Poverty/ homeless

===see HOMELESS 2 519see child tax creditsee social safety net

see also hunger and debtsee also prison ind complex, but do i need a sep category for fines extraction from poor/ppl of color?yep, cash bail

==an 2 23 edit bd
<div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body css-listicle-body-2659336684"><div class="body-description">The Iowa Republican party is proposing<a href="https://www.axios.com/local/des-moines/2023/01/19/iowa-republicans-snap-restrictions-medicaid-program" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> draconian new restrictions</a> on what food can be purchased with the state’s food stamps, or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).This attack on the poor at the state level is coming at the same time as the national GOP has successfully<a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/12/17/congress-just-passed-858-billion-military-budget-gop-blocking-12-billion-fight-child" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> blocked the continuation of the Child Tax Credit</a>, a program which substantially, demonstrably reduced child poverty.The

GOP’s priorities are clear. They don’t want to reduce poverty. They

want to police, control and torment the poor. The party that constantly

touts liberty doesn’t want liberty for all. They want liberty for the

powerful to impose their will on the most vulnerable.READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/04/washington-dc-replace-iowa-caucus" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="self" title="view post: 'Everyone in the territory is disenfranchised': Washington DC should replace Iowa as first presidential nominating contest" class="rm-stats-tracked">'Everyone in the territory is disenfranchised': Washington DC should replace Iowa as first presidential nominating contest</a>Republican ireSNAP is a crucial safety net and the country’s most effective anti-hunger program. In 2021, it<a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/the-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> ensured that 41 million Americans</a> — 12 percent of the population — could afford an adequate diet every month.SNAP

also provides valuable emergency economic stability. SNAP enrollment

increases in downturns, putting money into the economy to combat

recession and boost recovery.Despite its importance, or because of it, SNAP has long been a target of Republican ire.READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/mike-pence-teases-presidential-run" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="self" title="view post: Mike Pence teases a presidential run in Iowa stump speech for Republican midterm candidates" class="rm-stats-tracked">Mike Pence teases a presidential run in Iowa stump speech for Republican midterm candidates</a>Matthew Gritter’s 2017 monograph<a href="https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781498566322/Undeserving-SNAP-Reform-and-Conceptions-of-the-Deserving-Poor" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> Undeserving: SNAP Reform and Conceptions of the Deserving Poor</a>

chronicles how politicians have moved to regulate food stamps in recent

decades. They’ve tried to put limits on what foods could be purchased

and to prevent people without disabilities or dependents from getting

aid.They’ve also pushed drug testing — an idea<a href="https://www.academia.edu/24923711/Reforming_SNAP_Punitive_Policies_Moral_Failings_and_the_Creation_of_Social_Policy" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> introduced</a> by former KKK leader and Louisiana Senator David Duke, and instituted in states like Florida and Utah.Gritter

concludes in an earlier paper that the goal of these interventions

appears to be to replace “a safety net of last resort” with “a costly

method to impose punitive measures on the poor.”“Evidence

suggests that reforms will reduce enrollment without changing the

circumstances that led people to seek assistance,” he says.Iowa is the latest attempt to target SNAP.Canned tuna and salmonThe new bill,<a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ga=90&ba=HF3" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> House File 3</a>, would put<a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/01/20/snap-cuts-iowa-republicans-sliced-bread/11090446002/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> harsh limits</a> on what low-income families could purchase in Iowa when receiving federal SNAP food stamp funds for healthy food options.It would<a href="https://idph.iowa.gov/Portals/1/userfiles/184/235_20%20Iowa%20WIC%20Approved%20Foods%20List%20New%20Format%20%28KK%207_1_2022%29.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> restrict purchases to those covered by the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program</a>, which uses federal funds for food assistance to pregnant people and new parents.According to the<a href="https://www.iowahungercoalition.org/2023/01/13/the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-snap-bill/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> Iowa Hunger Coalition</a>,

“this bill would restrict SNAP participants’ ability to make their own

food choices, take food away from Iowans, and increase hunger and food

insecurity in our state.”Families under House File 3 could no

longer buy white bread, American cheese, coffee, snack foods, canned

fruit and vegetables, bottled water, crackers and more.

They also couldn’t buy any meat except canned tuna and salmon. This despite the fact that meat, poultry and seafood is the<a href="https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/SNAPFoodsTypicallyPurchased-Summary.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> top expenditure category for SNAP recipients</a>, accounting for 19 percent of money spent on food.The

Iowa GOP also wants a limit of $2,750 on household assets for receiving

SNAP benefits; the cap is raised to $4,250 in assets if one family

member is over 59 or is disabled. Houses and one vehicle would be

excluded. Children’s savings accounts would not.These low caps

mean that people could not save for emergencies, because doing so would

mean they would lose SNAP benefits. Nor could they own a second vehicle —

a necessity for getting to work in many rural areas.Historic lowThe

assault on SNAP is ugly because we have just conducted a sweeping

experiment demonstrating that no-strings assistance to the poor is

wildly successful at lifting children out of poverty with virtually no

downsides.The expanded Child Tax Credit<a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/year-end-tax-policy-priority-expand-the-child-tax-credit-for-the-19-million" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> instituted in 2021</a>

provided monthly cash payments to low-income families with children. It

closed a loophole that prevented the poorest families from receiving

assistance, and increased payments for everyone. The result? Child poverty dropped to a historic low of 5.2 percent.Lawmakers allowed the expanded CTC to expire.

Inevitably, child poverty rates<a href="https://www.epi.org/blog/child-tax-credit-expansions-were-instrumental-in-reducing-poverty-to-historic-lows-in-2021/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> went back up</a>.Lawmakers

refused to renew the expanded CTC in part because, mirroring attitudes

towards SNAP, they believed that the people receiving the money were not

deserving.West Virginia’s conservative Democratic Senator Joe Manchin said<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/manchin-privately-raised-concerns-parents-would-use-child-tax-credit-n1286321" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> he was worried parents would use benefits to buy drugs</a>. He also wanted to institute work requirements for recipients.But increasing restrictions prevents the neediest people from receiving benefits. It also may prevent people from working.

A study of those in line to receive CTC funds found that recipients<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/23/the-child-tax-credit-encourages-parents-to-work-study-finds.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> believed</a> the additional money would allow them to pay for childcare and increase their work hours.Sure enough, in studies of the program conducted after it expired, there was<a href="https://source.wustl.edu/2022/02/expanded-child-tax-credits-did-not-reduce-employment-study-finds/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked"> no evidence</a> that CTC payments reduced workforce participation.UndeservingWe

know that SNAP is effective at reducing hunger. We know that simply

giving people money, without conditions, is an incredibly effective

means of pulling children out of poverty.But conservatives don’t care. That’s because they’re not actually concerned with helping the poor.They are concerned with policing them.Conservatives want a poverty policy that is focused on preventing people from accessing benefits. The goal is to punish the undeserving. And all poor people are assumed to be undeserving.The success of the CTC shows that poverty and hunger are not intractable problems. They are deliberate policy choices.The

wealthy and powerful impose misery on the poor because they believe

desperate people are more tractable and less able to organize.

Or perhaps they attack the poor simply because they don’t like the poor and believe they should suffer.In

any case, the expiration of the CTC, and the Iowa GOP’s assault on the

SNAP program, shows that neither the pandemic nor the 2022 midterms have

changed Republican commitments. GOP politicians like to cosplay as

champions of the working class.But the truth is they hold people of modest means in contempt and relish the chance to take food out of their mouths.READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/chuck-grassley-joni-ernst-blasted" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_self" title="view post: 'This is on you': NRA-backed Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst blasted following mass shooting at Iowa church" class="rm-stats-tracked">'This is on you': NRA-backed Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst blasted following mass shooting at Iowa church</a></div>

