The Silent and Forgotten Americans - Victims of Poverty - Hostages of Indifference - Perpetual Political Pawns

This year, 2019 the federal, state, and local governments will spend close to a combined $1 trillion to fund more than 100 separate anti-poverty programs.  According to the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, since the “War on Poverty was launched by the Lyndon Johnson Administration in 1964, government efforts to fight poverty have cost more than $23 trillion.  Imagine that, $23 trillion dollars, yet poverty rates today remain about the same as during the Johnson Administration.

The Heritage Foundation studied the same issue for a report in 2014, which marked the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson's launch of the War on Poverty. In January 1964, Johnson declared "unconditional war on poverty in America."

Since then, the taxpayers have spent $22 trillion on Johnson's war. Adjusted for inflation, that's three times the cost of all military wars since the American Revolution.  If you add spending since 2014 you get $27 trillion dollars spent.

In 2018, the government spent $943 billion dollars providing cash, food, housing and medical care to poor and low-income Americans. (That figure doesn't include Social Security or Medicare.) More than 100 million people, or one-third of Americans, received some type of welfare aid, at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient. If converted into cash, this spending was five times what was needed to eliminate all poverty in the U.S.

The U.S. Census Bureau has just released its annual poverty report. The report claims that in 2013, 14.5 percent of Americans were poor.

Remarkably, that's almost the same poverty rate as in 1967, three years after the War on Poverty started. How can that be? How can government spend $9,000 per recipient and have no effect on poverty? The answer is - it can't.

Presidents since 1964 include Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama and Trump.  The four Democrats held office for 24 years, while the six Republicans held office for 23½ years.  The bottom line is both political parties spent about the same money fighting poverty.

From urban renewal to legal services, manpower programs to Head Start, high rise apartments to Section 8 single family homes, infrastructure to beautification, there have been many innovative, successful, and expensive programs yet little has changed.

At the root of the failure was corruption throughout government, a failure to test pilot programs before spending massive amounts of money, and a detachment from attacking the roots of poverty.

I worked over the years trying to identify programs and attack poverty for Democrats and Republicans alike.  In the 1960s I created a methodology for the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to identify pockets of poverty within a metropolitan area, opening the door for the first time to allow targeted programs within an urban area.

As a policy developer, program analyst, and program implementer, my job was to use all the resources of all levels of government to attack poverty.  Over the years I was called in to the Office of the Budget, later the Office of Management and Budget, on numerous task forces to consolidate the myriad of programs being created, help the state and local governments set up management and accountability systems, and identify new programs and strategies to address problems.

OMB was part of the Executive Office of the President and by 1973 I became part of the New Federalism Task Force in OMB to overhaul all the federal domestic programs and give the governors and mayor more control over the tens of billions of dollars being spent.

The New York Times said our “secret” 32-person task force operating out of the Executive Office of the President was responsible for the most far reaching reform of federal domestic programs since President Franklin Roosevelt created the New Deal in the 1930s.

During this time we created the General Revenue Sharing, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Comprehensive Manpower block grants, Housing block grants, Welfare Reform, and many other programs for transportation, health care, infrastructure, and related initiatives. 

For three decades I worked to create, evaluate, repair and replace programs in cooperation with the state and local governments attempting to address poverty.  During that time, I worked for city councils, mayors, poverty programs, metropolitan planning, governors, members of the House and Senate and the Office of the President.

Our work proceeded through economic adversity, racial riots, corruption, being the target of radical groups, the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Black Panthers, massive increases in gangs and crimes, the explosion of drug trafficking, cop killings, and a more.

We launched many innovative programs to attack poverty and many efforts fell short of expectations.  So frustrating was the work that years after building high rise apartments for the low income in Newark, New Jersey alone, over 30,000 housing units had to be destroyed because of crime, unfit living conditions, drugs and other reasons.

There were many people saved by these efforts and many minorities found the door to equal opportunity opened but the failure to anticipate the degree of corruption and the failure to actively involve law enforcement in the design and implementation of the many neighborhood programs kept them from succeeding.

Remember, there was continuous friction between the federal government and local government as the feds were using the massive infusion of money to local government as a tool to achieve the integration of police departments all over the nation.

