[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 22, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H359-H364]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS A MORAL
RESPONSIBILITY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THOSE PERSONS, GROUPS AND
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE IMPOVERISHED, DISADVANTAGED OR OTHERWISE IN
POVERTY
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 198) expressing the sense of
Congress that the United States has a moral responsibility to meet the
needs of those persons, groups and communities that are impoverished,
disadvantaged or otherwise in poverty, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 198
Whereas poverty can be seen as a deep, structural problem
that implicates our value system and our educational and
economic institutions;
Whereas poverty may be defined as the lack of basic
necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing, health
care, education, security, and opportunity;
Whereas policy initiatives addressing poverty have not kept
pace with the needs of millions of Americans;
Whereas many experts believe that the lack of an equitable
distribution of housing choices across the country leads to
isolation and concentrated poverty;
Whereas the number of Americans living in poverty has risen
by over 5,000,000 since 2000;
Whereas there were 37 million Americans living in poverty
in 2005;
Whereas the official poverty rate in 2005 was 12.6 percent;
Whereas 24.9 percent of African Americans, 21.8 percent of
Hispanics, 25.3 percent of Native Americans, 10.9 percent of
Asian Americans, and 8.3 percent of Whites lived in poverty
in the United States in 2005;
Whereas in 2005 a family of 4 was considered poor under the
U.S. Census Bureau's official measure if the family's income
was below $19,971;
Whereas the poverty rate for children 18 years and younger
(17.6 percent) remained higher than that of 18-24 year-olds
(11.1 percent) and that of people 65 and older (10.1 percent)
in 2005; and
Whereas the number in poverty increased for people 65 and
older by almost 400,000 since 2000: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the United
States should set a national goal of cutting poverty in half
over the next 10 years.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Shays) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.
General Leave
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia?
There was no objection.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues in
consideration of H. Con. Res. 198, as amended, which expresses the
sense of Congress that the United States has a moral responsibility to
meet the needs of those persons, groups and communities that are
impoverished, disadvantaged or otherwise in poverty.
H. Con. Res. 198 was introduced by Representative Barbara Lee on
August 1, 2007, and was amended and reported from the Oversight
Committee on December 12 by a voice vote. The measure has the support
and sponsorship of 80 Members of Congress and reminds each of us of the
important role we play in the battle against poverty.
Madam Speaker, I want to continue with certain of my remarks in the
Record, but I would like to make other remarks at this time.
We have just come from the celebration of the birth of Martin Luther
King, Jr. His signature issues, of course, were war and peace and
poverty, falling only behind civil rights. It's clear that he achieved
what he desired, certainly much of what we desired, because during the
1960s there were three seminal civil rights bills passed, long-time
goals of African Americans, other people of color, and many in this
Chamber.
But two of King's goals remain completely without remedy. One, of
course, is war and peace, and you can imagine where he would have been
on the war in Iraq. But perhaps, most telling, is that we celebrated
Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday at a time when the gap between rich
and poor is considerably wider than when King died.
Therefore, I am not sure whether the gentlewoman from California had
in mind that we would bring this bill up right after Martin Luther King
Jr.'s birthday, but there it is, and that makes it all the more timely.
As it turns out, though, Madam Speaker, the state of the economy has
rendered this issue high on the national agenda for the first time in
many years. For the first time, the entire Congress will be looking or
should be looking at those who have the least in our society and why. I
am afraid it's not because of their high priority. They are the lowest
voting group. They sometimes are invisible. But the fact is that
economists across the board have said that we need to enact a stimulus
package yesterday, and that in order for it to have any effect, and, in
fact, not be effective when it might do more harm than good, we need to
get the stimulus package in the pockets of people who can spend the
money immediately.
[[Page H360]]
Therefore, many of us think that the people we know who will spend
the money tomorrow are the people who have no money to spend. The
people who run out of food stamps in the middle of the month. The
people who have run out of unemployment security. The people who need
the most but who have the lowest profile often in the Congress now have
assumed importance because of the state of the economy.
Madam Speaker, what is most distressing was to see that the poverty
rate increased even for people 65 and over by almost 400,000 people.
The one group of people that, in fact, gets some attention in the
Congress, of course, are the elderly. They are the highest percentage
of voting people; yet, their poverty rate is going up. That is very
distressing since they are on fixed incomes and are least able to do
something about it. They don't get unemployment insurance, many of them
don't.
I am particularly concerned about the people who don't show up on the
tax rolls. Many, if not most of them, pay payroll taxes. The only way
to focus on them is to focus on them who needs, who will spend the
money first should get the money first.