    </div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font><p /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/a-new-trump-administration-rule-could-force-tens-of-thousands-of-kids-into-homelessness-report/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/a-new-trump-administration-rule-could-force-tens-of-thousands-of-kids-into-homelessness-report/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Trump Administration has proposed a rule designed to purge undocumented immigrants from public housing. But according to analysis from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;rule could have the effect of displacing more than&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/10/hud-says-children-could-be-displaced-under-trump-plan-evict-undocumented-immigrants/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.db1838973f9a" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">55,000 children</a>&nbsp;who are all legal citizens or residents of the United States.</span></b></font></p><div class="p1_7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);" size="4" face="Times New Roman">HUD Secretary Ben Carson has described the proposed rule, which is being<b>&nbsp;aggressively pushed by White House Senior Policy Adviser Stephen Miller,&nbsp;</b>as a way to “make certain our scarce public resources help those who are legally entitled to it.” However, HUD’s analysis indicates that about half of the people in households that are facing possible eviction or homelessness are children who are legally qualified for help.</font></p><div class="p2_7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="alt_ad_block story-page-in-content-graph-2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="teadsNative" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the U.S., current rules forbid undocumented immigrants from directly receiving federal housing assistance. But families that have mixed immigration status are eligible.</font></p><div class="p3_7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">An undocumented single man or single woman is not eligible for housing assistance under current rules, but a family is eligible if at least one person in that household is eligible. For example, a man who is undocumented would not be eligible by himself, but his family could apply if his wife is a U.S. citizen or if he has a child who was born in the U.S. (that U.S.-born child enjoys birthright citizenship). And the benefits the family is entitled to receive are prorated accordingly.</font></p><div class="p4_7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the new rule would require everyone in that household to have “eligible immigration status,” the Washington Post reports. According to HUD, roughly 25,000 households in the U.S. representing about 108,000 people presently living in subsidized housing have at least one ineligible member—and about 70% of these households with mixed immigration status (around 76,000 people) legally qualify for benefits. About 55,000 are children.</font></p><div class="p5_7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to its analysis, “HUD expects that fear of the family being separated would lead to prompt evacuation by most mixed households. Temporary homelessness could arise for a household if they are unable to find alternative housing."</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Diane Yentel, president and chief executive of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, is highly critical of the proposed rule, and the Washington Post quotes her as saying, “Tens of thousands of deeply poor kids, mostly U.S. citizens, could be evicted and made homeless because of this rule. And &nbsp;by HUD’s own admission, there would be no benefit to families on the waiting list.”</font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/trump-continues-his-attack-on-working-people-by-moving-to-redefine-poverty-and-slash-social-programs-for-millions"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/05/trump-continues-his-attack-on-working-people-by-moving-to-redefine-poverty-and-slash-social-programs-for-millions</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;Julia Conley / Common Dreams<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>May 8, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Trump administration on Monday moved to change the definition of “poverty” in the United States in a proposal which combines the president’s attempts to portray the U.S. economy as…</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Trump administration on Monday moved to change the definition of “poverty” in the United States in a proposal which combines the president’s attempts to portray the U.S. economy as strong with his repeated attacks on the working poor and their access to government services.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a regulatory filing, President Donald Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) wrote that it may change how inflation is calculated in order to reduce the number of Americans who are living below the federally-recognized poverty line and are therefore eligible for certain government support services and social programs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Melissa Boteach, who oversees income security programs at the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), wrote on Twitter, the change “seems technical, but it’s actually a big attack on working people.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;· May 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Replying to @mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Remember last year when the Trump admin declared that “our War on Poverty is largely over and a success”?&nbsp; https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Expanding-Work-Requirements-in-Non-Cash-Welfare-Programs.pdf ….&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now he’s acting on this bogus notion, trying to slowly define people out of poverty by decree. 2/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Seems technical, but it’s actually a big attack on working people. In short, Trump wants to weaken how our poverty definition keeps pace with cost of living. So each year, as costs go up, many working people w/low pay would gradually be stripped of WIC, Medicaid & other basics 3/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">15</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5:27 PM - May 6, 2019 · Washington, DC</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">See Melissa Boteach's other Tweets</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Under the administration’s proposal, which was first reported by Bloomberg News, the government would shift to a system known as “Chained CPI,” which assumes consumers will change what they buy as items grow more expensive through inflation, suggesting that they are not struggling to afford necessities.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The definitional change would result in a slower inflation rate, which is used to determine how many Americans are eligible for programs like Medicaid, SNAP benefits, and other federal assistance.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As of 2018, a family of four making $25,900 per year was considered to be living in poverty, based on the necessities they could afford with the current inflation rate.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Under the new system, OMB officials wrote in the proposal, “changes to the poverty thresholds, including how they are updated for inflation over time, may affect eligibility for programs that use the poverty guidelines.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Boteach wrote that the proposal demonstrates “how out of touch Trump is with lives of working-class people,” noting that even the current poverty line does little to reflect the amount of money an American family actually needs to live comfortably in the wealthiest country on the planet.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, wrote Boteach, the new standards will make the government’s understanding of poverty and inequality even less accurate.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;· May 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Replying to @mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Seems technical, but it’s actually a big attack on working people. In short, Trump wants to weaken how our poverty definition keeps pace with cost of living. So each year, as costs go up, many working people w/low pay would gradually be stripped of WIC, Medicaid & other basics 3/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This proposal shows how out of touch Trump is with lives of working-class ppl. “Americans on average&nbsp; report that it would take more than $55,000 in annual income to be considered out of poverty.” That’s more than TWICE our current threshold https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/reports/2014/01/07/81702/50-years-after-lbjs-war-on-poverty/ …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">12</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5:29 PM - May 6, 2019 · Washington, DC</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">50 Years After LBJ’s War on Poverty - Center for American Progress</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A major new study of public attitudes about poverty, work, and economic opportunity reveals that many Americans remain in economic hardship and desire new efforts to provide low-income families with...</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">americanprogress.org</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">15 people are talking about this</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;· May 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Replying to @mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sadly, even w/low unemployment, poverty & hardship are still a mainstay in American life. And guess what? Unilaterally redefining it doesn’t do a damn thing to help someone secure a better job, put food on the table, or pay critical health care bills.6/ https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/reports/2018/03/07/447412/ensuring-basic-living-standards/ …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">View image on Twitter</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Melissa Boteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@mboteach</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is a cynical attempt to squeeze working-class people. Their incomes will STILL be too low to make ends meet, but Trump’s decree would make it harder for them to qualify for help. 7/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">9</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5:40 PM - May 6, 2019 · Washington, DC</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">See Melissa Boteach's other Tweets</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some critics on social media denounced the proposal as Trump’s latest “cruel” measure aimed at weakening the systems meant to support the poorest Americans and struggling working class families.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">David Roberts</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@drvox</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;Trump is going to change how poverty is measured, with the intent of rendering a bunch of people ineligible for social assistance. His base will support this arbitrary cruelty b/c even though it hurts them, it also hurts brown people. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-06/trump-poverty-line-inflation …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">133</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">12:15 PM - May 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump May Redefine Poverty, Cutting Americans From Welfare Rolls</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Trump administration may alter the way it determines the national poverty threshold, putting Americans living on the margins at risk of losing access to welfare programs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">bloomberg.com</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">79 people are talking about this</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Democratic Coalition</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@TheDemCoalition</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;This appears to be the latest cruel and incompetent effort by the Trump administration to make it harder to access welfare programs.#ShitholePresidenthttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-06/trump-poverty-line-inflation …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">243</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">12:53 PM - May 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump May Redefine Poverty, Cutting Americans From Welfare Rolls</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Trump administration may alter the way it determines the national poverty threshold, putting Americans living on the margins at risk of losing access to welfare programs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">bloomberg.com</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">358 people are talking about this</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Paul Krugman</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@paulkrugman</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;For the moment, Republicans have mostly stopped pretending to care about deficits. But they're still eager to cut aid to the poor 1/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-06/trump-poverty-line-inflation …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1,691</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5:32 AM - May 7, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump May Redefine Poverty, Cutting Americans From Welfare Rolls</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Trump administration may alter the way it determines the national poverty threshold, putting Americans living on the margins at risk of losing access to welfare programs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">bloomberg.com</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">862 people are talking about this</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The OMB’s proposal follows multiple attacks on social welfare programs by the Trump administration as it attempts to keep families from accessing SNAP benefits, commonly known as food stamps, and Medicaid. The administration and the Republican Party have pushed in 2018 to require people who use food stamps to work at least 20 hours per week, a move which would push at least one million Americans out of the program.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The federal budget proposal unveiled in March also included more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid, threatening the healthcare of tens of millions of Americans.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The administration has spent much of the last two years insisting that the American economy is thriving—frequently pointing to the GDP, the stock market, and low unemployment rates as evidence.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But studies have shown that low unemployment numbers offer a misleading picture of how American families are actually coping in the economy, as the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not count “600,000 ‘discouraged workers’ who say they are no longer looking because they don’t think they can find a job,” according to Quartz.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Critics have pointed out that 40 percent of families are unable to save enough money to pay for a $400 emergency; 137 million American households struggle to pay healthcare costs; and nearly 80 percent of workers live paycheck-to-paycheck—regardless of the GDP or the stock market.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The OMB’s proposal, wrote Georgetown University and public policy researcher Joan Alker, is “a novel way to take healthcare, etc., away from people AND make it look like there are fewer poor people.”...</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/04/many-people-are-too-broke-for-bankruptcy-heres-what-congress-and-bankruptcy-organizations-could-do-to-help/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/04/many-people-are-too-broke-for-bankruptcy-heres-what-congress-and-bankruptcy-organizations-could-do-to-help/</font></a></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">robt reich&nbsp;</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RR: In addition to being a massive drain on the economy, these fees don’t even help cash-strapped cities.&nbsp;<a href="https://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Flao.ca.gov%2Fpublications%2Freport%2F3600&t=OTA2MDBmZmZiNjdhZThiYWMwMjkzZjE4YWQ0N2E3MWM4NGUyYzEzZCxuVE5yRFFGbg%3D%3D&b=t%3AhQ9Ds4P3Iv6D7mgEr8WMqg&p=http%3A%2F%2Frobertreich.org%2Fpost%2F183733253960&m=1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Uncollected court debt for traffic and criminal offenses totaled $12.3 billion in 2016 in California alone.</a>&nbsp;A lot<a href="https://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F1qg87j282I5Tpj-7AReJEST-mgbiaeFXC%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&t=MmM4MzRjYmZkNjU4YWYzYTM2Yzg3OGNlN2Y2MmViNDc3MWE2MzQxZixuVE5yRFFGbg%3D%3D&b=t%3AhQ9Ds4P3Iv6D7mgEr8WMqg&p=http%3A%2F%2Frobertreich.org%2Fpost%2F183733253960&m=1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">&nbsp;of the fee revenue that does come in goes to collection services, that are private and for profit</a>. Which means very little of the money that is collected winds up going to roads, bridges, schools, and other good things we all need.</font></p><div class="p27_30" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">WKB: That’s why we need to stop the criminalization of poverty. Have you heard of win-win? Well, this is lose-lose, non-win. It sucks. It’s bad for EVERYBODY.</font></p><div class="p28_30" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RR: Bad for poor people, bad for the social fabric, and doesn’t even help the bottom line for government.</font></p><div class="p29_30" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">WKB: Our home state of California is helping to lead the charge to stop the criminalization of poverty. &nbsp;Go to&nbsp;<a href="https://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=http%3A%2F%2Fcadebtjustice.org%2F&t=MTczNjFiOGI4OTVjODA0MWY3MjljYmY4NzBkNjcwMDcwMGFlMjEzZCxuVE5yRFFGbg%3D%3D&b=t%3AhQ9Ds4P3Iv6D7mgEr8WMqg&p=http%3A%2F%2Frobertreich.org%2Fpost%2F183733253960&m=1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">CAdebtjustice.org</a>for more information. Go. Don’t just watch the video. Go.</font></p><p style=""><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></strong></p><p style=""><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">trump trying to kill aca in ct w/ team red, also</font></strong></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/a-federal-judge-just-struck-a-blow-to-the-trump-administrations-cruel-plot-to-gut-medicaid/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/a-federal-judge-just-struck-a-blow-to-the-trump-administrations-cruel-plot-to-gut-medicaid/</a></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On Wednesday, a federal judge dealt a massive blow to one of the Trump administration’s pet projects.</font></p><div class="p1_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Washington, D.C. District Court judge James Boasberg struck down&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><u>work requirements</u> in&nbsp;<a href="https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2018cv1900-58" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Kentucky</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2018cv1900-58" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Arkansas</a>,&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ruling that the waivers granted by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar were not valid because work requirements do not further the Medicaid Act’s mission of improving public health.</span></b></font></p><div class="p2_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="teadsNative" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The rules differ in some ways, but both broadly require certain Medicaid recipients to complete a minimum number of work or community service hours each month&nbsp;and provide proof to the state.</font></p><div class="p3_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kentucky’s work requirement, known as Kentucky HEALTH, was the first to be approved by the Trump administration but was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2018/06/29/judge-rejects-kentucky-matt-bevin-medicaid-work-rules/721247002/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">struck down</a>&nbsp;last year by the same judge, and the newly revised rules were scheduled to take effect on April 1. Arkansas has already implemented its work requirement system, known as Arkansas Works, with disastrous consequences&nbsp;<span class="ILfuVd" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">—</span>&nbsp;over&nbsp;<a href="https://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2019/01/15/over-18000-lost-coverage-in-2018-due-to-medicaid-work-rule-but-only-fraction-have-reapplied" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">18,000 people</a>&nbsp;in the state have lost Medicaid coverage, many of whom actually were working but couldn’t figure out how to meet the state’s confusing reporting requirements, especially those in rural areas who don’t have easy access to the internet.</font></p><div class="p4_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Boasberg criticized Arkansas for doing virtually nothing to help Medicaid recipients understand and comply with the new work requirement, saying “the State’s outreach efforts may well be falling severely short.” He further criticized Kentucky, which argued that their work requirement does further the mission of expanding health coverage because Gov. Matt Bevin intended to cancel Medicaid expansion entirely if he didn’t get his way: “The Court cannot concur that …<span class="" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;states are so&nbsp;</span>armed to refashion the program Congress designed in any way they choose.”</font></p><div class="p5_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Several other Republican-controlled states are currently seeking approval for similar work requirement programs.</font></p><div class="p6_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Medicaid is a joint federal-state program&nbsp;<span class="ILfuVd" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">—&nbsp;</span>both Congress and the states provide funding, and the states are in charge of administering the program within their borders. The Medicaid Act sets strict guidelines about how the program can be run, but the Department of Health and Human Services can approve what are called “Section 1115” waivers if a state has a custom-designed plan that would promote health and coverage beyond what traditional Medicaid does. The Trump administration is trying to flip this on its head, encouraging states to apply for waivers that will lead to&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">fewer</em>&nbsp;people being covered.</font></p><div class="p7_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Boasberg’s ruling holds that states cannot use Section 1115 waivers in this manner. “That provision of the Act does not turn the comprehensive Medicaid program into a buffet for states,” he wrote.</font></p><div class="p8_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Medicaid work requirements are a particular passion of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/01/meet-the-person-behind-trumps-war-on-medicaid/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Seema Verma</a>, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services. She has claimed that denying low-income people health coverage is actually good for them, insisting that “it is not compassionate to trap people on government programs or create greater dependency on public assistance.”</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;She has also claimed that work requirements do further the mission of Medicaid, pointing to studies that show people with jobs tend to be healthier (when in reality the correlation is&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/healthy-workers-are-more-productive-study-finds-1502219651" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">probably the other way around</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.)</span></font></p><div class="p9_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Arkansas and Kentucky were early adopters of the Affordable Care Act’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.healthcare.gov/medicaid-chip/medicaid-expansion-and-you/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Medicaid expansion</a>, which made the program available to people up to 138 percent of the poverty line. The Affordable Care Act originally required states to expand Medicaid, but a Supreme Court ruling allowed states to decide whether they wanted to or not. Republicans in these states are now intent on chipping away at this progress, and work requirements are one way the Trump administration is encouraging them to do it.</font></p><div class="p10_11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For now, that effort has hit a roadblock.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/republicans-are-claiming-that-poverty-no-longer-exists-heres-why-thats-ridiculous/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/republicans-are-claiming-that-poverty-no-longer-exists-heres-why-thats-ridiculous/</a></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">chapman</font></div><div style=""><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For the longest time, one of the big talking points from Republicans was that government anti-poverty programs failed at their primary goal, merely trapping people in dependence on the government. “The federal government declared a war on poverty, and poverty won,”&nbsp;<a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4642456/reagan-war-poverty-poverty-won" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">said</a>&nbsp;President Ronald Reagan in an address to Congress. Former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) took it as fact,&nbsp;<a href="https://shareblue.com/paul-ryan-booed-for-lying-to-a-nun-about-poverty/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">telling</a>&nbsp;a constituent in 2017, “Our poverty rates are about the same as when we started this war on poverty.”</font></p><div class="p1_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s a compelling talking point — it’s just&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/5/5/8548065/paul-ryan-poverty" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">completely wrong</a>. In the 1960s, when President Lyndon Johnson enacted the broad package of programs referred to as the “war on poverty,” including Medicare, Medicaid, and federal housing programs, the poverty rate stood at 19 percent. In 2017, when Ryan had that exchange, the poverty rate stood at&nbsp;<a href="https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-united-states" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">13.5 percent</a>, and it has never gone above 15.2 percent at any time since Johnson’s reforms. That might even be understating things a little, because the supplemental poverty rate — a more accurate calculation of poverty that accounts for transfer payments and the cost of living — has fallen from 26 percent to 14.3 percent during the 60s, meaning we’ve cut the poverty rate almost in half.</font></p><div class="p2_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="teadsNative" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now, however, Republicans in the Trump White House seem to be taking the exact opposite argument as Reagan and Ryan. In their reasoning, we should cut government assistance programs because poverty has already been solved!</font></p><div class="p3_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“President Johnson’s War on Poverty, based on 1963 standards of material hardship, is largely over and has been a success,”&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ERP-2019.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">said</a>&nbsp;this year’s report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers. “However, victory was not achieved by making people self-sufficient, as President Johnson envisioned, but rather through increased government transfers.” The answer, says the report, is to scale back social programs by adding increasingly restrictive work requirements to weed out people who aren’t sufficiently deserving of federal and state aid.</font></p><div class="p4_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">First of all, the claim that poverty has been eliminated is itself incredibly dubious. The Council of Economic Advisers uses something called the Full-Income Poverty Measure, which measures consumption as well as income, to show that the “real” poverty rate has actually declined from 19.5 percent in 1963 to 2.3 percent in 2017. The problem with this measure is that an ever-increasing number of households&nbsp;<a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/trump-white-house-welfare-cuts-poverty-council-economic-advisers-report.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">finance consumption through debt</a>, and most people who go into debt would not consider themselves out of poverty no matter how much they are consuming. Indeed, by the White House’s measure, poverty was lower during the financial crisis and recession of 2008 than they did during the 1990s tech boom, because people consumed more!</font></p><div class="p5_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/07/16/the-trump-administrations-new-poverty-report-builds-a-phony-rationale-to-punish-the-poor/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">economic study</a>&nbsp;at the University of Michigan found that the “consumption poverty” rate does not correlate as well with the percent of households struggling to afford food, housing, or medical care, as the traditional poverty rate does.</font></p><div class="p6_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Second of all, the Trump administration’s conclusion doesn’t even make sense on its own terms. If anti-poverty programs have all but eliminated poverty, why would scaling back these programs benefit anyone? It is similar to the logic that parents&nbsp;<a href="https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/29/anti-vaccine-points-refuted-a-thousand-times/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">shouldn’t have to vaccinate their kids</a>&nbsp;because we have eliminated childhood epidemics.</font></p><div class="p7_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Moreover, study after study has shown that the sort of “work requirements” Trump’s advisers are pushing&nbsp;<a href="https://greenbook-waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/R43400_gb.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">do not work</a>&nbsp;— some programs have seen their enrollment decline slightly after adding work requirements, but the rules don’t make people more self-sufficient and barely affect employment or household income. Part of the reason is that many people on welfare&nbsp;<a href="https://www.epi.org/publication/one-in-nine-u-s-workers-are-paid-wages-that-can-leave-them-in-poverty-even-when-working-full-time/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">already work</a>, they just aren’t paid enough to feed their families.</font></p><div class="p8_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The notion that poverty has already been solved, much like the notion that&nbsp;<a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/12-96" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">racism has already been solved</a>, makes for a great justification to allow Republicans to attack the safety net. But it isn’t true, and telling poor people they aren’t really in poverty is not a substitute for addressing social problems.</font></p></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div></div><p style=""><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></p><p style=""><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/democrats-newest-proposal-could-slash-child-poverty-by-a-third-heres-how/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/democrats-newest-proposal-could-slash-child-poverty-by-a-third-heres-how/</a></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On Wednesday, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Michael Bennet (D-CO)&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/6/18249290/child-poverty-american-family-act-sherrod-brown-michael-bennet" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">introduced</a>&nbsp;a bold proposal known as the American Family Act. And while it hasn’t yet attracted much attention, this bill is likely to become a fixture of Democratic economic policy in the coming years.</font></p><div class="p1_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This bill, an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2018" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">earlier version</a>&nbsp;of which was introduced in 2017, would effectively expand the child tax credit into a “child allowance”, much like what other countries including Canada and the United Kingdom currently have. Under the law, families would receive $300 per month for children under 5, and $250 a month for children ages 6-16. According to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/6/18249290/child-poverty-american-family-act-sherrod-brown-michael-bennet" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">researchers</a>, this plan would cut child poverty by a third, taking it from 14.8 percent to 9.5 percent — an estimated 4 million children.</font></p><div class="p2_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="teadsNative" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The current child tax credit, which was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-child-tax-credit-expansion-20171222-story.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">expanded slightly</a>&nbsp;in 2017 as part of the GOP tax bill, is severely flawed — higher-income households are eligible for up to $2,000 in tax credits a year, but lower-income families that actually need the money get almost nothing.</font></p><div class="p3_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Vox’s Dylan Matthews&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/6/18249290/child-poverty-american-family-act-sherrod-brown-michael-bennet" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">explains</a>, Democrats are in a position to unify behind this proposal, and even if the odds of passage in the current Republican Senate are remote, there will be key opportunities down the road to make a serious push for it:</font></p><div class="p4_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; position: relative; line-height: 1.7; overflow: hidden; background: rgb(245, 245, 245); border: none !important;"><p id="atHgnt" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[I]n its latest incarnation, the bill has the support of the majority of the Democratic House and Senate caucuses, including the No. 2 Democrats in the House and Senate (Steny Hoyer and Dick Durbin, respectively); just about every possible Democratic 2020 contender currently in Congress from Tim Ryan in the House to Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren in the Senate; and leaders of both the moderate (Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Chris Coons) and left (Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) wings of the party. Thirty-five Democratic senators (out of 48 Democrats total) and 168 Democratic House Reps (out of 235) are sponsors or co-sponsors.