Without fully integrated police departments there could not be the cooperation needed between the police and residents to stop the crime, gangs, and drugs from overpowering the legitimate and dedicated people trying to help.

The problem remains, and our resolve to solve it must be renewed.  We have gained much experience these past 55 years of fighting poverty, segregation, discrimination, and bias and must not lose the lessons but build on them to find a solution to poverty and inequality.

Poverty is not a racial issue it impacts on all races.  It is not simply a matter of racial inequality because there are poor Whites, Blacks, Hispanic, Asian and Native American.  It destroys dreams, the quality of life, the educational opportunities, health care, the availability of good food at reasonable costs, clean drinking water, and the list goes on and on.

Of course, Baltimore and many other cities face poverty issues that have changed the nature of the once proud towns and are a deterrent to future opportunities in many cities.  We all have a stake in assuring a better quality of life for all people and equal opportunity for all people because poverty is a powerful reminder of the limits of our success, our wealth, and our determination to be fair and just.

CPT Twit - Democratic Debate Fallout - Democrats attack President Obama more than President Trump

As Democrats attack Obama, does he really have time to care?

Hope and Change Obama style.

The unfinished Obama agenda.

The Obamas joined Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks, and Bruce Springsteen as guests on the boat. Last summer, Geffen documented all of his celebrity friends who stayed on the yacht. Leonardo DiCaprio was aboard.

My people.

The People' President.

Racism, Discrimination, Inequality, Judgment, or Bias - the Causes, Conditions, or Results of Something Worse?

As the presidential election campaign heats up, racism seems to be interjected over and over again.  The result of rampant polarization, it is a term being manipulated and misused by the news media and political pundits.  To brand someone a racist while failing to apply due process to the claim is an act ignorance of the law itself. 

When it comes to judging racism in America, when did MSNBC and CNN become the custodians and enforcers of racial equality in America?  For a couple of news services who operate under FCC licenses from the government you would think they have assumed the role of the Justice Department and the Courts along with prosecutor and jury.

The cable news media in America has become the Kangaroo Court of First resort for select groups of citizens though it has no Constitutional basis for such actions, it is not part of their FCC license, and there is no liability for the volumes of lies they may broadcast in order to control or manufacture news.

The phrase "rush to judgment" means ignoring the judicial process and the Constitutional safeguards inherent in our system of justice.  Our Constitution requires such a process to protect people from the abuses of unregulated justice.  It also directs that a person is innocent until proven guilty by the judicial system.

We all know our judicial system is filled with legalese doubletalk and gobble de gook in order to intimidate the public, provide jobs to our law school grads, and overload the circuits of our news media.  In this way the innocent can be convicted, the guilty can be protected, and the lawyers can join the country club.

When you add to this already rather dismal system the mouthpieces and talking heads for every non-profit (most certainly including preachers and churches) dedicated to protecting the social interests of our citizens from the predator practices of our legal institutions (law enforcement),  manipulation by our financial institutions, and discrimination by everyone else, you have a recipe for sure failure.

So, we now have our politicians, preachers, prosecutors, and press, the latter the procrastinators and perpetrators of the news media whose very jobs, ratings, and profits depend on perpetuating pipe dreams on the public.  How many special interests does it take to protect the public interest?

Excuse me, does anyone besides me see a problem here?  Polls show people do not trust these groups.  Polls show people trust anyone but these groups to accomplish anything.  So, why are the people dependent on these same groups to protect them, advise them, or speak on their behalf?

Too many of these people operate under the old theory that if you don't like or can't stand the truth, then change it.  That ancient philosophy is what has kept civilization from getting beyond the Neanderthal age all these millennia.  Sometimes it seems we have more in common with such barbarian behavior than with what one might expect from the evolution of civilization.

In short, people are fed a steady stream of lies, distortion, or misinformation to keep us apart, distrustful of different races, hateful of other religions, suspicious of motives and to convince us anyone of any other color is out to take what you got.

So, here are a few truths that may help you penetrate the fog.  First about grand juries, everyone has an opinion about them but few speak the truth.  Here is part of what New York state law says about the grand jury process.

