The year 2016 is coming to and end and what a year it has been. Before I take a few days off to enjoy Christmas and the New Year festivities with my family and friends, I wanted to reflect a bit on my journey assisting the food insecure this year. This past year contained some positive highlights. Nationally, the US Census Bureau reported in September that the poverty rate in the US declined in 2015 for the first time since 1999. In my community, the local school district started offering free lunch during the summer to all school age children in our community through the Summer Food Service Program. Online I found the Click and Carry handle, and with a generous discount from the manufacturer, was able to purchase several dozen to provide to our homeless clients, allowing them to carry away more food when they visit the food pantry. And finally this past month, due to the generous response of my blog readers, the food pantry was able to provide every household receiving food with a sweet treat baking mix–cookies, quick breads or brownies–to brighten their holiday. We were even able to offer aluminum baking pans to those who didn’t have a pan in which to cook the mix of their choosing. It
was very rewarding to me and the other volunteers and staff who pack food for clients to see the happiness and excitement elicited by these unexpected treats. I want to extend a heartfelt thank you to all my friends, neighbors, family and readers who helped make this possible.
2016 also had it’s low spots. In Pennsylvania, the year started out without a budget negatively impacting a wide range of social services, from school districts to food pantries. When 2016 began, the state had been without a budget for over 180 days. Just before 2015 ended, Governor Wolfe announced he would line item veto the budget proposal sent to him by the General Assembly. Taking this action allowed $23.4 billion to be released, of which $18.4 million went to the State Food Purchase Program, which helps provide food to food pantries. In early Spring, the House GOP released a budget plan for fiscal year 2017 in which 62% of its proposed budget cuts came from low income, social safety net programs. Luckily this budget was not approved, but that is perhaps only a temporary reprieve from the ax for these programs, for 2016 came to a close with the election of Donald Trump for President after one of the nastiest Presidential campaigns I have ever witnessed.
I have heard many people say they are glad to see 2016 come to an end and it can’t end soon enough. I understand what they mean; unfortunately, I do not share their belief that next year will be better, especially with regard to those in poverty and experiencing food insecurity. There have been calls for the nation to come together, to work together, to address our nation’s challenges. I don’t have a problem with that sentiment, as long as that is what happens–both sides talking to each other and listening to each others’ concerns and proposals, then working together through compromise to reach a jointly crafted approach. I fear, however, that is not what is meant with the call for national unity. My concern is that what is being requested is for the nation to come together in support of the plans and proposals of the GOP, who will soon control the Legislative and Executive branches of the Federal Government and 33 Governorship (in 25 of those states they also control the State Legislature as well), with little to no dialogue or compromise taking place. If bipartisan compromise is not what is meant by the call to come together, I think the result will be unfortunate for all Americans. I guess we will just have to wait and see.
So as 2016 comes to an end I am trying to remain that same optimist who has always tried to find the silver lining. Up until now, however, I never realized how close the colors sliver and gray were to each other. My husband keeps reminding me to focus on my sphere of influence–poverty, and in particular food insecurity–so as to not get overwhelmed by the magnitude of change that may be headed our way. It is good advice and I intend to try to follow it as best as I can. I will continue to advocate and do whatever else I can for those who are struggling to make ends meet and are experiencing food insecurity. I will also continue to encourage meaningful dialogue from all points of view with this blog. Thank you to my readers and to those who comment, either here on the blog or on Facebook or even in person. I have received inspiration, insight and encouragement from your words. And again, thank you so much to those who helped us brighten a few families’ holiday by donating baking mixes!
I wish all of you a wonderful holiday season and a happy, healthy New Year!