My concern about the baby boomers, those over 65, is not only that
they should be in this group. I know they will spend the money
instantly. But my concern is to wonder whether or not this is a
harbinger of the baby boomers, the first baby boomers have just come
forward, whether we are about to see that huge group of people show up,
bringing increased pressure on the economy.
So I compliment the gentlelady from California for coming forward
with a bill that I am sure will have bipartisan support.
In the District of Columbia, I have to tell her that we are not a
poor city. We are second per capita in Federal income taxes and,
therefore, a lot of middle-class and rich people in the District of
Columbia, but one of every three children in the District of Columbia
lives in poverty.
I want to make sure that whatever we do to stimulate the economy or
to pay attention to this resolution hits those children very quickly.
We have 10 percent of District residents living in extreme poverty,
even though the District cannot be counted among those cities which
have lost so much, many of them lost a base, because we have the
Federal Government here, because even our real estate industry
continues to boom.
{time} 1430
Madam Speaker, I think this timely resolution is important not only
for its own sake, but because it draws our attention to what I believe
will be a first priority for the Congress this session, especially
today as our congressional leadership on both sides of the aisle are
meeting with the President of the United States on the very stimulus
package that I have described.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge passage of H. Con. Res. 198 which
expresses the sense of Congress that we have a moral responsibility as
a Nation to meet the needs of those persons, groups and communities
that are impoverished, disadvantaged or otherwise in poverty.
Madam Speaker, it is fitting that a day after the celebration of the
life and achievement of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., we are taking
up a resolution that addresses our obligation to help many of those
that Dr. King had particular concern for, the downtrodden, the
underserved and the impoverished.
I believe we all seek, as Dr. King did, to create a just society and
to alleviate poverty and its attendant suffering. We may differ on
methods, we may differ on who and how and how many, but broad
prosperity for all is, I believe, the goal of virtually everyone who
graces this Chamber.
This resolution seeks to bring attention to poverty and the
responsibility we have as citizens of this Nation and this world to
help relieve the suffering of others. This responsibility does not fall
only to the Federal Government, but it will be solved only through the
collective efforts of not just governments at every level, but
charities, businesses and individuals.
We are told the poor will always be among us, but that does not
relieve us of the challenge of trying to alleviate the suffering, tend
to their needs, and improve to the extent we can their lot in life.
I commend our colleague, Representative Lee, for reminding us of
this, and I, too, think it is a wonderful coincidence, that we are
taking this resolution on the day we have all come back from
celebrations recognizing that the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
didn't lead a rebellion, which is a failed revolution, he led a
revolution. And he spoke to this young person, me, in the 1950s when I
saw Little Rock with military forces and I wondered as a child what was
happening to my country. Reverend King helped guide all of us in a
direction that has done so much to address many of the concerns he
championed. His dream is not dead, it is still alive and it is a dream
that we need to carry into the future.
It wasn't a mindless dream, it was a dream based on the promise of
America. He spoke to our better nature and lifted all of us. He spoke
to the oppressor and to the oppressed, those with much and those with
very little, and those with nothing.
Reverend King belongs to all of us. We have a duty, as I think my
colleague Representative Lee will point out. We have a duty and
obligation and a wonderful opportunity to heed his call to action.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as she may
desire to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) who authored the
resolution.
Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentlelady from the District
of Columbia, not only for managing this resolution today, but for your
long-standing work in addressing injustice everywhere, including
economic justice which goes to the heart of this resolution.
Also let me take a moment to thank my colleague, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Shays) for your leadership and for your support and
for your commitment to eliminate poverty; to Speaker Nancy Pelosi; our
majority leader, Steny Hoyer; Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Tom
Davis. I want to commend them and thank them for their strong support
in bringing this very important resolution forward today because I
think the bipartisan support for this shows and demonstrates that we
all understand very clearly this is not a Democratic or Republican
issue, it is not an urban issue or rural issue, this is a moral issue
that we must address together.
I would like to recognize all 83 cosponsors who have worked hard on
this resolution. Your support has been critical in helping to move it
forward.
Also to those who co-chair the Congressional Out of Poverty Caucus
with me: Congressman Conyers, Chairman Baca, who chairs the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus; Congressman Honda, who chairs the
Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; and Congressman
Butterfield. Their dedication and commitment is crucial to our broader
goal of ending poverty.
I would also like to thank our staff, Alexis Brandt of the majority
leader's office; Bill Goold of the Congressional Progressive Caucus;
Leila Gomez of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, who works in my
office and has done a tremendous job on this; Tunde Eboda, who was a
Brookings Fellow in my office; and Chris Lee of my staff. All of our
staffs have really kept focused and worked together and have worked
very hard to make sure that this resolution received the support that
it has received.
