|
Re: Income Security and Family Support Advisory #ISF-17
To the Honorable Congressman Jim McDermott Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support of the Committee on Ways and
Means:
My name is Kim Aponte and I am a case manager of a township
welfare program. I am writing to comment on the hearing to establish a modern
measure of poverty. While I agree that a more modern measure is needed given
how outdated our current model is, I am hoping that consumption as opposed to
strictly income will be used as a more appropriate gauge. As we are all aware
of the many factors aside from strictly income which are relevant in
establishing an individual’s ability to provide for their basic needs, specifically
food, housing, childcare, transportation and healthcare.
In addition, I have two other concerns. One concern is
poverty measures versus financial eligibility criteria and standards of social
welfare programs, including state and federal programs. Many of our current
program’s financial qualification standards (including ours in our General
Assistance program within a township government) are so low as to cause the
majority of individuals falling under slightly higher poverty thresholds to
fall through the cracks. In those cases there are no social service
programs to assist them. Our country’s current economical status and
subsequent job losses has caused record numbers of individual’s to apply for
financial assistance benefit programs. Due to outdated financial qualification
standards and lack of programs in general, record numbers of individuals and
families are being turned away.
Notwithstanding, fiscal irresponsibility is causing many
state governments to drastically reduce social welfare monies and/or programs
at a time when they are needed more than ever. Why is it that social welfare
programs are the first to receive cuts usually followed by education? Why
aren’t higher income people being taxed at higher rates to assist in managing
our economy?
This leads me to my final question. Once a more accurate
indicator of poverty is established what changes will be implemented to benefit
those in poverty? The truth of the matter as I see it lies with the priorities
of many of the individual policy makers. Helping the poor has never
realistically been a priority in our country. The poor do not fund campaigns
nor do they have a large lobbying presence. The poor also focusing exclusively
on surviving do not inundate our government officials with letters, faxes or
emails regarding a lack of programs to assist them. And the social service
agencies serving these clients are too fragmented, they are unwilling to become
more cohesive, to unionize because so many are fighting for the same funding
sources
I have seen time and time again policy makers moving
mountains to fund special interest projects, as well as having the ability to
put aside political wrangling to get a bill passed in record time when it suits
their agenda.
Once again I am reminded of a poem by poet Tarapodo Rai
titled “The Poverty Line.” I would ask that you might read it and share it
with others in your subcommittee. For while it is noteworthy to try to
continue to define poverty, and issue more modern poverty guidelines, will more
accurate statistics really cause our current or future administrations to make
poverty a priority, to start creating, supporting, and funding anti-poverty
measures and programs to help all of its citizens in need?
Sincerely,
Kim Aponte
Kim Aponte
146 Valley Dr.
Bolingbrook, Il. 60440
Kaponte44@aol.com
| 