Think back to your worst, bad day. Nothing went right. Maybe you overslept and your car wouldn’t start or you missed your bus. Maybe you had an impossible task to complete for work or school. Maybe your boss was a jerk or your company was downsizing or you flunked out of college. Maybe the test results from the doctor were not good, for you or someone you love. There are countless ways you could have a worst, bad day.
frustration or uncertainty you faced on that worst, bad day, you face most days of your life. Additionally, imagine that many of the coping mechanisms you used to get you through that worst, bad day are not available to you. You don’t have any friends or family who can help you in any way except listen or commiserate. You can’t afford to take time out for a mental health break. You do not have the money to treat yourself to ice cream, alcohol or a meal out and if you do decide, “What the heck! It’s been a really bad day and I deserve a treat.”, you are certain to experience disapproval from someone who does not feel you are deserving of that treat, even after a bad day. Welcome to the reality of someone living in poverty.
condition the researchers called bandwidth poverty. When someone suffers from bandwidth poverty, s/he is spending most of his or her cognitive abilities figuring out how to put food on the table or pay bills and it becomes nearly impossible to think about the future and make long term plans. The study demonstrated that living in poverty created a mental stress that was equal to losing 13 IQ points, or stated another way, losing a whole night’s sleep. I have tried to function on little to no sleep and it was not easy. I can not imagine doing it day after day.
as a person with bandwidth poverty will have less patience and a shorter attention span for their children. Long-term planning activities, like saving money, getting more education or searching for a new job decome too taxing to continue or cease to even be considered. Of course this pattern of behavior feeds right back into the negative stereotype that people in poverty make bad decisions, and are therefore, soley responsible for their situation. In reality, however, the effects of bandwidth poverty create an insidious cycle, trapping those living in poverty in a succession of bad decisions, because they are incapable of thinking about and planning for the future.
Recently I was reading through a Facebook conversation about whether someone who paid his or her fair share of federal income tax was less intelligent than someone who was able, through aggressive use of loopholes in the tax code, to avoid paying any federal income tax. (Don’t worry we aren’t going there.) One of the responders asked the original poster if he thought it would be better to keep as much of his money as possible so that he could personally give to organizations and causes he wanted to support, instead of having the Federal Government spend his money for him. The implication in his query is that our current Federal Government it too large and operates in an inefficient, even corrupt manner, wasting our hard earned money. The questioner believes the solution to this perceived problem is a smaller Federal Government, which can operate more efficiently, with less waste and corruption. This smaller Federal Government is able to exist because much of the services provided by the larger Federal Government have been delegated to the states, private sector or charities. Shrinking the size of the Federal Government is exactly what Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, is trying to do when he advocates using charity as the solution to poverty. Using charities alone to solve a problem as large and as complex as poverty, is fraught with complications, however, and will never succeed in bringing about the desired result of lowering poverty rates.
the inequities that inevitably arise from using this approach to solving a complex problem. These inequities are, for the most part not intentional, but nonetheless, exist and are very problematic. Donations will vary from geographic location to geographic location or for that matter from season to season. Consequently charitable organizations in one part of the country may be much better able to assist those in poverty than organizations located in other areas. Additionally, the amount of aid a charity can provide may vary throughout the year as giving fluxuates. Furthermore, donors elect to donate to causes that interest them, often times giving to the organization that has the more effective advertising campaign or hook, but that is not always assisting the greatest need. What results from relying on charities to solve the problem of poverty is an approach that is unequal on many levels and may even serve to exacerbate the problem in certain locations.
The final and perhaps most important reason it is ill-advised to use charities to solve a problem as large and complex as poverty is that charities hinder or delay the social change and justice that must happen before any real progress in diminishing poverty can be seen. Donating to a charity fighting poverty distracts donors from fighting the inequities in society that cause poverty in the first place. The donor feels good, like s/he is making a difference in the overall problem, when really all s/he is doing is providing temporary relief. Furthermore, the act of providing temporary assistance often masks the true depth of these inequities. Those in need receive just enough to allow them to become complacent with their situation and to lessen the outrage they as well as the rest of society might otherwise feel. When you couple the complacency of the person in need with the sense of having helped of the donor, society fails to realize the true depth of the problem, and therefore, does not demand action to correct the inequities that allow the injustice to continue to exist.