Madam Speaker, the resolution before us today is really very
straightforward. It simply states that Congress supports setting a
national goal of cutting poverty in half over the next 10 years. It is
unfortunate that in the wealthiest country in the world that we even
need this resolution, but the fact is that we do.
As both the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton)
and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) reminded us, yesterday
we took the time out to honor what would have been Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr.'s 79th birthday, and as we reflect upon his life and his
legacy and the struggle for civil and human rights, for peace and
[[Page H361]]
for justice, it is important also to reflect upon how far we have
strayed from his vision to eradicate poverty.
So this resolution is just one small step in honoring his legacy in
more than words. It is one small legislative action we can do today to
say we, too, believe that not only on his birthday but throughout the
year we have a responsibility to live his legacy and do what we can do
to eliminate poverty.
Our country is the land of opportunity. But the sad reality is that
income inequality continues to grow and more people are falling into
poverty than getting ahead. Just consider the fact that over 37 million
Americans, more than the population of my home State of California, are
in poverty, and the number has grown by 5 million within the last 5 to
6 years. One in eight Americans lives in poverty now. Poverty in the
United States is far higher than in many other developed nations, and
inequality is at an all-time high.
The richest 1 percent of Americans in 2005 held the largest share of
the Nation's income since 1925; and at the same time, the poorest 20
percent held only 3.4 percent of the Nation's income.
Madam Speaker, I will include for the Record a document titled ``From
Poverty to Prosperity.'' It was put forth by the Center for American
Progress' Task Force on Poverty.
The statistics in this report and other reports quantify what most of
us already know, that we are heading in the wrong direction, and that
we need a national commitment to address the growing poverty crisis in
this Nation.
This resolution helps us get back on track by setting an achievable,
and in my view a very modest goal, of cutting poverty in half over the
next decade.
Madam Speaker, perhaps the greatest example of the profound need for
action to address the poverty crisis in our Nation was Hurricane
Katrina and the incredible suffering that it brought to so many, and
which continues today.
The facts speak for themselves. One-third of those displaced by
Hurricane Katrina had incomes below 1\1/2\ times the poverty line. The
storm had its greatest impact on people of color, affecting African
Americans who accounted for nearly half of those affected. The gulf
coast hurricane should have been a wake-up call. Unfortunately, the
administration chose only to hit the snooze button.
That is why I am glad we are here today in a bipartisan way helping
to sound this alarm again. By setting our sights to tackling poverty
head-on, we can take some very serious steps towards bridging the gap
between the haves and the have-nots. There is much work to be done.
Last year again, this important document on the state of poverty in
America made several important proposals. The Center based its
recommendations on four principles: Promote decent work, promoting
opportunity for all, ensuring economic security for all, and helping
people build wealth. Based on these principles, the report offers 12
key steps, including raising the minimum wage, and many of the efforts
which we have been engaging in in this Congress, but much more needs to
be done.
So as we consider an income stimulus plan in the next few weeks, I
hope we keep these points in mind. Fighting poverty isn't a mystery, it
just requires us to make a commitment to the goal and to dedicate the
necessary resources to do this.
This resolution is an important step forward, and I urge my
colleagues to support it and join me and my colleagues in the Out of
Poverty Caucus in our efforts to eliminate poverty in America. This is
a moral imperative which we must all embrace.
From Poverty to Prosperity
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Thirty-seven million Americans live below the official
poverty line. Millions more struggle each month to pay for
basic necessities, or run out of savings when they lose their
jobs or face health emergencies. Poverty imposes enormous
costs on society. The lost potential of children raised in
poor households, the lower productivity and earnings of poor
adults, the poor health, increased crime, and broken
neighborhoods all hurt our nation. Persistent childhood
poverty is estimated to cost our nation $500 billion each
year, or about 4 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic
Product. In a world of increasing global competition, we
cannot afford to squander these human resources.
The Center for American Progress last year convened a
diverse group of national experts and leaders to examine the
causes and consequences of poverty in America and make
recommendations for national action. In this report, our Task
Force on Poverty calls for a national goal of cutting poverty
in half in the next 10 years and proposes a strategy to reach
the goal.
Our nation has seen periods of dramatic poverty reduction
at times when near-full employment was combined with sound
federal and state policies, motivated individual initiative,
supportive civic involvement, and sustained national
commitment. In the last six years, however, our nation his
moved in the opposite direction. The number of poor Americans
has grown by five million, while inequality has reached
historic high levels.
Consider the following facts:
One in eight Americans now lives in poverty. A family of
four is considered poor if the family's income is below
$19,971--a bar far below what most people believe a family
needs to get by. Still, using this measure, 12.6 percent of
all Americans were poor in 2005, and more than 90 million
people (31 percent of all Americans) had incomes below 200
percent of federal poverty thresholds.