</font></p><div class="p5_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><div class="p6_8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p id="aCqzd0" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Given that the bill could easily be passed through budget reconciliation — which requires only a bare majority in the Senate — it has a strong shot at being enacted the next time Democrats have a governing trifecta in the House, Senate, and presidency, whether that’s in 2021, 2025, or later. What’s more, the expiration of the Trump tax bill in 2025 will force a reconsideration of the US tax code, giving Democrats an opportunity to push for the inclusion of a child poverty-slashing provision in whatever deal comes out of that deadline.</font></p><div class="p7_8" style="font-style: italic; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" /></div></div></blockquote><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Over the decades, Democrats have delivered massive reforms for the working and middle classes, from Social Security to Medicare to the Affordable Care Act. The American Family Act would be a similarly large disruption to the status quo, that would combat some of the ugliest, most life-destroying poverty in the United States, and provide for those who need it.</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><b><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></b></p><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s HUD wants to expand flawed program that is ‘privatizing public housing’</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>It leaves vulnerable residents at the mercy of developers.</div><div>DANIELLE MCLEAN</div><div>FEB 27, 2019</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://thinkprogress.org/a-flawed-public-housing-program-leaves-vulnerable-residents-at-the-mercy-of-developers-66a0ee5b2321/">https://thinkprogress.org/a-flawed-public-housing-program-leaves-vulnerable-residents-at-the-mercy-of-developers-66a0ee5b2321/</a></div><div><br /></div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/an-expert-in-geography-and-sustainable-development-explains-the-surprisingly-dark-side-of-the-tiny-house-movement/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/an-expert-in-geography-and-sustainable-development-explains-the-surprisingly-dark-side-of-the-tiny-house-movement/</a></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/trump-has-plan-even-further-demonize-food-stamps" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/trump-has-plan-even-further-demonize-food-stamps</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In&nbsp;an attempt to find new ways to make life worse for people receiving any government benefits, the Trump administration is seeking to lump together all government benefit programs into a renamed and reorganized Department of Health and Human Services. And you can be sure that the word “welfare” will be emphasized in any new organization.</font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/06/trump-reorganize-federal-government-629133" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">story</a>&nbsp;that ran first in Politico, the White House Office of Management and Budget soon will release a new report outlining a plan to move all safety-net programs into HHS and to give the federal department a new name, emphasizing the “welfare” moniker that used to be part of the department’s name. A big reason for this recommendation is to lump the $70 billion Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, more commonly known as food stamps, in with Medicare and Medicaid. SNAP would move out of the Department of Agriculture, where it is now housed.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The reasoning is likely that once these benefits are combined under one departmental roof, it will be easier to cut them all.</font></p><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">====</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"owned" doc levittown</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://kpfa.org/episode/upfront-june-13-2018/">https://kpfa.org/episode/upfront-june-13-2018/</a></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/affordable-housing/colonialism-and-the-lost-indigenous-housing-designs-20180528">http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/affordable-housing/colonialism-and-the-lost-indigenous-housing-designs-20180528</a></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/those-new-employment-numbers-trump-bragging-about-look-great-because-they-dont">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/those-new-employment-numbers-trump-bragging-about-look-great-because-they-dont</a></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/ben-carsons-war-poor-people-bad-news-republicans" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/ben-carsons-war-poor-people-bad-news-republicans</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;Trump's choice for Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson, delivered on the president's command to move people "out of poverty" by proposing to raise the rent on some of America's most vulnerable communities.</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><br /></div><div>On Wednesday Carson released legislative text that would raise rent for tenants in government-subsidized housing to equal 35 percent of gross income (based on the assumption that they work 15 hours a week at the federal minimum wage).&nbsp; This amounts to an increase of 5 percentage points from the current policy, which established a cap on the rate of rent at 30 percent of adjusted income. This means that the cap on rent for America's poorest families would rise to $150 per month instead of $50 per month.</div><div><br /></div><div>Carson titled his proposed bill the “Making Affordable Housing Work&nbsp; Act,” in one of his most distinctly Trumpian moves since assuming office. And officials at the Department of Housing and Urban Development claimed this would only affect about half of the 4.7 million families currently receiving housing benefits. But not all policy experts agree with that estimate.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><b>"More than 4 million households will see their rents rise,</b>" Will Fischer, Senior Policy Analyst at Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told Salon. He also emphasized that the effect of Carson's new policy on poor families would be devastating.</div><div><br /></div><div>"These proposals will raise rents for working poor families, the elderly and people with disabilities and force them to divert money from other basic needs like clothing or food or medicine," Fischer told Salon. "In some cases it's gonna push them to the brink and put them at risk of eviction or homelessness. The HUD says that these are reforms but they don't pursue any particular policy goal other than squeezing rent out of these families."</div><div><br /></div><div>Fischer also cast doubt on the idea that Carson's underlying goal is to reform the system and help poor families.</div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/cairo-thebes-in-small-town-america-the-public-housing-crisis-nobody-is-talking-about">https://www.propublica.org/article/cairo-thebes-in-small-town-america-the-public-housing-crisis-nobody-is-talking-about</a></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style=""><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/5-states-most-rapid-increases-homelessness">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/5-states-most-rapid-increases-homelessness</a></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">H<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">omelessness increased in the U.S. in 2017 for the first time since 2010, and advocates for homeless people are alarmed. Ten city and county governments have declared states of emergency since 2015 in response; meanwhile, Department of Housing and Urban Development head Ben Carson shows ongoing&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2017-12-06/us-homeless-count-rises-pushed-by-crisis-on-the-west-coast" style="text-decoration-line: none;">disinterest in supporting local governments’ efforts</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. While cities like Los Angeles are facing a well-publicized crisis as they struggle to find long-term solutions, California is surprisingly not even one of the states with the five</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;</span><a href="https://creditloan.com/blog/homeless-cities/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">fastest increases in homelessness</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, according to a new survey compiled by Credit Loan.</span></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Measuring homelessness in any city is a challenge. For one, most major cities count more homeless people in residing shelters than unsheltered people living on the street or in encampments (Los Angeles is a major exception). This survey includes both sheltered and unsheltered, but notes the frightening rise in unsheltered homeless (nationwide, about a third of the homeless lack shelter).</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Unsheltered homelessness is on the rise, and major cities are feeling it most,” said Nan Roman, president and CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “As cities bear the burden of increasing unsheltered counts, it is essential that they address the affordable housing crisis, increase investments in proven housing interventions, and ensure that they have appropriate emergency shelter capacity.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Beyond the division of sheltered versus unsheltered, experts disagree on the best methods of measuring rates of homelessness. The Credit Loan survey uses a point-in-time (PIT) count from HUD data that communities collect from physical outreach to determine how many individuals are literally homeless on a designated day. This data is pulled from PIT count numbers from 2007-2016. Other groups like the Michigan Coalition Against Homelessness prefer to rely on the numbers generated through statewide data systems to measure homelessness in their states.&nbsp;</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to the Credit Loan survey, these are the states that saw the most significant increases and decreases in homelessness over the past 10 years:</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;" /><div alt="" class="media-image" height="155" width="480" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><img alt="" class="media-image" typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.alternet.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/screen_shot_2018-02-20_at_11.35.31_am.png?itok=NTfTM_6c" style="border: none;" width="480" height="155" /></font></div><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><em><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Credit: Credit Loan</font></em></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The states vary significantly in geography and cost-of-living expenses (South Dakota, for example, is one of the least expensive states to live in, yet the same factors drive that state’s homelessness as in New York), but there is a surprisingly strong common thread explaining why so many people go without homes. In any city or state, the homeless crisis is directly tied to lack of available low-income housing.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A number of diverse factors make the situation in South Dakota unique. The state&nbsp;has seen the largest increase in homelessness in the past 10 years. Native American&nbsp;<a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/south-dakota-native-americans-struggle-with-homelessness/3910271.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">homeless rates are rising</a>&nbsp;as it becomes more difficult to find affordable housing on reservations, where isolation and lack of abundant infrastructure make construction difficult. Elsewhere in the state, homeless advocates have noticed the homeless population getting younger.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Traci Jensen, homeless liaison for the Sioux Falls School District,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ksfy.com/content/news/Federal-report-says-homelessness-decreasing-in-South-Dakota-advocates-say-otherwise-463483393.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">told KSFY in December</a>, "We do see the number of youth over the last couple years has increased." Though a different estimate at the end of 2017 claims the homeless rate had dropped 12% in the past year in South Dakota, three shelters say that number doesn’t tell the full story. "The demand that we see for homeless services certainly hasn't decreased," Brett Johnson with the Sioux Empire Homeless Coalition, said. Many of the area's homeless are living in cars or with friends, Johnson added.&nbsp;Local representatives are pushing for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/brandon/2018/02/06/lessons-homeownership-taught/110042346/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">more inexpensive housing options</a>. Rep. Kristi Noem recently wrote, “Despite South Dakota’s relatively low cost of living, finding affordable housing can still be a challenge for low- and middle-income families. That makes it no surprise that there are 120 families on the waiting list for Habitat Homes.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In densely populated metro areas like D.C. and New York, homeless advocates are unanimous in blaming the problem on sky-high rents. “The one single thing that really has changed is the lack of affordable housing,” Michael Ferrell, the executive director of the Coalition for the Homeless,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/01/us/washington-dc-homelessness-double-national-average.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">told the New York Times</a>. “The housing that’s being created today in the District is not for working-class people,” he said. Gradually widening inequality is to blame: in D.C., as in many other American cities, the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. In New York City, the Coalition for the Homeless similarly reports that lack of affordable housing is the main cause for the city with the highest number of homeless people. Homelessness in New York City has reached the highest levels since the Great Depression in the 1930s, according to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.coalitionforthehomeless.org/basic-facts-about-homelessness-new-york-city" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Coalition for the Homeless</a>.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There is some good news in the struggle to house the homeless. Though Michigan is hurting from the nationwide lack of affordable housing, the state managed to decrease its homelessness rate by 67% over the past 10 years, according to the survey. “We saw the incidence of homelessness spike during the recession and it’s been trending downward each year since in Michigan,” Eric C. Hufnagel, executive director of Michigan Coalition Against Homelessness, told AlterNet. “That’s due in part to a short-term funding infusion, an improved economy and policies which have strengthened the homeless service delivery system in Michigan. Additional funding remains a key need, but there are many other barriers to ending homelessness, including the affordable housing crisis.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These are some of the cities with the most homeless:</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></p></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></p><div class="headline" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="node-title" style="line-height: 52px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; clear: both;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Report: Cash Bail System Hurts Poor and Communities of Color in L.A.</font></h1></div><div class="teaser" style="margin-bottom: 15px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="field field-name-field-teaser field-type-text-long field-label-hidden" style=""><div class="field-items" style=""><div class="field-item even" style=""><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Many people don’t even have $100 in the bank, so paying 10 percent to a bond agent means that money won’t be going toward rent or food.”</font></div></div></div></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/human-rights/cash-bail-system-hurts-poor-and-communities-color">https://www.alternet.org/human-rights/cash-bail-system-hurts-poor-and-communities-color</a></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div><div style=""><a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?436568-1/after-words-peter-edelman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.c-span.org/video/?436568-1/after-words-peter-edelman</font></a></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></div><div style=""><span class="time" style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-weight: 600; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-transform: uppercase; display: block; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><time style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">NOVEMBER 7, 2017</font></time></span><div class="initial" style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.3; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><p style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.3em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.c-span.org/person/?peteredelman" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; transition: color 0.35s; outline: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">Professor Peter Edelman&nbsp;</a>talked about his book&nbsp;<i style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Not a Crime to Be Poor</i>, in which he argues that courts are exploiting the poor by charging excessive fines and fees for minor crimes. He was interviewed by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.c-span.org/person/?henryhankjohnson" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; transition: color 0.35s; outline: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">Representative Hank Johnson&nbsp;</a>(D-GA).</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></p></div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">AH 12/17</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;djt dick-ensian:</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">hat same attitude is driving social policy in the United States today.&nbsp; Only now that the tax overhaul is all but a done deal have we begun to read about why our Republican House and Senate and President seem so little worried about tax cuts that, simple arithmetic tells us, we cannot afford. All month we have been reading about the size of the tax cuts and the plutocrats who will benefit, but there has been very little honest reckoning about what will be the most serious human consequences.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now, however, are we learning the reason. <b>The real goal is eliminating dependency by punishing the poor for being poor.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In a short update,&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.cbpp.org/blog/gop-budgets-statements-make-plans-clear-costly-tax-cuts-for-wealthy-now-program-cuts-later" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">Chye-Ching Huang of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities tells us</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">: “The congressional budget resolution that Congress approved in October, which created the process and set the parameters for the</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> tax bill, also calls for $5.8 trillion in budget cuts over the coming decade, including deep cuts in Medicaid, Medicare, and other health care programs; basic assistance including food assistance through SNAP (formerly known as food stamps); and non-defense discretionary funding, the part of the budget that funds education and training, transportation and other infrastructure, medical research, child and elder care, and other important priorities.”</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">From&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/08/state-group-usda-mulling-big-changes-to-food-stamps-including-allowing-states-to-impose-soda-ban/?utm_term=.c6a52681414e" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">the&nbsp;<em>Washington Post</em>‘s Caitlin Dewey we learn</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;that </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Trump-appointed officials in the Department of Agriculture are considering major limitations within the food stamp program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">): “SNAP is America’s largest anti-hunger program, providing an average benefit of</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> $125 per person each month to 42 million Americans.&nbsp; The majority of SNAP recipients are children or seniors, though participation rose sharply across all demographic groups during and after the recession, peaking in 2013 at 47.6 million.”&nbsp; Officials are considering “new restrictions on purchases of soda and candy,” but also considering more significant cuts: “The agency is also considering a proposal to allow states to reduce payments to some groups of people, including undocumented immigrants’ citizen children…&nbsp; The secretaries’ proposals would allow states to significantly change how they offer nutrition assistance.&nbsp; Through the use of the waivers, the USDA could unilaterally enact the proposals on a state-by-state basis without further congressional action….”</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Why are these proposed changes so utterly devastating?&nbsp; Here is Harvard University ethnographer Kathryn Edin—from her (2015) book,&nbsp;</span><em style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">$2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing in America—</em><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">reporting on the collapse of welfare programs after passage in 1996 of the welfare reform law and the subsequent shift of responsibility for welfare programs from the federal government to the states, which have provided very unevenly for poor families: “Starting in 2001, more and more families with children who were receiving SNAP began to report that they had no other source of cash income to live on—not from work, not from public assistance.&nbsp; By 2006, the number of such families had grown 143 percent from a decade before. By 2012, 1.2 million families on SNAP told eligibility workers they had no other income.”</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> (pp. 30-31)</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Earlier this week&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/11/trump-welfare-reform-safety-net-288623" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;"><em>POLITICO</em>&nbsp;published a scathing indictment</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;of </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">planning that has been going on in federal departments to reduce federal services </b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">once tax reform has been enacted: “The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are hoping to make the most sweeping changes to federal safety net programs in a generation, using legislation and executive actions to target recipients of food stamps Medicaid and housing benefits.&nbsp; The White House is quietly preparing a sweeping executive order that would mandate a top-to-bottom review of the federal programs on which millions of poor Americans rely.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> And GOP lawmakers are in the early stages of crafting legislation that could make it more difficult to qualify for these programs… Federal health officials are encouraging states to impose work requirements on able-bodied adults on Medicaid—a major philosophical shift that would treat the program as welfare, rather than health insurance. The Agriculture Department said last week that it would soon give states greater control over the food stamp program, potentially opening the door to drug testing or stricter work requirements on recipients of the $70 billion program long targeted by fiscal conservatives…</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> The president is expected to sign the welfare executive order as soon as January, according to multiple administration officials, with an eye toward making changes to health care, food stamps, housing and veterans programs, not just traditional welfare payments… Although the effort to reshape the country’s welfare system is all but guaranteed to produce powerful political backlash, it appears to have broad backing from conservative congressional Republicans, who are already coordinating with the White House on a legislative agenda to complement expected executive actions.”</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who, for years, has proposed his own miserly federal budget plans, is quoted by&nbsp;<em style="">POLITICO</em>: “We have a welfare system that’s basically trapping people in poverty and effectively paying people not to work, and we’ve got to work on that.”</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Not considered in all this planning is whether jobs are available and whether people using programs like SNAP are able to work.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/07/opinion/republicans-children-health-chip.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Paul Krugman, the Nobel-prize winning economist and regular columnist for the&nbsp;<em style="">NY Times,</em>&nbsp;is one writer who has highlighted what all this will mean for our society and our children.</a>&nbsp;As an economist, Krugman believes cuts in programs like the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and welfare programs like SNAP—programs that, incidentally, help children be able to thrive at school—are economically foolish</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. He also deplores what such cuts to social programs say about the decline in our society’s ethic of social responsibility: “Children who get adequate care are more likely to be healthier and more productive when they become adults, which means that they’ll earn more and pay more in taxes. They’re also less likely to become disabled and need government support… By the way, broadly similar results have been found for the food stamp program: Ensuring adequate nutrition for the young means healthier, more productive adults, so that in the long run this aid costs taxpayers little or nothing. But such results, while interesting and important, aren’t the main reason we should be providing children with health care and enough to eat. Simple decency should be reason enough. And despite everything we’ve seen in U.S. politics, it’s still hard to believe that a whole political party would balk at doing the decent thing for millions of kids while rushing to further enrich a few thousand wealthy heirs.&nbsp; That is, however, exactly what’s happening.”</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If you wonder what all this commentary about planned cuts to social service and health and nutrition programs is doing in a public education blog, consider these previous posts—about sociologist&nbsp;<a href="https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2017/12/12/14840/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Sean Reardon, writing about the impact of poverty on education</a>—about Harvard’s&nbsp;<a href="https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2017/10/18/14456/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Daniel Koretz examining how poverty affects test scores</a>—about author&nbsp;<a href="https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2017/07/21/13863/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Jack Schneider reflecting on poverty and public education</a>.</font></p><div wibbitz="embed-main-player" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="bio-new body_story" style="width: 630px; line-height: 22px; height: auto; border-top: 3px solid rgb(223, 223, 218); clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="author-bio" style=""><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font style="" size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jan Resseger is a writer and public education advocate in Ohio. She formerly chaired the National Council of Churches Committee on Public Ed</font></p></div></div><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no link</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/human-rights/horrifying-step-backwards-sessions-retracts-guidance-designed-end-abuse-poor-courts">https://www.alternet.org/human-rights/horrifying-step-backwards-sessions-retracts-guidance-designed-end-abuse-poor-courts</a></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Civil rights advocates accused Attorney General Jeff Sessions of "turning back the clock" on criminal justice reforms after the Department of Justice rescinded Obama-era guidance that protected low-income defendants from being forced to pay gratuitous fees to local courts.</b></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Profit-minded court policies targeting the most economically vulnerable Americans have resulted in a resurgence of unconstitutional but widespread practices penalizing the poor and people of color," said Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law. "Attorney General Jeff Session's decision to retract guidance from the Justice Department rooting out practices resulting in a perpetual cycle of fines, debt and jail of America's poor is a horrifying step backwards in ongoing efforts to reform the criminal justice system."</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Under President Barack Obama, the DOJ issued a warning to local courts in May 2016 regarding the common practice of handing fines to poor defendants in order to boost their own revenues.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Individuals may confront escalating debt; face repeated, unnecessary incarceration for nonpayment despite posing no danger to the community; lose their jobs; and become trapped in cycles of poverty that can be nearly impossible to escape," wrote Vanita Gupta, the head of the DOJ's civil rights division at the time, and former Office for Access to Justice director Lisa Foster. "Furthermore, in addition to being unlawful, to the extent that these practices are geared not toward addressing public safety, but rather toward raising revenue, they can cast doubt on the impartiality of the tribunal and erode trust between local governments and their constituents."</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The "Dear Colleague" letter of guidance sent by Gupta and Foster, which was not legally binding, cited examples of unfair demands for payment made by municipal courts, including drivers who could be ordered to pay a penalty of $300 for a driving citation and told that a court date could only be scheduled after the payment was made.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Such requirements "can have the effect of denying access to justice to the poor," they wrote.</b></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sessions said Friday that he was reversing the guidance to combat "the long-standing abuse of issuing rules by simply publishing a letter or posting a web page" and to prevent "confusing the public with improper and wrong advice."</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Gupta told the Washington Post that Sessions's decision "seems like an abdication of the Justice Department's responsibility" to guide municipal courts.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"I think it just takes the pressure off of some jurisdictions that may have been more reluctant to engage in reform," she said.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On social media, other critics denounced Sessions's decision.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Radley Balko</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@radleybalko</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sessions pulls mostly symbolic Obama era DOJ memo advising judges not to fill city coffers by imposing huge fines on poor people for petty infractions.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Merry Christmas everybody! https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-rescinds-justice-dept-letter-asking-courts-to-be-wary-of-stiff-fines-and-fees-for-poor-defendants/2017/12/21/46e37316-e690-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.84f6cb14eb64 …</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4:19 PM - Dec 21, 2017</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sessions rescinds Justice Dept. letter asking courts to be wary of stiff fines and fees for poor...</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The move is the latest in the attorney general’s effort to reshape the Justice Department.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">washingtonpost.com</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;13 13 Replies&nbsp; &nbsp;214 214 Retweets&nbsp; &nbsp;182 182 likes</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Radley Balko</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@radleybalko</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sessions pulls mostly symbolic Obama era DOJ memo advising judges not to fill city coffers by imposing huge fines on poor people for petty infractions.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Merry Christmas everybody! https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-rescinds-justice-dept-letter-asking-courts-to-be-wary-of-stiff-fines-and-fees-for-poor-defendants/2017/12/21/46e37316-e690-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.84f6cb14eb64 …</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4:19 PM - Dec 21, 2017</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sessions rescinds Justice Dept. letter asking courts to be wary of stiff fines and fees for poor...</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The move is the latest in the attorney general’s effort to reshape the Justice Department.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">washingtonpost.com</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;13 13 Replies&nbsp; &nbsp;214 214 Retweets&nbsp; &nbsp;182 182 likes</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">justin kanew</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">?</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@Kanew</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">To avoid confusion, Sessions rescinds a DOJ letter asking courts not to fine poor people just to fill their coffers.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yes, wouldn't want anyone mistakenly thinking he actually cares about that.https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-rescinds-justice-dept-letter-asking-courts-to-be-wary-of-stiff-fines-and-fees-for-poor-defendants/2017/12/21/46e37316-e690-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.e60dd9316f2a …</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><br /></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4:49 AM - Dec 22, 2017</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;Replies&nbsp; &nbsp;7 7 Retweets&nbsp; &nbsp;9 9 likes</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twitter Ads info and privacy</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Julia Conley is a staff writer for Common Dreams.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font><br/>