understands that charity alone will not solve the problem of poverty. The bishops have created ![homeless-man-free-picture-for-blogs-1[1]](https://fromasimmertoaboil.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/homeless-man-free-picture-for-blogs-11.jpg?w=317&h=211)
the homeless person sitting on the sidewalk or avoid making eye contact with the mother with the child who is asking for something to eat because he is hungry. Or worse, we look at them with disgust or harsh judgement. There are many reasons why we behave in this manner. Maybe we are frustrated because we are working hard and not getting ahead and we worry that one day that could all too easily be us. Or maybe we look away because we desperately want to be of assistance, but feel powerless to truly help these folks out of their situation. Some may tell themselves this homeless person or single mother is responsible for his or her situation due to the poor decisions he or she has made in life, and therefore deserves no further consideration. Whatever our rationale, the result of our actions is to push people living in poverty to the edges of society, to segregate them.
snack cakes or sweets that are out of season, like the packaged peppermint bark we got right after Christmas. It is always fun slipping these items into a family’s monthly groceries, knowing the joy it will bring to a little one whose life holds few treats. This past week we were able to ensure a young girl got a birthday party thanks to someone who donated a birthday party in a bag, which included cake mix, birthday candles, plates and napkins. (What a great idea this is!) This young lady’s birthday party will be on Saturday and I will happily think of her getting to celebrate her birthday like a “normal” kid.
The other day, as I sat down with my coffee to look over the morning’s news, the following headline caught my eye, 
contains proposals that will often negatively impact those it purports to assist. For instance, proposals in the plan seek to weaken nutrition standards for school lunches as well as reduce access to free meals for students in need, while raising administrative costs and burdens. Also proposed in the antipoverty plan is a shift to funding school lunches as a block grant. I find this particularly alarming, because block grants in the past often result in unequal access to programs nationwide and a decrease in benefits overall. Targeting the school lunch program for cuts is particularly troubling, as this program benefits children, a group most Americans agree should receive assistance. Additionally, the school lunch program has successfully lessened childhood hunger and ensured children are nutritionally prepared to meet their school day.
The second concern I have with Ryan’s antipoverty plan is that while it seeks to reward being employed, the plan fails to address the minimum wage at all. Many Americans, including numerous people in Ryan’s own district, have lost good paying unionized manufacturing jobs as factories have closed and manufacturing jobs have moved oversees. When those who have found themselves unemployed find employment, what they find are often positions in the service industry which pays minimum wage. As I have said before, a full time minimum wage job barely keeps a single person without dependents above the poverty line, but someone with a family and that same job would certainly be in poverty with no chance to pull his or her family out of poverty on such a meager salary. For an antipoverty plan that champions working as the path out of poverty, to neglect to advocate for a living wage, or even a modest raise to the minimum wage is inexcusable.
proposed in recent years to correct some of the faults associated with the Official Poverty Measure.
Consumer Price Index.
the poverty thresholds; however, for a decade and a half after the report’s release the panel’s recommendations were by and large ignored as neither Republican nor Democrat wanted to touch this political third rail topic. Finally, in 2011, the Obama administration started publishing a supplemental poverty measure (SPM) based largely on the recommendations of the NAS panel. The SPM is not the official measure of poverty and is not used when determining eligibility for poverty programs or allocation of funds for poverty programs; however it does give an alternative method to assess the status of low income American households. Like the poverty thresholds, the SPM is published annually. The report that accompanies the SPM data explains the difference between the Official Poverty Measure numbers and the SPM numbers, as well as discusses the effects of noncash benefits, taxes and other nondiscretionary expenses on the economic well being of low income households.
dollar above the line and you are not considered to be in poverty, but your situation will likely not be any different than the person making $2 less than you who is considered to be below the poverty line. A line only provides economic data. It does not provide any information about what the person in poverty, or even just above the line, is experiencing, why he is there or show long he has been there. This information would be vital in formulating any plan to address poverty. To truly understand poverty, any measurement of it must encompass more than just a line. Consequently, the United States government should continue to strive for a more accurate assessment of poverty.