Millions of Americans will spend at least one year in
poverty at some point in their lives. One third of all
Americans will experience poverty within a 13-year period. In
that period, one in 10 Americans are poor for most of the
time, and one in 20 are poor for 10 or more years.
Poverty in the United States is far higher than in many
other developed nations. At the turn of the 21st century, the
United States ranked 24th among 25 countries when measuring
the share of the population below 50 percent of median
income.
Inequality has reached record highs. The richest one
percent of Americans in 2005 had the largest share of the
nation's income (19 percent) since 1929. At the same time,
the poorest 20 percent of Americans had only 3.4 percent of
the nation's income.
It does not have to be this way. Our nation need not
tolerate persistent poverty alongside great wealth.
The United States should set a national goal of cutting
poverty in half over the next 10 years. A strategy to cut
poverty in half should be guided by four principles:
Promote Decent Work. People should work and work should pay
enough to ensure that workers and their families can avoid
poverty, meet basic needs, and save for the future.
Provide Opportunity for All. Children should grow up in
conditions that maximize their opportunities for success;
adults should have opportunities throughout their lives to
connect to work, get more education, live in a good
neighborhood, and move up in the workforce.
Ensure Economic Security. Americans should not fall into
poverty when they cannot work or work is unavailable,
unstable, or pays so little that they cannot make ends meet.
Help People Build Wealth. All Americans should have the
opportunity to build assets that allow them to weather
periods of flux and volatility, and to have the resources
that may be essential to advancement and upward mobility.
We recommend 12 key steps to cut poverty in half:
1. Raise and index the minimum wage to half the average
hourly wage. At $5.15, the federal minimum wage is at its
lowest level in real terms since 1956. The federal minimum
wage was once 50 percent of the average wage but is now 30
percent of that wage. Congress should restore the minimum
wage to 50 percent of the average wage, about $8.40 an hour
in 2006. Doing so would help over 4.5 million poor workers
and nearly nine million other low-income workers.
2. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax
Credit. As an earnings supplement for low-income working
families, the EITC raises incomes and helps families build
assets. EITC expansions during the 1990s helped increase
employment and reduced poverty. But the current EITC does
little to help workers without children. We recommend
tripling the EITC for childless workers, and expanding
help to larger working; families. Doing so would cut the
number of people in poverty by over two million. The Child
Tax Credit provides a tax credit of up to $1,000 per
child, but provides no help to the poorest families. We
recommend making it available to all low- and moderate-
income families. Doing so would move two million children
and one million parents out of poverty.
3. Promote unionization by enacting the Employee Free
Choice Act. The Employee Free Choice Act would require
employers to recognize a union after a majority of workers
signs cards authorizing union representation and establish
stronger penalties for violation of employee rights. The
increased union representation made possible by the Act would
lead to better jobs and less poverty for American workers.
4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families
and promote early education for all. We propose that the
federal and state governments guarantee child care help to
families with incomes below about $40,000 a year, and also
expand the child care tax credit. At the same time, states
should be encouraged to improve the quality of early
education and broaden access for all children. Our child care
expansion would raise employment among low-income parents and
help nearly three million parents and children escape
poverty.
[[Page H362]]
5. Create two million new ``opportunity'' housing vouchers,
and promote equitable development in and around central
cities. Nearly 8 million Americans live in neighborhoods of
concentrated poverty where at least 40 percent of residents
are poor. Our nation should seek to end concentrated poverty
and economic segregation, and promote regional equity and
inner-city revitalization. We propose that over the next 10
years the federal government fund two million new
``opportunity vouchers'' designed to help people live in
opportunity-rich areas. New affordable housing should be in
communities with employment opportunities and high-quality
public services, or in gentrifying communities. These housing
policies should be part of a broader effort to pursue
equitable development strategies in regional and local
planning effects, including efforts to improve schools,
create affordable housing, assure physical security, and
enhance neighborhood amenities.
6. Connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth with school
and work. About 1.7 million poor youth ages 16 to 24 were out
of school and out of work in 2005. We recommend that the
federal government restore Youth Opportunity Grants to help
the most disadvantaged communities and expand funding for
effective and promising youth programs--with the goal of
reaching 600,000 poor disadvantaged youth through these
efforts. We propose a new Upward Pathway program to offer
low-income youth opportunities to participate in service and
training in fields that are in high-demand and provide needed
public services.
7. Simplify and expand Pell Grants and make higher
education accessible to residents of each state.
Low-income youth are much less likely to attend college
than their higher income peers, even among those of
comparable abilities. Pell Grants play a crucial role for
lower-income students. We propose to simplify the Pell grant
application process, gradually raise Pell Grants to reach 70
percent of the average costs of attending a four-year public
institution, and encourage institutions to do more to raise
student completion rates. As the federal government does its
part, states should develop strategies to make post-secondary
education affordable for all residents, following promising
models already underway in a number of states.