<a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/civil-rights-group-reaches-agreement-mississippi-reinstate-over-100000-drivers">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/civil-rights-group-reaches-agreement-mississippi-reinstate-over-100000-drivers</a>

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/books/gig-economy-permanent-low-wage-nomads-nomadland">http://www.alternet.org/books/gig-economy-permanent-low-wage-nomads-nomadland</a>

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/economy/6-cruel-moves-made-local-governments-against-poor">http://www.alternet.org/economy/6-cruel-moves-made-local-governments-against-poor</a>

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/recycling-declines-and-centers-close-homeless-are-really-screwed">http://www.alternet.org/recycling-declines-and-centers-close-homeless-are-really-screwed</a>

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/video/how-bail-system-really-screws-you-if-you-are-poor">http://www.alternet.org/video/how-bail-system-really-screws-you-if-you-are-poor</a>

==

HUD cut The proposed reductions are in line with Trump’s recent <a href="http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-trump-wants-to-add-54-billion-to-the-1488211206-htmlstory.html" style=" text-decoration: none;">claim</a> that he will pay for a $54 billion increase to the war budget in large part by cutting domestic programs.

But long before Trump made this assertion, HUD Secretary Ben Carson—who has no prior experience in housing policy—has been open about his desire to dismantle key public housing initiatives. In 2014, he opposed an <a href="http://www.kwwl.com/story/25257161/2014/04/15/dubuque-agrees-to-correct-discriminatory-housing-policies" style=" text-decoration: none;">agreement</a> between the city of Dubuque and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to address the city’s housing policies that discriminate against black residents, <a href="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/ben-carson-iowa-housing-discrimination-settlement-shows-america-is-becoming-communist/" style=" text-decoration: none;">suggesting</a> it was proof America was "becoming communist." In 2015, he vocalized his opposition to a HUD <a href="https://www.huduser.gov/portal/affht_pt.html#final-rule" style=" text-decoration: none;">fair housing rule</a> that is aimed, in part, at reducing segregation, <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/23/ben-carson-obamas-housing-rules-try-to-accomplish-/" style=" text-decoration: none;">calling</a> it a “failed socialist experiment.”

...

</div>

==

While the latest figures from the office of Department of Housing and Urban Development show that homelessness has declined by three percent in the U.S. overall, it <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/hud-us-homeless-population-lower-nationally-higher-west" target="_blank" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration: none;">has also increased in 15 states, especially those in the West.</a>

California had the dubious honor of hosting America's largest homeless population—its count (118,142 people) was up 2 percent from 2015 to 2016. Washington, DC, saw the highest year-to-year increase (more than 14 percent), and was followed closely by Idaho. Of the 15 states that saw increases in homelessness, eight were in the West: Washington state gained more than 7 percent and Colorado 6 percent. Hawaii had a 4 percent increase.

</blockquote>

That’s the bad news. The good news is that with this report, the U.S. has seen <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/hud-us-homeless-population-lower-nationally-higher-west" target="_blank" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration: none;">homelessness drop again for the seventh year</a>.

The new figures, <a href="https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/2016-AHAR-Part-1.pdf" target="_blank" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration: none;">released</a> Thursday by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in its annual report to Congress, mark the seventh consecutive year that homelessness has declined nationally. Sixty-eight percent of the affected people were staying in transitional housing and emergency shelters. The number experiencing chronic homelessness, defined as people with a disability who have been consistently homeless for at least a year, dropped 7 percent from 2015 to 2016—and 35 percent since 2007.

</blockquote>

<p open="Open" sans="Sans" font-size="font-size" px="px" letter-spacing="letter-spacing" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 10px; display: inline;">President-elect Donald Trump hasn’t gotten around to discussing his cabinet pick for HUD, but the current secretary is hoping<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/hud-us-homeless-population-lower-nationally-higher-west" target="_blank" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration: none;"> the policies that have cut away at the problem will continue.</a>

[HUD secretary Julian] Castro told reporters he hoped the incoming administration would retain, or expand, current programs. He pointed to a 47 percent decline in homelessness among veterans since 2010—that's when President Barack Obama launched the <a href="https://www.usich.gov/opening-doors" target="_blank" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; background: transparent; text-decoration: none;">Opening Doors </a>initiative, an effort to wipe out veteran, chronic, and family homelessness.

</blockquote>

===

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/economy/low-income-families-evicted-silicon-valley-apartments-so-building-can-rebrand-facebook">http://www.alternet.org/economy/low-income-families-evicted-silicon-valley-apartments-so-building-can-rebrand-facebook</a>

==

<a href="http://www.globalpossibilities.org/heres-how-three-cities-aim-to-beat-youth-homelessness-this-year/">http://www.globalpossibilities.org/heres-how-three-cities-aim-to-beat-youth-homelessness-this-year/</a>

==

pediatirians now collect malnutrition #

==

===

<a href="http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-subtle-design-features-that-make-cities-feel-more-hostile">http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-subtle-design-features-that-make-cities-feel-more-hostile</a>

==

==

http://www.alternet.org/economy/shocking-unacceptable-levels-hunger-and-homelessness-american-cities

12/15

==

Are We in Ferguson -- or Kabul?

What surprises me most, however, isn’t the corruption at the top, but the ways in which lives at the bottom are affected by it. Reading Thieves of Stateset me thinking about how regularly money in this country now flows from the bottom up that pyramid. If you head down, you no longer find yourself on Main Street, U.S.A., but in a place that seems uncomfortably like Kabul; in other words, a Ponzi-scheme world of the first order.

Consider, for instance, the Justice Department’s 2015 <a href="http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">report</a> [45] on the police in Ferguson, Missouri, about whom we’ve learned so much since Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html?r=0" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">shot</a> [46] to death on August 9, 2014.  As it happens, the dangers for Ferguson’s residents hardly ended with police misconduct. “Ferguson’s law enforcement practices are shaped by the city’s focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs,” Justice Department investigators found:

“This emphasis on revenue has compromised the institutional character of Ferguson’s police department, contributing to a pattern of unconstitutional policing, and has also shaped its municipal court, leading to procedures that raise due process concerns and inflict unnecessary harm on members of the Ferguson community.”