I first started reading about these types of poverty, my assumption was that most people who lived in poverty as adults had grown up in poverty. In other words, that generational poverty was the most prevalent type of poverty in the United States. Historically this may have been the case and certainly in places like Appalachia, the deep South and many inner cities, people still suffer from generational poverty. Recent research, however, conducted independently by two professors, Stephen Pimpare currently at the University of New Hampshire and Mark Rank at Washington University, suggests that situational poverty is much more prevalent, and alarmingly, affects far more people than current Census Bureau poverty statistics reflect.
With almost 40% of the population experiencing poverty for at least 1 year during the ages 25 to 60, the likelihood exists that most Americans know someone who has experienced poverty, or quite possibly have firsthand experience. The face of poverty today could very likely look like me or you. According to analysis of Census data done by the Brookings Institute, so far in the 21st century, more than two thirds of the increase in poverty rates have occurred in suburban households. In fact in 2013 suburban poverty levels exceeded urban areas. This dramatic rise in suburban poverty may surprise some, because unlike other types of poverty, suburban poverty is often hidden on tree-lined streets in developments that look just like mine.
A group of alumni from my elementary school have been planning a reunion for all former students of this school. The school is no longer open, but when I attended it housed grades 1-4, one classroom for each grade. When my dad attended that same school it housed grades 1-8, with two grades per classroom, so as you can imagine the school was a small tight-knit community. Sadly, I will not be able to attend the reunion, but being included in the Facebook discussion about the reunion and memories of our little school and community has caused me to do a bit of reminiscing myself. Once we completed fourth grade and my class continued on to the much bigger middle school, I had fewer and fewer classes with many of my former classmates, and I lost track of many of them as the years passed.
that, including the people who lived there. It is still called that today. Back in elementary school, my little person’s mind assumed it was called that because a large pit existed somewhere back in this wooded enclave of homes.
Tuesday my co-volunteer and I played “Would You Eat That Cold?” which is what we ask each other when we have to pack food for a homeless person who has no way of heating their food. This week we also played the companion games, “Is This Too Heavy to Carry?” and ” How Long Do You Think This Can Last Unrefrigerated?” These companion games were necessary because the homeless gentleman we were assisting was without transportation and could only take what he could carry. In addition, he lacked a refrigerator, cooler, or any other way to keep his food cold. As games go, these are not a very fun. This is the second time we have had to play them this month and at least the third time this year. Each time we have played them, it has been with a different person.![homeless-man-free-picture-for-blogs-1[1]](https://fromasimmertoaboil.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/homeless-man-free-picture-for-blogs-11.jpg?w=351&h=233)
poverty, which is defined as a period of being poor caused by situational factors like job loss, illness, divorce or natural disaster. While he may not have had many extras as a child and young adult, he did not live in poverty; however, due to situational factors like having to take care of his mother during her illness and current difficulty finding employment, he now finds himself homeless and living in poverty. If he could receive the necessary temporary assistance and find a permanent full time job that paid a living wage, so that he could begin to build a financial cushion, the likelihood exists that he would lift himself out of poverty.
The reason for my hesitancy to move forward thus far stems from the fact that I’m not a risk taker, never have been. For me, as it probably is for most people, I haven’t taken risks because of a fear of failure. One of the things I really like about the Albion book is that it is peppered with motivational quotes, at least one on every page. Several of them deal with taking risks or overcoming the fear of failure. One of the ones that really caused me to stop and think is a simple statement from Wayne Gretzky:
disturber,” which is a term Alan Webber, cofounder of the company and magazine Fast Company, coined to refer to himself. Albion quotes Webber, who describes his philosophy as such “Telling the truth for me was all about trying to make a difference by being honest about what I saw.” I plan to take this course of action, telling the truth about what I see and hoping it makes a difference. I believe that too many mistruths, exaggerations and bald faced lies have been told with regard to poverty, people struggling with poverty, the benefits they receive and the reasons these people are living in poverty. My intent is to stand up for and with those struggling with poverty, here in this blog as well as my everyday life, and without blame or belligerence tell the truth as I see it or experience it.
From a Simmer to a Boil 