8. Help former prisoners find stable employment and
reintegrate into their communities. The United States has the
highest incarceration rate in the world. We urge all states
to develop comprehensive reentry services aimed at
reintegrating former prisoners into their communities with
full-time, consistent employment.
9. Ensure equity for low-wage workers in the Unemployment
Insurance system. Only about 35 percent of the unemployed,
and a smaller share of unemployed low-wage workers, receive
unemployment insurance benefits. We recommend that states
(with federal help) reform ``monetary eligibility'' rules
that screen out low-wage workers, broaden eligibility for
part-time workers and workers who have lost employment as a
result of compelling family circumstances, and allow
unemployed workers to use periods of unemployment as a time
to upgrade their skills and qualifications.
10. Modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a
coordinated system that helps workers and families. A well-
functioning safety net should help people get into or return
to work and ensure a decent level of living for those who
cannot work or are temporarily between jobs. Our current
system fails to do so. We recommend that governments at all
levels simplify and improve benefits access for working
families and improve services to individuals with
disabilities. The Food Stamp Program should be strengthened
to improve benefits, eligibility, and access. And the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program should be
reformed to shift its focus from cutting caseloads to helping
needy families find sustainable employment.
11. Reduce the high costs of being poor and increase access
to financial services. Despite having less income, lower-
income families often pay more than middle and high-income
families for the same consumer products. We recommend that
the federal and state governments should address the
foreclosure crisis through expanded mortgage assistance
programs and by new federal legislation to curb unscrupulous
practices. And we propose that the federal government
establish a $50 million Financial Fairness Innovation Fund to
support state efforts to broaden access to mainstream goods
and financial services in predominantly low-income
communities.
12. Expand and simplify the Saver's Credit to encourage
saving for education, homeownership and retirement. For many
families, saving for purposes such as education, a home, or a
small business is key to making economic progress. We
propose that the federal ``Saver's Credit'' be reformed to
make it fully refundable. This Credit should also be
broadened to apply to other appropriate savings vehicles
intended to foster asset accumulation, with consideration
given to including individual development accounts,
children's saving accounts, and college savings plans.
We believe our recommendations will cut poverty in half.
The Urban Institute, which modeled the implementation of one
set of our recommendations, estimates that four of our steps
would reduce poverty by 26 percent, bringing us more than
halfway toward our goal. Among their findings:
Taken together, our minimum wage, EITC, child credit, and
child care recommendations would reduce poverty by 26
percent. This would mean over nine million fewer people in
poverty and a national poverty rate of 9.1 percent--the
lowest in recorded U.S. history.
The racial poverty gap would be narrowed. White poverty
would fall from 8.7 percent to 7 percent. Poverty among
African Americans would fall from 21.4 percent to 15.6
percent. Hispanic poverty would fall from 21.4 percent to
12.9 percent and poverty for all others would fall from 12.7
percent to 10.3 percent.
Child poverty and extreme poverty would both fall. Child
poverty would drop by 41 percent. The number of people in
extreme poverty would fall by over two million.
Millions of low- and moderate-income families would
benefit. Almost half of the benefits would help low- and
moderate-income families.
That these recommendations would reduce poverty by more
than one quarter is powerful evidence that a 50 percent
reduction can be reached within a decade.
The combined cost of our principal recommendations is in
the range of $90 billion a year--a significant cost but one
that is necessary and could be readily funded through a
fairer tax system. An additional $90 billion in annual
spending would represent about 0.8 percent of the nation's
Gross Domestic Product, which is a fraction of the money
spent on tax changes that benefited primarily the wealthy in
recent years. Consider that:
The current annual costs of the tax cuts enacted by
Congress in 2001 and 2003 are in the range of $400 billion a
year.
In 2008 alone the value of the tax cuts to households with
incomes exceeding $200,000 a year is projected to be $100
billion.
Our recommendations could be fully paid for simply by
bringing better balance to the federal tax system and
recouping part of what has been lost by the excessive tax
cuts of recent years. We recognize that serious action has
serious costs, but the challenge before the nation is not
whether we can afford to act, but rather that we must decide
to act.
THE NEXT STEPS
In 2009, we will have a new president and a new Congress.
Across the nation, there is a yearning for a shared national
commitment to build a better, fairer, more prosperous
country, with opportunity for all. In communities across the
nation, policymakers, business people, people of faith, and
concerned citizens are coming together. Our commitment to the
common good compels us to move forward.
poverty task force members
Angela Glover Blackwell, Founder and CEO, PolicyLink (co-
chair).
