives $40 and takes $18 for their salaries and overhead and delivers $22 worth of services. Only $22. The figures can vary a bit, but th at is how it works.

        On the other hand, If I give $100 to St Mary’s Foodbank, $90 will be used to purchase food.

        $90 versus $22! That is why I don’t like Government Program. They waste enormous amounts of money and rarely get the job done.

        As to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, that is not a guarantee the government will provide that. It simply says there is a right to it, but you are still expected to work for it.

        • The overhead costs for Social Security in 2015 are .7%, so 70 cents per hundred dollars.

          https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/admin.html

          • Well, you are correct, but Social Security is not what I was referring to as a “Government Program”. I was speaking most government programs like Head Start, LIHEAP, Senior Programs, do to provide their services. Most poverty programs are “pass through Programs” where funding is sent down to the Cities and/or Counties to the States through the various Cabinet Departments. And, as I said, overheads and expenses can vary, depending on the program.

            There are Government Programs administered and managed directly by the Federal Government with no interim distribution to the States. Examples are: Social Security, Veterans Benefits, Federal Aviation Programs, etc., but the majority of government programs are entitlement programs that tend to be “pass throughs”.

        • We are talking about children, Mr. Scrooge! Oops, I mean Steve! Children who are hungry!

          • Yes, we are. I believe I pointed out that a direct contribution to St. Mary’s Food Bank is 3X-4X more effective at actually delivering food to the hungry. I am certain, TS, that what you want is getting food into the pantrys of those who need it. The best way to do that is through direct action in your communitynot through a government program.

            Keep in mind also that we are not the first to want the hungry fed, nor is it unique to our time in history. This has occurred over and over, and has resulted in the establishment of dozens of similar or identical programs over the years. Every time the GAO does an audit of the federal government, they cite the hundreds of example of social services programs that provide identical services to the same demographic. This is not a good way to deliver needed services.