New York State

GRAND JUROR’S HANDBOOK

THE ROLE OF THE GRAND JURY IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

The grand jury is an arm of the court. It is not an agent of the prosecutor or the police. A grand jury does not decide whether or not a person has been proven guilty. That is the trial jury's job. The grand jury decides whether or not a person should be formally charged with a crime or other offense. The grand jury makes that decision based on evidence presented to it by the prosecutor, who also instructs the grand jury on the law. The grand jury's decision must be based on the evidence and on the law.

In general, the grand jury makes one of three decisions:

A. The grand jury may vote to formally accuse someone of a crime. This accusation is called an “indictment,” also known as a “bill” which is short for “bill of indictment.”

B. The grand jury may vote to dismiss the charges, also known as a “no-bill.”

C. The grand jury may direct the prosecutor to file an information accusing the person of an offense less serious than a felony.

There are also rare circumstances where a grand jury recommends that a case should be sent to Family Court or where the grand jury makes a report to the court.

WHY WE HAVE GRAND JURIES

The use of trial juries (also called petit juries) and grand juries goes back approximately 800 years. Beginning around 1215 A.D., both types of juries were used in England. The grand jury made the formal accusation, known as a “bill of indictment” or “presentment.” The trial jury decided whether the accusation was proven.

The grand jury is included in the United States Constitution and the New York State Constitution. In New York State, a person cannot be brought to trial for a felony unless that person has been indicted by a grand jury.

The grand jury has an awesome responsibility. It uses its power both as a sword and as a shield: a sword to accuse or indict those whom there is reason to believe have committed crimes; a shield to protect the innocent against unfounded accusations.

                      

Hum, a grand jury does not decide if a person is guilty or innocent.  A grand jury can be a sword or a shield to accuse or indict or to protect the innocent.  Don't hear many media or "experts" saying this, they just want a conviction which no grand jury can provide.

Personally, I think these tragic events taking place are not rampant racism smoldering below the surface of society but are more symptomatic of the unequal economic opportunity plaguing our nation.  First, why are cops involved in these incidents?  Are they are trying to stop criminal activity or are they enforcing stupid laws of the government.

Take the tragic case of Eric Garner in New York City.    In New York, the city and state wanted more tax revenue, so 60% of the cost of cigarettes is now taxes.  Imagine what would happen if you paid 60% of your income to corrupt governments.

Well the cigarette tax is like the gas tax, it does not care what your skin color may be or how much money you may have, it is the epitome of equality, the poor and the super rich pay exactly the same tax, even if the poor have no money, no jobs and no hope.

Therefore, unscrupulous people buy cigarettes out of state where governmental greed is not prevalent and bring them to the poor parts of town to sell them on the streets without the onerous taxes but for a fee.  Of course, the rich just send their jets to a country where there are no taxes on cigarettes to feed their addiction.

When the city needs more money to fund corruption they go after the citizens cheating on taxes and for the cost of lost cigarette tax a dead body lies on the ground.  Why did the government order the police to enforce tax collection?  Isn't that the job of tax collectors?

As for Ferguson, Missouri, where Michael Brown was killed, the entire city is trapped in economic despair, like so many parts of so many cities around the nation.  Abraham Lincoln once said all people were not equal, but all people must have equal opportunity.  They still don't.

However, unequal opportunity is not just a racial issue.  There are poor whites just like there are poor every other race.  Where poverty breeds there is attendant crime.  Those trapped in poverty are also trapped in an endless circle of crime which leads to hopelessness, which leads to envy, and then to revenge against those who have what the poor person does not have.

The effort to break the cycle of poverty has been one of very slow progress, dependent on many uncontrollable forces like the world economy, honesty in government officials, etc., etc.  The victims and the perpetrators of crimes are generally from the same race no matter what the professional mouthpieces tell you.

Contrary to what some of the mouthpieces have been saying to the media, the jails are not just filled with kids busted for petty possession of marijuana.  Many violent criminals are incarcerated, for victimizing their own people.

When our leaders get past pointing fingers and making judgment on people, and police are people too, then maybe we can get to the serious problem of creating economic opportunity, meaningful economic opportunity, and get on with solving our real problem of poverty for all races and genders.  Poverty, the underlying cause of economic inequality that results from lack of economic opportunity.