Peter B. Edelman, Professor of Law, Georgetown University
(co-chair).
Rebecca Blank, Dean, Gerald R. Ford School of Public
Policy, Henry Carter Adams Collegiate Professor of Public
Policy, University of Michigan.
Linda Chavez-Thompson, Executive Vice President, AFL-CIO.
Reverend Dr. Floyd H. Flake, President, Wilberforce
University.
Wizipan Garriott, Law Student and Board President of the He
Sapa Leadership Academy.
Maude Hurd, National President, ACORN.
Charles E. M. Kolb, President, Committee for Economic
Development.
Meizhu Lui, Executive Director, United for a Fair Economy.
Alice M. Rivlin, Senior Fellow and Director, Greater
Washington Research Program, Brookings Institution.
Barbara J. Robles, Associate Professor, Arizona State
University.
Robert Solow, Professor Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology.
Dorothy Stoneman, Founder and President, YouthBuild USA.
Wellington E. Webb, Former Mayor of Denver.
Mr. SHAYS. I had already yielded back my time.
I wonder if the gracious lady would yield me a minute.
Ms. NORTON. I certainly will.
Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
this time, and I want to agree with everything I have heard to the
point of the need to have a stimulus package that recognizes those who
have the least resources.
But I do want to say that we also need to recognize that we need to
stimulate investment in plants, machinery, and we need to make sure
that whatever goods consumers buy are likely to be American products
and that we are just not transferring that benefit overseas. So there
is going to be a lot that happens, but I agree with my colleagues, we
will be able to work together on this issue.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, the poor in our country have assumed a
high profile today because of the state of the economy. I hope that the
gentlelady's resolution helps us to bear in mind that the poor in our
country need a higher profile throughout the 110th Congress.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong
support of H. Con. Res. 198, expressing the sense of Con-
[[Page H363]]
gress that the United States has a moral responsibility to meet the
needs of those persons, groups and communities that are impoverished,
disadvantaged or otherwise in poverty, introduced by my distinguished
colleague from California, Representative Barbara Lee. Congresswoman
Barbara Lee, co-founder of the Out of Poverty Caucus, has articulated a
national goal to reduce poverty by 50 percent over the next 10 years.
This legislation is an imperative instrument in addressing the ongoing
endemic that is poverty in America.
Approximately 36.5 million American citizens, 12.3 percent of United
States population, live in poverty. The incidence of destitution is
associated with race and ethnicity, location, family composition, age,
and education. America has allowed poverty to fall off the national
agenda. In a nation as industrial and prominent as the United States,
it seems paradoxical to have such high levels of poverty. During the
1960s, when President Johnson made poverty a national concern, policies
and programs were created to set into motion a series of bills and acts
which ``brought about real results, reduced rates of poverty, and
improved living standards for America's poor.''
Madam Speaker, it is essential that this Congress satisfies the needs
of Americans who are impoverished, disadvantaged, or otherwise in
poverty; this legislation requires that we acknowledge that
responsibility. While poverty is believed by some to be a statistical
phenomenon, it is in fact a daily reality for millions of Americans.
Policy proposals addressing poverty have not kept pace with the needs
of millions of Americans. The measure of poverty is simple but rather
crude. Poverty cannot be accurately evaluated until we can essentially
comprehend the number of people in poverty.
When Mollie Orshansky, renowned economist and statistician, defined
the poverty line in the 1960s, she used a farm family living in the
1950s as her model, nevertheless times have changed. In this day and
age, an income of $20,000 is not sufficient for a family of four to
survive. Journalist Barbara Ehreinreht worked alongside the ``near
poor'' in her nonfiction piece ``Nickel and Dimed.'' Ten years ago, a
family in her book earned $40,000 a year cumulatively, but was still
unable to afford suitable housing. An annual income of $20,000 in 1950
and $40,000 in 1998 for a family of four is ``unpretentious.''
Technology has advanced, times have changed, the price of living is
constantly rising, and those factors, along with many others should be
used to evaluate how a family can survive.
Many impoverished individuals are believed to be able to return to
self-sufficiency with 12-18 months of assistance and affordable
housing. Since its conception, welfare has caused countless economic,
political, psychological, and sociological effects that have shaped
American society, produced innumerable reforms and depicted its
recipients as irresponsible agents of self- inflicted poverty. In 1996,
the Republican-led Congress introduced welfare reform. If the objective
was to reduce the number of people on the welfare rolls, it worked;
however, poverty did not decline. The central goal that needs to be
established is how to decrease poverty while simultaneously placing
welfare recipients in a position to maintain an existence above the
poverty line after assistance. Welfare is not a substantial economic
alternative; in no state do welfare disbursements alone lift a family
above the poverty line. The Federal Government must play a vital role
in revitalizing and restoring opportunities for Americans to reach the
American dream.
