Scraping By: Ehrenreich interview

[Max Sawicky]

The Pwogs, who may not exist, are loathe to
put a redefinition of poverty on the table
for fear it could slide in a bad direction.
This would have real implications for Federal
spending of various types.  The simplest
option is to define it as half the median
income, possibly varied by family size/structure.

We've been doing research here on 'hardship,'
and we have published material on calculating
"living wage" family budgets, including w/respect
to regional price differences.  The other topical
reference on poverty measurement is Pat Ruggles' book.
See our web site for details.

mbs
http://epinet.org

alex lantsberg wrote:
> 
> > 
> and the obvious question is why don't the more progressive dems push
> forward with a bill that would redefine poverty to include these obvious
> and necessary costs?  seems like a sure fire political winner.

This contains several fallacies, which ?Alex is probably aware of but I
think underlining them is worthwhile. The first is that progressive
Democrats (in any serious sense of "progressive") exist. This proposal
would require at least some mass mobilization to carry it through, and
the Democratic Party exists primarily to block mass mobilization. And
the second is that the DP gives first priority to winning elections.
Winning elections is very important to them, doubtless, but that desire
is definitely secondary to  carrying out is primary goal of blunting
mass mobilization.

This was rather clearly exhibited in 1988. Paul Simon (one of the great
'progressive' icons of the DP) ran for the presidential nomination
pretty clearly not because he ever had any hope of the nomination but to
blunt the impact of the Jackson campaign. And of course the most
threatening aspect, perhaps the only threatening aspect, of the Jackson
campaign was its potential for pulling more people into the political
process. (I write in praise not of Jackson but of the constituency to
which he appealed.) And part of the "deal" the Dukakis forces made with
the Jackson supporters at the convention was to provide money for local
registration drives. It never came through of course. Had he been
willing to risk mass mobilization, Dukakis would have had an excellent
chance of winning.

  can you
> imagine a repug arguing why the costs of housing or health care should
> not be a consideration when figuring out if someone is officially poor
> or not.

No, but neither can I imagine DP leaders seriously arguing that when so
arguing might make a difference. (DP progressive gestures always come
when they are least apt to actually make any difference -- e.g. some of
Clinton's last minute executive orders or his and his wife's medical
proposals back in '93.)

Carrol
> 
> alex