The report then recounted in excruciating detail the extent to which the police were a plague on the city’s largely black population. Ferguson was -- make no mistake about it -- distinctly Kabul, U.S.A.  The police, for instance, regularly accosted residents for what might be termed “sitting in a car while Black,” and then charged them with bogus “crimes” like failing to wear a seat belt in a parked car or “making a false declaration” that, say, one’s name was “Mike,” not “Michael.” While these arrests didn’t make money directly for the police force, officers interested in promotion were told to keep in mind that their tally of “self-initiated activities” (tickets and traffic stops) would have a significant effect on their future success on the force. Meanwhile, those charged often lost their jobs and livelihoods amid a welter of court appearances.

Ferguson’s municipal court played its own grim role in this ugly scheme. As Justice Department investigators discovered, it did not “act as a neutral arbiter of the law or a check on unlawful police conduct.”  Instead, it used its judicial authority “as the means to compel the payment of fines and fees that advance[d] the city’s financial interests.”

By issuing repeated arrest warrants when people missed court appearances or were unable to pay fines, it managed to regularly pile one fine on top of another and then often refused to accept partial payments for the sums owed. Under Missouri state law, moving traffic violations, for instance, automatically required the temporary suspension of a driver’s license. Ferguson residents couldn’t get their licenses back until -- you guessed it -- they paid their fines in full, often for charges that were manufactured in the first place.

As if in Kabul, people then had to weigh the risk of driving license-less (and getting arrested) against losing their jobs or -- without a car -- not making it to court. With no community service option available, many found themselves spending time in jail.  From the police to the courts to city hall, what had been organized was, in short, an everyday money-raising racket of the first order.

And all of this was linked to the police department, which actually ran the municipal court.  As the Justice Department report put it, that court “operates as part of the police department... is supervised by the Ferguson chief of police, is considered part of the police department for city organizational purposes, and is physically located within the police station. Court staff report directly to the chief of police.” He, in turn, ran the show, doing everything from collecting fines to determining bail amounts.

The Harvard Law Review <a href="http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/04/policing-and-profit/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">reported</a> [11] that, in 2013, Ferguson had a population of 22,000.  That same year, “its municipal court issued 32,975 arrest warrants for nonviolent offenses,” or almost one-and-a-half arrests per inhabitant. The report continued:

“In Ferguson, residents who fall behind on fines and don’t appear in court after a warrant is issued for their arrest (or arrive in court after the courtroom doors close, which often happens just five minutes after the session is set to start for the day) are charged an additional $120 to $130 fine, along with a $50 fee for a new arrest warrant and 56 cents for each mile that police drive to serve it. Once arrested, everyone who can’t pay their fines or post bail (which is usually set to equal the amount of their total debt) is imprisoned until the next court session (which happens three days a month). Anyone who is imprisoned is charged $30 to $60 a night by the jail.”

Whether in Kabul or Ferguson, this kind of daily oppression wears people down. It’s no surprise that long before the police shot Michael Brown, the citizens of Ferguson had little trust or respect for them.

Privatizing Official Corruption

But might Ferguson not have been an outlier, a unique Kabul-in-America case of a rogue city government bent on extracting every penny from its poorest residents? Consider, then, the town of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/us/lawsuit-accuses-missouri-city-of-fining-homeowners-to-raise-revenue.html?emc=edit_th_20151105&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=65427895" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Pagedale</a> [47], Missouri, which came up with a hardly less kleptocratic way of squeezing money out of its citizens. Instead of focusing on driving and parking, Pagedale <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/us/lawsuit-accuses-missouri-city-of-fining-homeowners-to-raise-revenue.html?emc=edit_th_20151105&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=65427895" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">routinely hit</a> [47] homeowners with fines for “offenses” like failing to have blinds and “matching curtains” on their windows or “unsightly lawns.”  Pagedale is a small town, with 3,300 residents. In 2013, the city’s general revenues totaled $2 million, 17% percent from such fines and fees.

Might such kleptocratic local revenue-extraction systems, however, be limited to just one Midwestern state? Consider then the cozy relationship that Augusta, capital of Georgia, has with <a href="http://www.sentrak.com/faqs/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Sentinel Offender Services, LLC</a> [48].  That company makes electronic monitoring equipment used by state and local government agencies, ranging from the Los Angeles County Probation Department to the Massachusetts Office of the Commissioner of Probation. Its website touts the benefits to municipalities of what it calls “offender-funded programs” in which the person on probation pays the company directly for his or her own monitoring, saving the courts the cost of administering a probation system. In return, the company sets its own fees at whatever level it chooses. “By individually assessing each participant a fee based on income,” says Sentinel, “our sliding-fee scale approach has shifted the financial burden to the participant, allowing program growth and size to be a function of correctional need rather than budget availability.”

“Profiting from Probation,” a 2014 Human Rights Watch <a href="http://perma.cc/K6WC-T2XT" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">report</a> [49], offers a typical tale of an Augusta resident named Michael Barrett. Arrested for shoplifting a can of beer, he entered a local court system that was focused on revenue extraction via a kind of official extortion, which is the definition of corruption. Even to step into a courtroom to deal with his “case,” he had to hand over an $80 fee for a court-appointed defense lawyer. Then, convicted, he would be sentenced to a $200 fine and probation. Because the charge was “alcohol-related,” the court required Barrett to wear an electronic bracelet that would monitor his alcohol consumption, even though his sentence placed no restrictions on his drinking. For that Sentinel bracelet, there was a $50 startup fee, a $39 monthly “service” charge, and a $12 “daily usage” fee.  In total, he was forced to pay about $400 a month to monitor something he was legally allowed to do. Since Barrett couldn’t even pay the startup fee, he was promptly thrown in jail for a month until a friend lent him the money.

Such systems of privatized “justice” that bleed the poor are now spreading across the U.S., a country officially without debtor’s prisons. According to the Harvard Law Reviewarticle, some cities charge a “fee” to everyone they arrest, whether or not they’re ever convicted of an offense. In Washington, D.C., on the other hand, for “<a href="http://www.dccourts.gov/internet/public/aud_criminal/handlearrest.jsf" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">certain traffic</a> [50] and a number of lower level criminal offenses,” you can simply pay your arresting officer “to end a case on the spot,” avoiding lengthy and expensive court costs.  Other jurisdictions charge people who are arrested for the costs of police investigations, prosecution, public defender services, a jury trial (“sometimes with different fees depending on how many jurors a defendant requests”), and incarceration.

Watch Your Ass(ets)

Even Machiavelli, who counseled princes seizing new territory to commit all their crimes at once because human beings have such short memories, warned that people will accept pretty much any kind of oppression unless “you prey on the possessions or the women of your subjects.” So many centuries later, while we women now tend to believe we belong to ourselves, <a href="http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/introduction/#citation_32" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">civil asset forfeiture</a> [51] is still a part of American life. Unlike criminal asset forfeiture, which permits the government to seize a person’s assets after conviction of a crime, civil forfeiture allows local, state, or federal law enforcement to seize and keep someone’s money or other property even if he or she is never charged. If, say, you are suspected of involvement with drugs or terrorism, the police can seize all the money you have on you on thespot, even if they don’t arrest you -- and you have to go to court to get it back.

Federal asset forfeiture collections have risen from around $800 million in 2002 to almost $4.5 billion in 2014, <a href="http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/introduction/#citation_32" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">according</a> [51] to the Institute for Justice (IJ). Governments defend the practice as a means of preventing suspected criminals -- especially high-level drug dealers -- from using their money to commit more crimes. But all too often, it’s poor people whose money is “forfeited,” even when they've committed no crime. The Pennsylvania ACLU <a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/new-aclu-report-shows-philadelphia-da-seizes-1-million-cash-annually-innocent-philadelphians" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">reported</a> [52] that police take around a million dollars from Philadelphians each year in 6,000 separate cases -- and not from drug lords either. More than half the cases involve seizures of less than $192, and in a city that’s only 43% black, 71% of those seizures from people charged with no crimes come from African Americans. If your property is seized, you can try to go to court to get it back but, <a href="http://www.aclupa.org/files/1814/4526/3118/Broken_Justice-Montgomery_County_final.pdf" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">says the ACLU</a> [53], you should expect to make an average of four court appearances. Most people just give up.

Reading Thieves of Statereminded me that we’re not living in the country many of us imagine, but in something like an American klepto-state. Corruption, it turns out, doesn’t just devour the lives of people in far-off nations. Right now, it’s busy shoving what’s left of our own democracy down our throats.

Chayes documents how such corruption can lead to violent explosions in other countries. Indeed, it was a final kleptocratic insult -- a police woman’s slap in the face after he refused to pay a bribe to retrieve his confiscated vegetable cart -- that led Tunisian <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Mohamed Bouazizi</a> [54] to burn himself to death and touch off the Arab Spring. As Machiavelli wrote so long ago, people will put up with a lot -- <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/09/world/cia-torture-report-document.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">torture</a> [55], <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded#section/1" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">mass surveillance</a> [56], even a <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-gop-clown-car-20150812" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">car full of clowns</a> [57] masquerading as candidates for president -- but they don’t like being robbed by their own government. Sooner or later, they will rebel. Let’s hope, when that happens, that we don’t end up under the rule of our own American <a href="http://www.salon.com/2014/07/03/we_are_a_corporate_theocracy_now_the_christian_right_seeks_cultural_and_political_domination/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Taliban</a> [58] or some billionaire reality TV star.

Rebecca Gordon is the author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0199336431/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Mainstreaming Torture: Ethical Approaches in the Post-9/11 United States</a> [59]. She teaches in the philosophy department at the University of San Fran

</div>

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/housing-crisis-insane-6-cities-where-homelessness-out-control">http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/housing-crisis-insane-6-cities-where-homelessness-out-control</a>

ny sf portland, HI LA

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/15-million-american-families-live-2-day-these-authors-spent-years-finding-out-why">http://www.alternet.org/15-million-american-families-live-2-day-these-authors-spent-years-finding-out-why</a>

==

history AA latino urban  renewal

http://www.alternet.org/economy/4-most-shocking-times-rich-people-displaced-poor-people-profit-america

===

Della Curry is now the former kitchen manager at Dakota Valley Elementary School in Aurora, Colorado. Last week she was fired for giving out school lunches to <a href="http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/06/02/kitchen-manager-fired-for-giving-lunch-to-students-without-money/" style="text-decoration: none;">elementary school kids who did not have money.</a>

<blockquote style="line-height: 25px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“I had a first grader in front of me, crying, because she doesn’t have enough money for lunch. Yes, I gave her lunch,” Curry said.

In the district, students who fail to qualify for the free lunch or reduced lunch program receive one slice of cheese on a hamburger bun, and a small milk.

</blockquote>

===

http://www.propublica.org/article/pets-killed-over-unpaid-fines-and-more-in-muckreads-weekly

<a href="http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/pet-fines/?sr=twmoney0411dogskilled11aINT">http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/pet-fines/?sr=twmoney0411dogskilled11aINT</a>

==

The Kansas legislature has sent a bill to Gov. Sam Brownback’s (R) desk that <a href="http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article17115698.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">limits welfare recipients</a> to withdrawing just $25 a day from their benefits and enacts a range of other restrictions.

If Brownback signs the law, recipients of the state’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program would only be able to withdraw $25 a day with their benefits cards from ATMs, which act like debt cards. No other states or the federal government currently limit withdrawals.

While one of the backers of the bill asserted that recipients could take out more at a bank counter, the cards can’t be used at counters and many poor people lack access to bank accounts given the need to maintain balances and pay fees. <a href="https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2012_unbankedreport_execsumm.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Seventeen million Americans</a> are unbanked, going without formal financial products. Meanwhile, during debate over the bill state Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau (D) pointed out that many recipients need to withdraw hundreds of dollars some days in order to be able to pay rent.

The bill bans welfare recipients from using their benefits or withdrawing them at movie theaters, nail salons, pools and spas, liquor stores, jewelry stores, casinos or racing facilities, tattoo and piercing parlors, cruise ships, and other locations.

It also imposes hard caps on how long recipients can get benefits. After 36 months, poor people would hit the lifetime limit and not be able to get any further benefits unless they could prove they had an extraordinary hardship such as sexual assault, in which case they could get 12 additional months. The federal lifetime limit, on the other hand, is five years. It also bans anyone with two felony drug convictions from ever getting welfare and suspends anyone who tests positive for drugs after enacting a drug testing program in 2014 that has <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/26/3624447/tanf-drug-testing-states/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">cost $40,000</a> and only turned up 11 positive tests out of 2,783 applications. State Sen. Michael O’Donnell (R) said he wanted the bill to go “back to the ‘T’ and making sure this is ‘temporary.'”

==

berk

t the end of the video, as the two homeless men are packing up their belongings to leave, Bailey can be seen pinning Swor into a corner and heard saying, “I swear I will knock you out.”

Bailey initially filed a report to his superiors about the incident, <a href="http://www.berkeleyside.com/2015/03/27/homeless-men-take-plea-deals-after-1-is-beaten-in-berkeley/comment-page-1/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">claiming he acted in self defense</a>. The police report says that Swor brandished a pole with a blade attached to it, and that Cocklereese “raised his fist, and charged the victim,” neither of which can be seen on the video.

But after the Youtube video surfaced, the DBA said it had fired him and suspended Francois. So far neither has been charged.

Cocklereese and Swor, on the other hand, have been charged with seven misdemeanor counts. They both entered no contest pleas on Monday and will be sentenced to two years of probation. They will also have to pay into a restitution fund and will be subject to law enforcement searchers. After Cocklreese admitted to a probation violation, he will have to work for 30 days in a sheriff department program.

DBA CEO John Caner has <a href="http://www.dailycal.org/2015/03/27/homelessness-advocates-rally-after-video-of-berkeley-assault-surfaces/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">called</a> the assault “shocking” and said, “We’re taking steps to do whatever we can to make sure it doesn’t happen again.” He blames the incident on a problematic individual but said the association will expand a training program for its ambassadors.

But advocates for the homeless say the assault is part of a larger problem with the DBA. As many as 15 people <a href="http://www.dailycal.org/2015/03/27/homelessness-advocates-rally-after-video-of-berkeley-assault-surfaces/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">took to the streets</a> on Friday to protest what happened. David Teague, and advocate known as Ninja Kitty, said at the demonstration, “It doesn’t stem [from] this individual ambassador… When it comes to an ambassador’s word against [a] homeless [person’s], the ambassador’s word is gold.” Bob Offer-Westort of Streets Are for Everyone agreed, <a href="http://abc7news.com/news/group-protests-alleged-beating-of-homeless-man-in-berkeley-/576717/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">telling ABC 7</a>, “If there’s a conflict and the ambassador reports, ‘this person assaulted me,’ then the cop is likely to believe the ambassador and arrest the person for assault.”

The homeless face many challenges, one of them being run-ins with city officials and police, particularly given the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/07/16/3460553/homeless-criminalization-report/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">growing adoption</a> of ordinances that effectively criminalize homeless people’s lives. Many of these are put into place at the behest of local businesses.

The homeless are also at an extremely elevated risk of violence, although it often comes from passing strangers, rather than those purportedly there to help them. There were <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/06/27/3453846/homeless-hate-crimes-up/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">at least 109 violent attacks</a> against the homeless from non-homeless assailants in 2013, 18 of which were fatal, a 24 percent increase over the year before. Over the last 15 years, 375 homeless people were murdered.