Congress is morally obligated to provide better services to meet the
needs of its citizens; nevertheless, the quality of the services for
various groups differs greatly. The aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita demonstrated that sub-par services are readily available to
minorities. While many existing organizations have worked to help those
displaced, and some new groups and special efforts have been initiated,
the survivors of Hurricane Katrina are still largely disorganized and
deprived. In the United States, the incidence of poverty is associated
with race and ethnicity, location, family composition, age, and
education. Three years ago, the criticisms of the Government's response
to Hurricane Katrina generally consisted of condemnations of negligence
and lack of leadership in the relief efforts in response to the storm
and its aftermath. Currently, the principal criticism is the long
overdue assistance for the poverty-stricken.
The U.S. has a higher sense of poverty and a visible phenomenon of
poverty than any other country. Internationally, the United States
poverty rate at the turn of the 21st century ranked 24th of 25
countries, with only Mexico having a higher percentage rate.
This important piece of legislation will recognize the continuing
need of many Americans. This is extremely significant in the sense that
it will assist those who desire upward mobility and believe in the
``American Dream.'' This is an unprecedented step forward for
impoverished Americans and I applaud this legislation for this
significant first step towards helping American realize their dreams.
As we celebrate Dr. King's birthday, we also commemorate the 40th
anniversary of King's Poor People's Campaign which, through nonviolent
direct action, King hoped to focus the Nation's attention on economic
inequality and poverty. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in
supporting this extremely important legislation.
Mr. HONDA. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res.
198, a resolution introduced by Congresswoman Barbara Lee that
expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should set a
national goal of cutting poverty in half over the next 10 years.
Poverty can be defined as meaning a lack of the basic necessities of
life such as food, shelter, clothing, health care, education, security,
and opportunity. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2006 over 38.7
million men, women and children across this country struggled to
survive on an annual income well below the national poverty line. The
number of people living in poverty has increased by over 5 million
since the year 2000. In a country that prides itself on being the land
of freedom and opportunity, and that has a level of affluence
unparalleled by any other nation in the world, these statistics are
both alarming and unacceptable.
I am a proud cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 198 because I believe that any
nation that considers itself great must make a concerted effort to step
up and do something about the problem of poverty. When the average
national poverty rate is at 13.3 percent and growing, the status of
poverty in this country should not be diagnosed as simply an
unfortunate anomaly, but rather, as a nationwide epidemic; an epidemic
that should be treated with the utmost care and concern, because it is
a condition that affects all of us. Poverty erodes the health and
security of our Nation's most valuable resources--our children and our
communities. Strong, healthy communities are necessary for the
preservation of the American way of life, a way of life that cannot
exist when infected by the ills that are symptomatic of poverty
stricken areas.
In addition, poverty hits hardest those with the least amount of
immunity against the conditions that contribute to poverty. While
minority communities have made many significant advancements over the
past few decades, a disproportionate number of minorities are still
impoverished and disadvantaged. African Americans comprise nearly 25
percent of people living in poverty, Hispanics 22 percent, and Asian
Americans nearly 11 percent. Native American communities capture an
astounding 25.3 percent of people living under the poverty level, many
living in what are considered ``fourth world'' poverty conditions. Many
Native Americans on the Rosebud and Pine Ridge reservations will not
make it through the winter due to inadequate housing, warm clothing,
and nourishment. In this country, and in this day and age, these
numbers are simply deplorable. Unfortunately, they do not stop there.
More than half of those living at or below the Federal poverty level
come from single parent households, and children ages 18 and younger
have the highest rate of poverty of any age group with 17.6 percent
living at or below the poverty line. Instead of receiving a proper
education in school, learning valuable life-lessons and leadership
skills in extra-curricular activities, and partaking in the many other
childhood activities that are a necessary part of growing up, nearly 13
million kids will spend the day wondering whether or not they are going
to eat that night, or whether their mother or father will be drunk or
in prison when they get home, that is assuming they even have a place
to go home to. Nevertheless, these children are expected to perform
well in schools, meet the national score on standardized tests, or risk
having their school shut down thanks to No Child Left Behind system.
Children who live under such conditions are not destined to succeed.
Most will not graduate from high school. Many will turn to gangs,
drugs, or a life of crime, and as a result, spend most of their adult
life in and out of prison.
Poverty is the result of a deep structural problem that implicates
our value system as well as our educational and economic institutions,
and it is a problem that permeates into all aspects of society. The
costs to victims of poverty are great, but the costs to us are greater.