A big part of the problem, of course, is that the homeless sleeping outside — <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/10/31/3587079/homeless-count-2014/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">more than 135,000 people</a> on any given night at last count — are left exposed. Ninja Kitty has been on a housing waiting list for two years and said, “They expect us to magically disappear while we wait and they attack and assault us while we have nowhere to go.” Criminalization is effectively a way to try to sweep the problem of homelessness aside while often increasing the risk of run-ins with police, which is not just another challenge for the homeless but eats up local government resources.

Some cities have instead moved toward housing their homeless populations. That approach saves a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/05/27/3441772/florida-homeless-financial-study/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">significant</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/09/05/2579451/colorado-homeless-shelter/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">amount</a> of <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/24/3418140/charlotte-homeless-study/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">money</a> by reducing police interactions as well as emergency room visits. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/01/06/3124991/salt-lake-city-homelessness/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Salt Lake City</a>, <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/12/23/3099911/phoenix-homeless/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Phoenix</a>, and <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/01/08/3609181/nola-ends-vet-homelessness/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">New Orleans</a> have all been able to completely house portions of their homeless populations.

==

<div>

<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">If you’re among the millions of Americans who feel bypassed by the economic recovery, you should pay attention to what the GOP-controlled Congress says it wants do to the federal government—via the 2016 budget—because if Republicans get even a fraction of what they have proposed, your living standards will start sliding downhill.

This is the takeaway from economists and experts who know how to ignore the right wing’s ridiculous rhetoric about freedom and opportunity, and instead see exactly who will be hurt, and how that will unfold—if the GOP rips the floor out of virtually every federal social safety net, as they propose, and also raises taxes on already struggling lower wage earners, which they also propose.

“The simplest way to understand these budgets is surely to suppose that they are intended to do what they would, in fact, actually do: make the rich richer and ordinary families poorer,” <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/paul-krugman-trillion-dollar-fraudsters.html?ref=opinion" style="">wrote</a> [3] Paul Krugman, The New York Times’ columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist. “We’re looking at an enormous, destructive con job, and you should be very, very angry.”

The GOP-controlled House and Senate budgets not only drastically cut spending on education, retirement, environment, road and bridges, climate change, immigration, job creation, Obamacare, food stamps, and other social welfare programs; but it gives the Pentagon a blank check, and includes tax cuts for the rich and corporations while raising taxes for lower-income Americans. That’s the <a href="https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/publications/2015-competing-visions-npp.pdf" style="">analysis</a> [4] by the National Priorities Project (NPP), not just Krugman, and they make an even more disturbing point.

In almost every one of these budget areas, nationwide polls show that a majority of Americans strongly oppose what the GOP is proposing. In other words, the Republicans are not delivering the kind of federal government that Americans want; they are declaring economic war on average Americans by reshaping government to serve the upper classes and biggest businesses.

What follows is a summary of the NPP’s analysis, with its documentation, showing that Repubicans are brazenly ignoring public opinion and national needs—which isn’t just anti-democratic but reveals how deeply corrupt the modern GOP has become.

1. Bleed domestic programs to death.The budget is broken down into various areas that are reviewed separately, starting with domestic discretionary spending. This includes education, energy, environment, housing, job training and more. The White House wants modest increases in these areas in 2016. Polls show that Americans want more investment in <a href="http://www.govexec.com/management/2015/01/poll-spending-infrastructure-top-priority-americans/103446/" style="">infrastructure</a> [5], <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/01/29/us/global-warming-poll.html?_r=0" style="">climate change</a> [6], <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">the economy</a> [7], <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">immigration</a> [7], and support higher tax<a href="http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/files/2014-election-survey-by-Hart-Research-for-AFL-CIO-11-5-14.pdf" style="">revenues</a> [8] for these priorities. The GOP propose to freeze current spending or cut it back by hundreds of billions of dollars starting next fall, adding up to $5 trillion in cuts over the next decade.

2. Who needs new or better jobs? Two-thirds of Americans <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">say</a> [7] improving job prospects is a key issue facing Washington. Obama wants to spend about half a trillion dollars over the next six years on road and bridge upgrades, research and development, and give tax credits to new manufacturers. The House and Senate budgets propose “no new funding” in these areas, NPP said, with the Senate saying that “reduced spending and regulation will indirectly lead to job creation.”

3. Who needs a good education? The same-size majority that wants to see more and better jobs, also <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">wants</a> [7] to see Congress improve access to education. The White House wants to expand federal subsidies from pre-school through high school, and spend $60 billion to provide two years of community college for free over the next decade. Republicans propose the opposite. The House wants to cap federal <a href="http://www2.ed.gov/programs/fpg/index.html" style="">Pell grants</a> [9], which are awarded to low-income people for college and graduate school. That means “financial aid to fewer families,” NPP said. It also wants “substantial cuts” to discretionary education programs. The Senate is as bad. NPP said its budget has “no new funding for education,” and “unspecified cuts to domestic discretionary spending could mean cuts to education.”

4. Who needs healthcare anyway?Obamacare may have its problems because it relies on private insurers to be middlemen, but since its inception <a href="http://acasignups.net/" style="">11.7 million</a> [10] people have gained access to healthcare and millions have subsidized premiums. The Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks healthcare trends, <a href="http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-march-2015/" style="">reports</a> [11] that 56 percent of Americans want Congress to expand, improve and implement the law. Obama wants “small tweaks” in 2016, NPP said, whereas the House and Senate still obsess with repealing it entirely.

5. Next on the chopping block: Social Security. Here, too, even cautious pollsters like the Pew Research Center, <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">report</a> [7] that 66 percent of Americans want to strengthen the program—which, contrary to GOP rhetoric, isn’t an “entitlement,” but the government acting as a retirement bank for decades of payroll deductions. Both chambers have already begun to attack a small part of Social Security that helps people with disabilties, saying they want to weed out fraud and cut payments. Meanwhile, the House wants a commission created to “study the program’s problems,” as NPP put it. The GOP agenda is not expanding payments to make life easier, but cutting senior benefits while allowing young people to give their payroll deductions to Wall Street.

6. Privatize Medicare, health care for seniors. Medicare is the federal government health plan for people age 65 and older. It is not free, but costs significantly less than private health insurance. Pew <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">reported</a> [7] that 61 percent of Americans want this system fortified and improved. Obama wants to raise premiums for wealthy retirees, start co-payments for home health care, and allow the federal government to negotiate for lower drug costs, NPP said. The House GOP would also raise premiums for wealthier people, but starting in 2024 if would offer people a lump-sum payment to end their coverage, so they could theoretically buy private insurance. They also would ban the government from negotiating lower drug prices. Both of those proposals are giveaways that take money out of seniors’ pockets and give it to corporations. The Senate GOP simply says it wants to cut about half a trillion dollars from Medicare over the next decade, but doesn’t say how or where those cuts would be. That's pretending no one would be hurt.

7. Kick 7 Million Poor People Off Medicaid. Medicaid is the state-run health program for low-income people. Under Obamacare, before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states don’t have to implement this part of the law, the federal government planned to give every state grants to allow all poor people to get coverage through Medicaid. Even though almost all red states have not helped millions of residents this way, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/08/usa-healthcare-medicaid-idUSL2N0QE0Z720140808" style="">7 million</a> [12] Americans have gotten access to health care through this Obamacare reform. Sixty-two percent of Americans <a href="http://morningconsult.com/polls/poll-states-that-have-not-expanded-medicaid/" style="">believe</a> [13] that this Medicaid expansion should continue.

The White House wants to keep it that way and start a project where Medicaid recipients would be able to access new long-term care options, which comes into play when people no longer can take care of themselves. The House GOP doesn’t just want to repeal Obamacare, kicking millions off this health plan, NPP reports, but it would cut overall Medicaid spending and turn the program—along with SCHIP (the State Children’s Health Insurance Program)—into one block grant. That scenario all-but ensures that health care for poorer families will shrink. The Senate GOP, as with Medicare, says trillions must be cut, “but does not specify how,” NPP reports.

8. Our century’s version of “Let Them Eat Cake.” Those infamous words were <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake" style="">attributed</a> [14] to France's queen in the late 1700s, when commenting about impoverished countrymen. Today, in America, the food stamp program (SNAP) tries to ensure that nobody goes hungry, and is supported by <a href="http://frac.org/pdf/snap_poll_august2013_hart_memo.pdf" style="">70 percent</a> [15] of the public. The White House wants to continue it and make applying easier for seniors, NPP reports. The House GOP, in contrast, would make “deep cuts to SNAP” and turn it into a grant to states, where legislators might not even use the funds for food aid. The Senate GOP merely says food stamps should be on the list of programs that will yield $4.3 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade.

9. But give the Pentagon more blank checks. Sixty-three percent of Americans say the Pentagon spends the “right amount or too much on national security," NPP reported, citing a Gallup <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/181628/americans-split-defense-spending.aspx?" style="">poll</a> [16]. The White House wants to increase the defense budget by more than half a trillion dollars in 2016, which NPP said would make it “the highest base budget in history.” The House Republican budget writers say that’s not enough, however, and seek to use loopholes in war funding laws to add several hundred billion more over the next decade. The Senate GOP essentially rubber stamps that approach, offering no specifics.

10. And use the excuse of endless war to do it.Even though <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-americans-are-feeling-about-the-fight-against-isis-economy/" style="">85 percent</a> [17] of the public is afraid that getting involved in the civil wars in Syria and Iraq will be long and costly, the White House wants $51 billion in additional wartime funding in 2016, and another $5.3 billion to fight the Islamic State (ISIS). Not to outdone by Obama, the House GOP proposes spending an additional $90 billion next year, NPP reports, while Senate GOP wants about $60 billion more on top of the baseline Pentagon budget.

11. Corporate taxes are still too high, right? That’s not what 66 percent of Americans told the Gallup <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/1714/taxes.aspx" style="">poll</a> [18], which the White House sort of acknowledges. Obama, trying to reach some deal with Republicans on tax reform, would lower the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent, and 25 percent for domestic manufacturing, NPP reports. But the White House also would impose fees on Wall Street speculators to raise “$112 billion over 10 years,” close loopholes that let companies park billions overseas tax-free, and impose a 14 percent tax on that cash. House Republicans, in contrast, have only proposed lower rates for corporations and small businesses, NPP said, and nothing to recapture outsized wealth. The Senate GOP hasn't proposed any corporate tax changes.

12. And the rich can’t afford to pay, either? In January, 68 percent of Americans <a href="http://ap-gfkpoll.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/AP-GfK_Poll_January_2015_Topline_taxes.pdf" style="">polled</a> [19] said wealthy households aren’t paying a fair share in taxes. Obama’s budget would try to rebalance that by raising the capital gains tax—on investment income—to 28 percent, and close loopholes that only the wealthiest Ameicans can exploit, such as avoiding inheritance taxes, which would raise $208 billion in a decade, NPP reports. Obama also would implement a minimum tax rate for the richest people, and close a big loophole for Wall St. hedge fund managers, which would raise an additional $17.6 billion over a decade.

The House GOP, in contrast, only wants to lower tax rates “for individuals and familes,” NPP said, and eliminate the “Alternative Minimum Tax that sets a minimum tax for the wealthy.” The Senate GOP, as is the case with corporate taxes, hasn’t proposed any tax changes for the wealthy individuals, suggesting that the status quo works fine for them.

13. But working class and poor must pay more. In a January <a href="http://ap-gfkpoll.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/AP-GfK_Poll_January_2015_Topline_taxes.pdf" style="">poll</a> [19], 91 percent of Americans said that middle-class households paid enough or too much in taxes, and 79 percent <a href="http://ap-gfkpoll.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/AP-GfK_Poll_January_2015_Topline_taxes.pdf" style="">said</a> [19] the same for low-income households. Obama’s response to these sentiments is to increase tax credits for all poor people—with and without children—and give a tax credit to students to help pay for college.

Both House and Senate GOP go in the opposite direction, phasing out two tax credits that now lower taxes for 13 million families, NPP reported. Their budgets allow “the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) to expire in 2017, raising taxes on more than 13 million working families.” In other words, the GOP won't touch taxes for the rich, but will raise them on the poor.

14. Why Krugman called all of this a “con game.”In politics, there’s always a publicly given reason why something is proposed and the real motive, which is not stated. The GOP’s public rationale for these devastating cuts is their sanctimonious obsession with lowering the federal deficit, which makes them pretend to be responsible stewards. About <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2015/01/15/publics-policy-priorities-reflect-changing-conditions-at-home-and-abroad/" style="">two-thirds</a> [7] of the public say that reducing federal borrowing is a good idea. Obama has cut annual deficits by <a href="http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/sep/05/barack-obama/obama-says-he-has-cut-national-deficit-half/" style="">more than 50 percent</a> [20] since he took office, fact checkers have found. Obama’s 2016 budget would continue this, cutting about half a trillion next year, and $1.8 trillion over the next decade.

But deficit reduction is not what is going on here. The House and Senate Republican budgets actually would cut less money from next year’s deficit—about $350 billion—than Obama, NPP said, and then decrease domestic spending by more than $5 trillion dollars over the next decade to “balance” the budget. What's going on is the GOP wants to cut back the federal government to roughly where it was before the Progressive era began a century ago, when government helped the rich get richer and there were no safety nets.

“Think about what these budgets would do if you ignore the mysterious trillions in unspecified spending cuts and revenue enhancements,” Krugman <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/paul-krugman-trillion-dollar-fraudsters.html?ref=opinion" style="">wrote</a>[3]. “What you’re left with us huge transfers of income from the poor and the working class, who would see severe benefit cuts, to the rich, would would see big tax cuts.”

Krugman said this wasn’t Republican extremism as usual, but a declaration of economic warfare on behalf of wealthy Americans at the expense of everyday Americans who want, and expect, more from federal government.

“Look, I know that it’s hard to keep up with the outrage after so many years of fiscal fraudulence,” he concluded. “But please try. We’re looking at an enormous, destructive con job, and you should be very, very angry.”

The National Priorities Project’s budget <a href="https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/publications/2015-competing-visions-npp.pdf" style="">analysis</a> [4] underscores that the GOP’s proposals aren’t just corrupt—a vast giveaway to the wealthy people and interests who fund their campaigns—but are fundamentally anti-democratic. Poll after poll report that a majority of Americans want Congress to invest in education, road and bridges, jobs, climate change, immigration, healthcare reform, retirement security, safety nets for the poor and vulnerable, and raise taxes on those who can easily afford to pay a fairer share.

Astoundingly, congressional Republicans not only oppose every one of those goals, but their budget proposals, if enacted, would undeniably make life harder for average Americans, millions of whom would slide down the economic ladder toward poverty.

Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet, including America's retirement crisis, democracy and voting rights, and campaigns and elections. He is the author of "Count My Vote: A Citizen's Guide to Voting" (AlterNet Books, 2008).

</div>

jungle  <a href="http://www.alternet.org/some-sort-hell-how-one-wealthiest-cities-america-treats-its-homeless?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark">http://www.alternet.org/some-sort-hell-how-one-wealthiest-cities-america-treats-its-homeless?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark</a></div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

To an outside observer, the eviction was predictable. The state’s threat to sue Santa Clara County over the pollution in Coyote Creek caused by camping spurred the closing of the Jungle, a winding, 68-acre shantytown under an overpass with upwards of 300 people. With the state’s environmental agencies—and the public—watching, San Jose could not allow another Jungle to spring up.

But the city could offer no viable alternative to the people it was expelling for the second time in a week. San Jose, the self-described capital of Silicon Valley, the largest wealth generator in the United States, lacked the resources.

The Jungle had become a symbol of the growing divide between the nation’s rich and poor. But its December 4 dismantling—a spectacle of crying residents struggling with shopping carts, Hazmat-suited cleanup crews tossing furniture into dump trucks and hordes of police and reporters standing watch—only underscored the problem, since so many Jungle residents were literally left out in the cold.

Residents of the neighborhood in Central San Jose that abutted the Jungle were glad to see the encampment go. But dismantling the Jungle is already creating new problems. Just days after the Jungle was torn apart, San Jose police and other city departments began fielding calls from people in different neighborhoods complaining of former Jungle residents setting up camps near them. Some ended up in a Walmart parking lot before being booted. Others were congregating near the airport, also under threat of eviction. At least one hospital reported an upsurge of emergency room visits from former residents of the Jungle, sick from weathering the elements, having misplaced medications in the eviction.

“What the city is saying is that it refuses to provide affordable housing, but it does not tolerate people living outside,” said Sandy Perry, an organizer at the Affordable Housing Network of Santa Clara County, who has worked with San Jose’s homeless population since 1991. “This is a willful, wholesale violation of human rights.”

San Jose, by all accounts, is experiencing a crisis in homelessness. Even with dedicated non-profits working to stem the tide, the city’s homeless problem, like that of other booming cities—New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, to name a few—has grown markedly worse in recent years. San Jose is the nation’s 10th largest city (with one million residents) but the San Jose/Santa Clara County area, home to 34 billionaires, has the nation’s fifth largest homeless population, after New York, Los Angeles, Seattle and San Diego.

San Jose/Santa Clara County also has the nation’s highest percentage of homeless people living on the streets. More than 75 percent, upwards of 7,600, are unsheltered, according to the 2014 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, compared to five percent of the homeless people in New York City.

Ray Bramson, San Jose’s homeless response team manager, said the city did all it could for the Jungle. It earmarked $4 million and spent 18 months, with contracted non-profit organizations, to find housing for 144 Jungle residents, using housing vouchers that expire in two years. But another 60 residents, vouchers in hand, could not find apartments, even with social workers working on their behalf. By the end, just weeks before the dismantling, the population of the Jungle was still between 200 and 300 people, according to housing advocates and volunteers who worked with jungle residents. That’s because every time a resident of the Jungle moved out, another person, or more, took their place.

Critics of the way the city dismantled the Jungle, both professional advocates for the homeless and citizens registering their opinions on social media, have decried the city for creating a two-year voucher program that inadequately served the population.

“When a city decides to built a park, it doesn’t build until it has the funding to finish it,” said Anthony King, a volunteer outreach worker who was homeless for more than 10 years. “So why did the city decide to undergo a program that addressed the needs of only some of the people in the Jungle?”

The city said it was forced to close the camp for its environmental risks and hazardous conditions. But Bramson himself has said that there are many other homeless camps along the waterways. In fact, the Jungle was part of a string of 247 tent cities along Santa Clara County’s waterways that contain 1,230 people, according to a recent county census.

Chris Herring, a Ph.D candidate in sociology at the University of California at Berkeley who has extensively researched homeless encampments on the west coast, said the eviction “will not mitigate the ongoing environmental damage to Coyote Creek by homeless habitation”—only move it around.”

In an essay in Beyond <a href="http://chron.org/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Chron.org</a>, Herring also said the eviction “will exacerbate rather than improve unsanitary conditions faced by the evicted, pushing them further from clean water, recycling centers and toilets.”

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div><a href="http://www.beyondchron.org/four-fallacies-jungle-eviction/">http://www.beyondchron.org/four-fallacies-jungle-eviction/</a></div>

<div>

</div>

<div>On December 4th San Jose began the eviction of what has been called America’s largest homeless encampment: 68 acres of creek-side property inhabited by some 300 men, women, and children residing in tents, shanties, and underground adobe dwellings. The city’s homeless response manager Ray Bramson<a href="http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2014/12/04/homeless-evicted-from-the-jungle-in-san-jose" style="line-height: 1.25em; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">justified the camp’s eviction</a> on grounds of “environmental risks,” and its “unsafe and unsanitary conditions.” Yet, it is difficult to understand how an eviction might relieve any of these conditions.</div>

First, the eviction will not mitigate the ongoing environmental damage to Coyote Creek by homeless habitation. Even if the city succeeds in preventing re-settlement after the “sweep” it will not resolve the pollution problem, but merely move it around. The Jungle is the largest camp in a much longer archipelago of 247 tent cities along Santa Clara’s waterways that contain 1,230 people according to a recent <a href="http://www.sccgov.org/sites/mhd/Services/RCare/Documents/Housing/%2713%20Homeless%20Census%20and%20Survey%20Santa%20Clara%206%2028%2013%20FINAL.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">county census</a>. While the $7,000 investment in an eight-foot steel fence and several boulders to seal the site may restore the natural habitat of the former campsite, it will be at the cost of increased environmental degradation further upstream where the evicted will relocate.

Second, the eviction will exacerbate rather than improve the unsanitary conditions faced by the evicted – pushing them further from clean water, recycling centers, and toilets. An obvious alternative would be for the city to provide access to toilets, clean water, and trash disposal. In November Jungle residents <a href="http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/The-Jungle-in-San-Jose-Residents-of-Nations-Biggest-Homeless-Encampment-Protest-Port-A-Potty-Closing-Time-Police-Sweeps-281383481.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">protested for better sanitary provisions</a>, in an event eerily similar to those occurring in the favelas of Rio and slums of Mumbai, shouting “No Potty, No Peace” in front of the three port-a-potties provided by the city. Not only was the 1/100 person to toilet ratio grossly inadequate, they were only open between 8am-4pm. After hours, residents were encouraged to use city-provided sanitary bags. When a United Nation’s Special Rapporteur on Human Rights visited Sacramento’s Tent City and discovered similar conditions <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/80310395/Letter-to-Mayor-Johnson-from-UN" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">the city was found in blatant violation of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights</a>, for denying access to safe water and its policy of evictions. Far from a solution to unsanitary conditions, San Jose’s evictions are likely in violation of international law.

Third, eviction will only increase the insecurity and violence experienced by the evicted. From the interviews I’ve conducted with residents of twelve large encampments across the west coast, the primary reason the homeless “chose” to live in such congregate settings as opposed their limited alternatives is the “safety in numbers” from attacks by other homeless people, <a href="http://nlchp.org/documents/No_Safe_Place" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">pestering by police</a>, and <a href="http://nationalhomeless.org/new-report-hate-crimes-homeless-2013/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">harassment of the housed</a> who all too frequently exploit, rob, rape, or beat-up the un-housed. Yes, the Jungle was a violent and dangerous place. The sad reality is that it was likely safer than the places the evicted will be spending the coming nights.

City officials will refute the critiques leveled above by highlighting their <a href="http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2014/12/04/homeless-evicted-from-the-jungle-in-san-jose" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">“housing first approach” to eviction</a>, noting the 144 Jungle residents who have been successfully housed with two-year rental subsidies, the 60 who have vouchers in hand, and the opening of 250 winter shelter beds. This incomplete excuse is the fourth fallacy of the Jungles eviction. The claim that the provision of the regularly scheduled 250 temporary shelter beds is an ample response to a permanent eviction in a <a href="http://www.sccgov.org/sites/mhd/Services/RCare/Documents/Housing/%2713%20Homeless%20Census%20and%20Survey%20Santa%20Clara%206%2028%2013%20FINAL.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">city with more than 5,000 unsheltered individuals</a> is an insult to citizen’s intelligence. The fact that 60 voucher holders, more than one-third of recipients, could not find housing even with government guaranteed rent is an embarrassing indictment to city, <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2012/09/19/redevelopment-in-california-the-program-that-disappeared" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">state</a>, and <a href="http://www.wraphome.org/downloads/2010%20Update%20Without%20Housing.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">federal policies</a> that subsidize wealthier homeowners at the expense of poorer renters.

Furthermore, as other cities such as L.A. and San Francisco move towards coordinated assessments to distribute limited housing to those most in need, one must wonder if San Jose’s blanket-provision of vouchers to Jungle residents is the most efficient and just use of resources or merely a strategy to reduce the Public Relations bruising of the eviction. Most importantly, the housing provisions did not cover all those in the Jungle. At least 50 people were evicted by police along with countless others who left beforehand in anticipation of eviction.

As San Jose captures the momentary media, it’s important to remember that there is nothing exceptional about the Jungle in its existence or its eviction. Mass homeless encampments are increasingly common fixtures of US cities and the rationales for their evictions follow nearly identical scripts. As the media has its field day with the latest expression of the pornographic poverty of squalor in the midst of opulence that the US is so prone to produce, it is important to remember that those living in the Jungle were not there “by choice,” but because they had nowhere else to go. Expelled from all other public spaces by the region’s criminalization of the poor, they have now been pushed into more remote, dangerous, and unsanitary jungles along Coyote Creek.

Author Bio: Chris Herring is PhD Candidate of Sociology at University of California Berkeley. His research focuses on homelessness and urban policy. He is the primary author of the National Coalition on Homelessness report: “Tent Cities in America: A Pacific Coast Report.”

<div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>==

<div>

</div>

<div><a href="http://www.alternet.org/print/economy/6-step-process-dispose-poor-half-america">http://www.alternet.org/print/economy/6-step-process-dispose-poor-half-america</a></div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

<div class="byline economy" style=" background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="http://alternet.org/" style="">AlterNet</a> [1] / By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/paul-buchheit-0" style="">Paul Buchheit</a> [2]</div>

</div>

<h1 property="dc:title" datatype="" class="node-title">The 6-Step Process to Dispose of the Poor Half of America</h1>

</div>

</div>

<div class="story-date">December 14, 2014  |  </div>

One of the themes of the writing of <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13033599-disposable-youth" target="_blank" style="">Henry Giroux</a> [3] is that more and more Americans are becoming "disposable," recognized as either commodities or criminals by the more fortunate members of society. There seems to be a method to the madness of winner-take-all capitalism. The following steps, whether due to greed, indifference or disdain, are the means by which America's wealth-takers dispose of the people they don't need.

1. Deplete Their Wealth

Recent <a href="http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/more-evidence-that-half-of-america-is-in-or-near-poverty/18551-more-evidence-that-half-of-america-is-in-or-near-poverty" target="blank" style="">analysis</a> [4] has determined that half of America is in or near poverty. This is confirmed by researchers <a href="http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/SaezZucman2014.pdf" target="blank" style="">Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman</a> [5], who point out: "The bottom half of the distribution always owns close to zero wealth on net. Hence, the bottom 90% wealth share is the same as the share of wealth owned by top 50-90 families—what can be described as the middle class."

The United States has one of the <a href="http://www.epi.org/publication/ib339-us-poverty-higher-safety-net-weaker/" target="blank" style="">highest poverty rates</a> [6] in the <a href="http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-poverty-figure-7w-relative-poverty-rate/" target="blank" style="">developed world</a> [7]. It's much worse since the recession, especially for <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/07/14/economic-lynching" target="_blank" style="">blacks and Hispanics</a> [8].

From 2008 to 2013 the stock market, which is largely <a href="http://epi.3cdn.net/2a7ccb3e9e618f0bbc_3nm6idnax.pdf" target="blank" style="">owned</a> [9] by just 10% of Americans, gained <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/25/business/economy/sp-has-more-than-doubled-under-obama.html?r=0" target="blank" style="">18% per year</a> [10]. Well-to-do stockholders get capital gains tax breaks, including a carried interest subsidy <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/12/09/wall-streets-democrats" target="blank" style="">Robert Reich</a>[11] calls "a pure scam."

The bottom half of America, relying on regular bank accounts, earn about <a href="http://www.thesimpledollar.com/why-are-savings-account-rates-so-low/" target="_blank" style="">one percent</a> [12] on their savings.

2. Strip Away Their Income

Earnings due to workers for their years of productivity have been withheld by people in power. Based on inflation, the minimum wage should be nearly <a href="http://inequality.org/minimum-wage/" target="blank" style="">three times</a> [13] its current level. An investor report from J.P. Morgan <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/14/269213/report-corporate-profits-wage-cuts/" target="blank" style="">noted</a> [14] a direct correlation between record profits and cutbacks in wages.

We hear occasional news about job growth, but <a href="http://www.nelp.org/page/-/Job_Creation/LowWageRecovery2012.pdf?nocdn=1" target="blank" style="">low-wage jobs</a> [15] ($7.69 to $13.83 per hour), which made up just one fifth of the jobs lost to the recession, accounted for nearly three-fifths of the jobs regained during the recovery. And it's getting worse. Nine out of 10 of the fastest-growing <a href="http://www.bls.gov/ooh/most-new-jobs.htm" target="blank" style="">occupations</a> [16] are considered low-wage, generally not requiring a college degree, <a href="http://www.nelp.org/page/content/Unbalanced-Recovery/" target="_blank" style="">including</a> [17] food service, healthcare, housekeeping, and retail sales.

Among rich countries, according to OECD data, the U.S. is <a href="http://www.alternet.org/labor/youre-likely-be-lot-poorer-you-were-few-years-ago-and-its-all-design" target="blank" style="">near the bottom</a> [18] in both <a href="http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=UN_DEN" target="blank" style="">union participation</a> [19]and <a href="http://www.oecd.org/employment/emp/oecdindicatorsofemploymentprotection.htm#data" target="_blank" style="">employee protection</a> [20] laws.

3. Take Away Their Homes

A <a href="http://nlihc.org/oor/2014" target="blank" style="">study</a> [21] by the National Low Income Housing Coalition concluded that an average American renter would need to earn $18.92 per hour—well over twice the minimum wage—to afford a two-bedroom apartment. "In no state," its report says, "can a full-time minimum wage worker afford a one-bedroom or a two-bedroom rental unit at Fair Market Rent." Over <a href="http://nlchp.org/documents/No_Safe_Place" target="blank" style="">one-eighth</a> [22] of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001.

Little wonder so many people are <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/10/14/ten-facts-about-being-homeless-usa" target="blank" style="">homeless</a> [23]: over <a href="https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/ahar-2013-part1.pdf" target="blank" style="">600,000</a> [24] on any January night in the U.S., tens of thousands of children, tens of thousands of veterans, and one of every five suffering from mental illness.