That is why I wholeheartedly emphatically support the commitment to
cutting poverty made by H. Con. Res. 198. It will not be easy, but
there is a moral, and social urgency facing us. We have the opportunity
today to impact the lives of millions and give others the opportunity
to share in the great wealth that our nation has to offer.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, in the richest country in the world, no
one should go to bed hungry, no one should have to go without heat on a
cold winter night, and no one should be deprived of life saving
medicine because they can't afford it.
[[Page H364]]
It is so sad that in our country, the richest in the world, 37
million people live below the poverty line and deal with these fears
everyday.
As a Congress, we need to do more to help these people, which is why
I am proud to stand in support of Congresswoman Barbara Lee's bill, H.
Con. Res. 198, and the goal of cutting poverty in the U.S. in half in
the next 10 years.
This bill, recognizing the problem of poverty in our country is a
good start, but we need to do more. We can put our money where our
mouths are, starting with an economic stimulus package that gets money
to the people who need it most in an economic downturn. This can be
done by extending unemployment insurance and food stamps to help the
neediest among us . . . not by extending tax breaks for the richest
people in this country who have amassed great wealth at the expense of
the rest of us. Let's do the right thing and help those who actually
need it.
Madam Speaker, again I thank Representative Lee for her leadership in
fighting poverty and for bring this resolution to the floor and urge
all my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. STARK. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of resolving
to cut poverty in half over the next 10 years. America is the richest
country in the history of the world, yet 37 million Americans languish
in poverty. The poverty rate is an inexcusable 17 percent for all
children and 33 percent for black children. As a body, Congress has a
moral obligation to alleviate poverty and provide all people with
opportunities to lead healthy and independent lives.
The resolution, H. Con. Res. 198, before us is simple: it puts
Congress and the Nation on the clock and acknowledges our collective
responsibility to the impoverished and disadvantaged. As a country, we
spend more than all other countries combined on our military and
ongoing wars. Yet, our poverty rate is dead last among developed
nations. Clearly, we have the financial ability to drastically reduce
the number of people living in poverty. The question is do we have the
political will.
I believe the answer is yes. During the 1960s the poverty rate fell
from over 22.2 percent to 12.6 percent. These gains were brought about
by the creation and expansion of a strong safety net supported by
programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, and AFDC. Now, the safety net
is frayed and under constant attack from those who don't blink when
approving the $500 billion to fight the Iraq war, but would like to see
crucial entitlement programs ``wither on the vine.'' This resolution
rejects the failed ideology that has brought us the manmade disaster in
New Orleans and the shame of an additional 5 million people living in
poverty since 2000.
As we celebrate Martin Luther King's birthday, we must redouble our
efforts to fight poverty. Congress has to expand SCHIP and continue
moving toward universal health care. We need to ensure that all
families can afford childcare, decent housing, nutritious meals, and a
good education. These are basic human rights. As a society, our
obligation is to lift those who are disadvantaged and provide
opportunities. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and
rededicate ourselves to eradicating poverty.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong and unwavering
support for H. Con. Res. 198 and am pleased to be a co-sponsor on this
Congressional Resolution that draws attention to the approximately 37
million Americans who live in poverty. In particular, I am bound and
determined to meeting the Resolution's goal of cutting poverty in half
over the next 10 years.
The number of impoverished Floridians increased from 859,888 in 2000
to 943,670 in 2005, a 9.7 percent rise, representing almost 6 percent
of the total population. Over those years, Broward County's severely
poor grew from 77,942 to 82,327, while Miami-Dade's poverty rate of 6.8
percent was among the highest in the State.
African Americans and Hispanics have poverty rates far above the
poverty rate for Caucasians. In 2005, 24.9 percent of African Americans
(9.2 million) and 21.8 percent of Hispanics (94 million) had incomes
below poverty, compared to 8.3 percent of non-Hispanic whites (16.2
million) and 11.1 percent of Asians (1.4 million). Although African-
Americns represent only 12.6 percent of the total population, they make
up 24.8 percent of the poor population.
And among those that are the highest of our country's poor are our
children. In 2005, 12.3 million children (17.1 percent) were poor. For
African American children, this statistic is even higher--in 2005, 34.2
percent of black children were poor (3.7 million). This is inexcusable
in a country where so many live in great wealth.
Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick
and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to
school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is
fear for the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a
child to illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is
powerlessness, lack of representation and freedom.
It is time to change these statistics. Our citizens with minimal
education, and our citizens without a job are among those that are the
most susceptible to poverty. Clearly, Americans need to work. We need
to do what we have to do to make this happen.
And we need to do this soon, and not drag our feet on this important
issue. This Resolution will motivate us to get moving and gives us a
very necessary goal--to cut poverty in half over the next 10 years.
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res.
198, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution, as amended, was
agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________