4. Hit Them with Fines, Fees and Fleecings

The poor half of America is victimized by the <a href="https://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2014/rarc-wp-14-007.pdf" target="blank" style="">banking</a> [25] industry, which takes an average of $2,412 each year from underserved households for interest and fees on alternative financial services; by <a href="http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-america-why-the-poor-pay-dollar4158-for-a-dollar1500-%E2%80%98rent-to-own%E2%80%99-sofa/ar-BB9w32K" target="blank" style="">rental centers</a> [26] that charge effective annual interest rates over 100 percent; by <a href="http://www.thewire.com/entertainment/2014/08/john-oliver-examines-the-resilience-of-payday-loans/375850/" target="blank" style="">payday lenders</a> [27] that <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2009/200933/200933pap.pdf" target="blank" style="">charge</a> [28] effective annual <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-trap-of-payday-loans-can-lead-to-triple-digit-interest-rates/2014/03/25/ca1853dc-b471-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html" target="blank" style="">interest rates</a> [29] of over 1,000 percent; and by the burgeoning <a href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/27138-public-prisons-private-profits%20/%20%20http://truth-out.org/news/item/27306-the-shackles-return-why-debtors-prisons-are-making-an-american-comeback" target="blank" style="">prison industry</a> [30], which charges prisoners for food, healthcare, phone calls, and even probation monitoring.

On top of all this, bubbly TV personalities rave about all the lottery money just waiting to be taken home. Poor families account for <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/25/3326421/state-lottery-education/" target="_blank" style="">most</a> [31] of the lottery sales.

5. Criminalize Them

Matt Taibbi's recently published <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Divide:American_Injustice_in_the_Age_of_the_Wealth_Gap" target="blank" style="">book</a> [32] The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap contrasts the targeting of the poor for trivial offenses with a tolerance for the architects of billion-dollar financial <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-divide-american-injustice-in-the-age-of-the-wealth-gap-by-matt-taibbi/2014/04/11/66a1e7c8-b291-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html" target="_blank" style="">crimes</a>[33].

The U.S. court system is <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-is-swift-as-petty-crimes-clog-courts-1417404782" target="blank" style="">flooded</a> [34] with cases for minor infractions, including loitering charges reminiscent of the infamous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Codes%28United_States%29" target="_blank" style="">Black Codes</a> [35] of post-slavery years. The buildup of arrests has added one out of every three U.S. adults to the FBI's criminal database.

The poor are <a href="http://www.nlchp.org/documents/No_Safe_Place" target="blank" style="">criminalized</a> [36] for lying down or sleeping in public, for sharing food, for having <a href="http://www.nlchp.org/documents/No_Safe_Place" target="blank" style="">nowhere to go</a> [36].

6. Most Insidious: Let Their Children Suffer

The U.S. has one of the highest relative <a href="http://www.aecf.org/blog/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-measuring-poverty-in-america/" target="blank" style="">child poverty rates</a> [37] in the developed world. <a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/fact-sheets/poverty/" target="blank" style="">Almost half</a> [38] of black children under the age of six are living in poverty. Nearly half of all <a href="http://blogs.usda.gov/2011/06/24/fact-vs-fiction-usda%E2%80%99s-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program/" target="blank" style="">food stamp</a> [39] participants are children. The number of <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/17/study-more-homeless-children-now-any-point-us-history" target="blank" style="">homeless children</a> [40] has risen by <a href="http://www.homelesschildrenamerica.org/mediadocs/280.pdf" target="_blank" style="">50 percent</a> [41] in less than 10 years.

Early education is certainly part of the solution, for <a href="http://www.nieer.org/news-events/news-releases/nieer-statement-president-obama%E2%80%99s-pre-k-proposal" target="blank" style="">numerous studies</a> [42] have shown that pre-school helps all children to achieve more and earn more through adulthood, with the most disadvantaged benefiting the most. But even though the U.S. ranks near the <a href="http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/CN%20-%20United%20States.pdf" target="blank" style="">bottom of developed countries</a> [43] in the percentage of 4-year-olds in early childhood education, Head Start was recently hit with the <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/19/stateline-head-start/2671309/" target="_blank" style="">worst cutbacks</a> [44] in its history.

Meanwhile, public schools in the inner-city are being closed to satisfy the profit urges of the privatizers, who view our children as commodities. Said community organizer <a href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/27631-tough-lessons-for-rahm" target="_blank" style="">Jitu Brown</a> [45] after 50 schools were shut down in Chicago: "It has ripped black communities apart."

Americans seek reasons for all the violence in our city streets. With so many "disposable" citizens deprived of living-wage jobs, a meaningful education and equal treatment by our system of justice, rebellion in the form of violence is not hard to understand. The privileged members of society would lash out, too, if they were stripped of everything they own and tossed into the streets. </div>

</div>

<div>

<div>===

<div>

</div>

<div>

<div class="yiv3684339125item-hed" style=" margin: 0px 0px 7px; padding: 0px; line-height: 22px; outline: none; zoom: 1; font-weight: bold;"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://click.lists.propublica.net/?qs=3d145f68ba4199a3d713b603a8a85435338c0faadb3698361865f621979321b1" style="text-decoration: none; line-height: 1.2em; outline: none;">Old Debts, Fresh Pain: Weak Laws Offer Debtors Little Protection</a></div>

<div class="yiv3684339125byline" style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.1; outline: none; zoom: 1; font-style: italic;">by Paul Kiel, ProPublica, and Chris Arnold, NPR |<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.lists.propublica.net/?qs=3d145f68ba4199a33b99c6b4366e4cb70d89015f57421efd4c1ca88e182cbe92" style="text-decoration: none; line-height: 1.2em; outline: none;">@paulkiel</a> and <a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click.lists.propublica.net/?qs=3d145f68ba4199a3d27075790d9a6f512414a7dcacf2a98b14c125179cb4eb16" style="text-decoration: none; line-height: 1.2em; outline: none;">@Chris_ArnoldNPR</a></div>

Critics say the 1968 federal law that allows collectors to take 25 percent of debtors' wages, or every penny in their bank accounts, is out of date and overly harsh.

This story was co-published with NPR.

<div class="yiv3684339125full-coverage" style=" margin: 10px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; outline: none; zoom: 1; font-weight: bold;">More coverage: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://click.lists.propublica.net/?qs=3d145f68ba4199a377d171080ab159366fecdceb79717dd449043d46683d831b" style="text-decoration: none; line-height: 1.2em; outline: none;">Unseen Toll: Wages of Millions Seized to Pay Past Debts</a></div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div><a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/unseen-toll-wages-of-millions-seized-to-pay-past-debts">http://www.propublica.org/article/unseen-toll-wages-of-millions-seized-to-pay-past-debts</a></div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

<h1 style=" margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1.2; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Unseen Toll: Wages of Millions Seized to Pay Past Debts</h1>

A new study provides the first-ever tally of how many employees lose up to a quarter of their paychecks over debts like unpaid credit card or medical bills and student loans.

</div>

<p class="byline author-override" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: italic; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1.2; float: left; width: 555px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">by <a href="http://www.propublica.org/site/author/paul_kiel" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">Paul Kiel</a>, ProPublica, and Chris Arnold, NPR, Sep. 15, 2014,

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>After years of spotty employment, Evans, 58, thought he'd finally recovered last year when he found a better-paying, full-time customer service job in Springfield, Mo. But early this year, he opened his paycheck and found a quarter of it missing. His credit card lender, Capital One, had garnished his wages. Twice a month, whether he could afford it or not, 25 percent of his pay — the legal limit — would go to his debt, which had ballooned with interest and fees to over $15,000.</div>

<div>

"It was a roundhouse from the right that just knocks you down and out," Evans said.

The recession and its aftermath have fueled an explosion of cases like Evans'. Creditors and collectors have pursued struggling cardholders and other debtors in court, securing judgments that allow them to seize a chunk of even meager earnings. The financial blow can be devastating — more than half of U.S. states allow creditors to take a quarter of after-tax wages. But despite the rise in garnishments, the number of Americans affected has remained unknown.

At the request of ProPublica, <a href="http://www.adp.com/tools-and-resources/adp-research-institute.aspx" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">ADP</a>, the nation's largest payroll services provider, undertook a study of 2013 payroll records for 13 million employees. <a href="http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1301187-adp-garnishment-report.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">ADP's report</a>, released today, shows that <a href="http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1301187-adp-garnishment-report.html#document/p10/a177373" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">more than one in 10 employees in the prime working ages of 35 to 44 had their wages garnished</a> in 2013.

Roughly half of these debtors, unsurprisingly, owed child support. But a sizeable number had their earnings docked for consumer debts, such as credit cards, medical bills and student loans.

Extended to the entire population of U.S. employees, ADP's findings indicate that 4 million workers — about <a href="http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/1301187-adp-garnishment-report.html#document/p8/a177374" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: transparent;">3 percent of all employees</a> — had wages taken for a consumer debt in 2013.

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>==

<div>

</div>

<div>

2. Florida City Tries to Make it Illegal for Homeless People to Own Stuff

The city of Ft. Lauderdale recently took up a resolution that would make it illegal for homeless people keep their possessions anywhere on public property. The resolution would allow police to confiscate any property stored on a public ground, provided twenty-four hours notice is given; confiscated property may be retrieved, if the person pays a “reasonable” fee for storage and transportation.

The city claims the ordinance is due in part to an “interest in aesthetics,” but as homeless people have no alternative method for hanging on to their belongings, the resolution effectively criminalizes their only possessions.

“Maintaining city streets is a legitimate concern, but simply punishing homeless people for leaving their possessions in public places is not an effective or humane way to address it,” Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/21/3428899/fort-lauderdale-criminalize-homelessness/" style="">said</a> [5] to Think Progress. “Instead, city and business leaders should work with advocates and homeless people to develop alternative short and long term solutions, such as public storage options for homeless people and affordable housing.”

The resolution is, of course, backed by the city’s business community, which merely finds homeless people an eyesore.

</div>

<div>==

<div>right trying to coopt the issue, but On Wednesday, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) will hold a hearing on poverty called “<a href="http://budget.house.gov/hearingschedule2014/a-progress-report-on-the-war-on-poverty-lessons-from-the-frontlines.htm" style="line-height: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">A Progress Report on the War on Poverty: Lessons from the Frontlines</a>.” While it will feature three experts, none of them are actually low-income Americans who struggle to get by.</div>

But that’s not for lack of trying from some poor people themselves. Witnesses to Hunger, an advocacy project that shares the stories of low-income Americans, has tried and failed twice to have some of their members who live in poverty speak at Ryan’s poverty hearings. “When Ryan had his first hearing last July,” Director Mariana Chilton told ThinkProgress, “we wrote to his office to see if we could testify, but they weren’t interested.” While Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) tried to get one of their low-income members to speak, it was too late. They were asked to submit written testimony instead. ...<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/30/3432697/paul-ryan-poverty-hearing-poor-people/">http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/30/3432697/paul-ryan-poverty-hearing-poor-people/</a>  note congr hearing on women's health had no women?

<div>

</div>

<div>Gentrification:

<div>

</div>

<div>3/14 SF limits RV</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Google bus protest</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Facebook pays for a cop for its hood; </div>

<div>

</div>

<div>evictions up b/c rent control circumvented </div>

<div>

</div>

<div>banks goble up foreclosures, CDSwaps again OMG/BIZZ</div>

<div>

Attempting to solve homelessness by making life harder for the homeless is common -- and similarly unsuccessful -- around the country. As Adam Peck notes in  <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/23/3417952/rockford-church-homeless/" style="text-decoration: none;">Think Progress</a>, shutting down the center is one example of a larger pattern of the criminalization of homelessness and poverty. Instead of investing in resources to aid the needy, authorities restrict the activities of homeless people and groups that offer services. Ironically, when they lead to fines and arrests they cost cities much more than it would cost to provide adequate housing.

Laws that ban sitting or lying down in public, camping, and panhandling enable police to move the homeless out of the nice parts of town.  Going after groups who feed or shelter the homeless can serve a similar function, preventing them from assembling in certain spaces.

In several cities, authorities have cracked down on groups who give out food to the hungry, as Peck points out. In Raleigh, North Carolina volunteers were threatened with arrest over the summer. No one was led away in cuffs, but that's not unprecedented. In 2011, over 20 Food Not Bombs <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/161677/food-not-bombs-members-arrested-feeding-hungry#" style="text-decoration: none;">volunteers</a> were arrested when they refused to comply with an ordinance that limited food-sharing in parks to only twice a year. The Mayor called them "food terrorists."

</div>

M<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/us/as-homeless-line-up-for-food-los-angeles-weighs-restrictions.html?_r=0" style="text-decoration: none;">ore than 30 cities </a>now have or have sought to establish laws that restrict food sharing and penalize groups that feed the needy in public places the New York Times reported, even as more Americans go hungry.

=

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/1-wants-ban-sleeping-cars-because-it-hurts-their-quality-life">http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/1-wants-ban-sleeping-cars-because-it-hurts-their-quality-life</a>

palo alto

==

<table class="wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter" style="margin: 1em 0px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 22.4px; background-color: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><tbody><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">34</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina" title="North Carolina" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">North Carolina</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.1%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">1,115</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.3%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">35</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California" title="California" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">California</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.2%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">4,716</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.5%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">22.4%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">36</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana" title="Montana" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Montana</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.8%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">128</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.5%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">10.5%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">37</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia(U.S.state)" title="Georgia (U.S. state)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Georgia</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.4%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">1,298</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">18.5%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">18.8%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">38</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York" title="New York" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">New York</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.5%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">2,760</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.9%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17.6%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">39</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky" title="Kentucky" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Kentucky</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.8%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">599</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17.1%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.2%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">40</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee" title="Tennessee" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Tennessee</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">872</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">16.7%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.3%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">41</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina" title="South Carolina" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">South Carolina</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">626</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.8%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.8%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">42</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona" title="Arizona" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Arizona</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.2%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">917</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">21.3%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">21.6%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">43</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia" title="West Virginia" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">West Virginia</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.4%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">276</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">16.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">11.3%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">44</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma" title="Oklahoma" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Oklahoma</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.6%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">543</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">13.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">10.8%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">45</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas" title="Arkansas" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Arkansas</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.9%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">509</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">19.1%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.9%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">46</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas" title="Texas" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Texas</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">16.2%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">3,681</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17.4%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.9%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">47</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama" title="Alabama" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Alabama</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">16.7%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">750</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">16.8%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.9%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">48</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mexico" title="New Mexico" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">New Mexico</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17.9%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">347</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">19.6%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15.8%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">49</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana" title="Louisiana" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Louisiana</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">18.3%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">748</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">14.3%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">12.8%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">50</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi" title="Mississippi" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">Mississippi</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">20.1%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">571</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">23.2%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">17%</td></tr><tr><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">51</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia" title="District of Columbia" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none;">District of Columbia</a></td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">20.7%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">15</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">18.0%</td><td style=" border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); padding: 0.2em;">23.1%</td></tr></tbody></table>

==

</div>

</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>

Poverty/ homeless

Attachments