Comments on: ONE to one - Letter 5! http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/ The Campaign to Make Poverty History Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:33:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Brianna Shepard http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-536787 Brianna Shepard Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:05:43 +0000 http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-536787 Thank you all for your comments. I agree that we need to take care of things in the US as well; however I don't see the two entities as independent. Rather, I believe that all people, in our global society, in our civil society, have much to offer one another. To assume that because I want to help millions who are starving and dying of disease in another part of the world means that I don't feel as strongly about our own citizens is just naive on your part. In fact, I belong to several organizations right here in Los Angeles. My favorite organization is My Friend's Place, which is a sanctuary for homeless youth in LA. The folks at My Friend's Place are set up to do outreach on the streets, bring kids in, give them a place to eat, give them counseling, get them on a path to education or a vocation, and so on. They work from beginning to end with these struggling, starving youth, may of whom are victims of abuse. I also belong to several environmental organizations, to Medicins Sans Frontieres, to Amnesty International and, of course, to One. These are not exclusive. These are all important to me. It is imperative that each one of us finds a way to help others. But we must also find those issues about which we feel most passionate. Otherwise, our work is stilted, and insincere, and ultimately ineffective. So I would incourage all of you to reach deep inside and consider the possibility that we can help everyone, in different places, and in different ways, simultaneously. No person is more deserving than another. One.org is doing great work in one part of the world. You are doing work in another part of the world. We are all part of ONE world. Let's keep our eye on the world, folks. Peace, Brianna Shepard Thank you all for your comments.

I agree that we need to take care of things in the US as well; however I don’t see the two entities as independent. Rather, I believe that all people, in our global society, in our civil society, have much to offer one another. To assume that because I want to help millions who are starving and dying of disease in another part of the world means that I don’t feel as strongly about our own citizens is just naive on your part. In fact, I belong to several organizations right here in Los Angeles. My favorite organization is My Friend’s Place, which is a sanctuary for homeless youth in LA. The folks at My Friend’s Place are set up to do outreach on the streets, bring kids in, give them a place to eat, give them counseling, get them on a path to education or a vocation, and so on. They work from beginning to end with these struggling, starving youth, may of whom are victims of abuse. I also belong to several environmental organizations, to Medicins Sans Frontieres, to Amnesty International and, of course, to One. These are not exclusive. These are all important to me. It is imperative that each one of us finds a way to help others. But we must also find those issues about which we feel most passionate. Otherwise, our work is stilted, and insincere, and ultimately ineffective.

So I would incourage all of you to reach deep inside and consider the possibility that we can help everyone, in different places, and in different ways, simultaneously. No person is more deserving than another. One.org is doing great work in one part of the world. You are doing work in another part of the world. We are all part of ONE world. Let’s keep our eye on the world, folks.

Peace,

Brianna Shepard

]]> By: Jennifer http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-534332 Jennifer Fri, 28 Dec 2007 19:05:16 +0000 http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-534332 I have to say I am outraged by this grassroots, non-partisan, campaign to get voters to think globally! Let's face the previous two comments state how DESPERATE things are here at home. I want the candidate that can get things done at HOME, in the USA. Until we can take care of our own, we can't act like the saviors of other countries. As a mother of four children, we are blessed to live in the land of the free, home of the brave. Growing up in the Heartland, I know first hand what it is like to work a long day to get a meal to the table. I know how much my parents sacrificed so that we could have adequate health care coverage, no corporate America wasn't paying for my Health Care. What I would love to see this group focus its funding on, instead of advertising campaigns and mass mailers (PLEASE tell me this was a donation from a corporate sponsor and PLEASE tell me this group didn't spend thousands of dollars on mass mailings, when we could have given thousands of people a hot meal.) Helping OUR own here in the USA, when we can say that we are the home of the FREE; FREE from poverty, homelessness, and Hatred, then we can go abroad and lovingly help our neighbors. It starts at Home first, just like I teach my children, we need to take care of our own actions, before we can point out our brother's faults. A very concerned citizen in the Heartland - Wake up people it starts here at HOME! I have to say I am outraged by this grassroots, non-partisan, campaign to get voters to think globally! Let’s face the previous two comments state how DESPERATE things are here at home. I want the candidate that can get things done at HOME, in the USA. Until we can take care of our own, we can’t act like the saviors of other countries.

As a mother of four children, we are blessed to live in the land of the free, home of the brave. Growing up in the Heartland, I know first hand what it is like to work a long day to get a meal to the table. I know how much my parents sacrificed so that we could have adequate health care coverage, no corporate America wasn’t paying for my Health Care.

What I would love to see this group focus its funding on, instead of advertising campaigns and mass mailers (PLEASE tell me this was a donation from a corporate sponsor and PLEASE tell me this group didn’t spend thousands of dollars on mass mailings, when we could have given thousands of people a hot meal.) Helping OUR own here in the USA, when we can say that we are the home of the FREE; FREE from poverty, homelessness, and Hatred, then we can go abroad and lovingly help our neighbors. It starts at Home first, just like I teach my children, we need to take care of our own actions, before we can point out our brother’s faults.

A very concerned citizen in the Heartland - Wake up people it starts here at HOME!

]]> By: adjfs http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-532704 adjfs Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:25:58 +0000 http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-532704 Demand on food banks reflects lack of adequate benefits through “safety net” programs The news has been filled with stories of food pantries and soup kitchens that are struggling to meet the growing problem of hunger. These groups are frequently staffed with volunteers and depend on donations. They deserve our gratitude. The growing demand on food banks reflects the failure of our elected officials to provide adequate benefits through “safety net” programs. What happened to the safety net of Food Stamps, Supplemental Social Security Income and TANF cash assistance? These programs were intended to meet the basic needs of low income citizens. It is extremely distressing to see that the official government policy for feeding hungry people is to rely on the charity of food pantries and soup kitchens. Forty years ago the Food Stamp program was established to end hunger in America. Yet, it was only designed to provide 75% of what the U.S. Department of Agriculture determined necessary to meet minimum nutritional needs. Poor families were expected to make up the rest with cash. Unfortunately, that is nearly impossible for those who must rely on SSI or TANF. The payment levels for these programs are very low. It is difficult for these people to find extra cash to buy food when they spend every dime available for rent, utilities, and other essentials. As a result our food pantries must deal with constant demands from people who are already receiving help from the safety net. This is unconscionable. This is not the Depression. People need to be able to get their food from the grocery store and should not have to wait in lines to get a meal or box of food. We cannot continue to rely on the kindness of volunteers and donations to meet a responsibility that we all have towards our less fortunate neighbors. We must insist that our government officials ensure that our safety net does its job. Demand on food banks reflects lack of adequate benefits through “safety net” programs

The news has been filled with stories of food pantries and soup kitchens that are struggling to meet the growing problem of hunger. These groups are frequently staffed with volunteers and depend on donations. They deserve our gratitude. The growing demand on food banks reflects the failure of our elected officials to provide adequate benefits through “safety net” programs. What happened to the safety net of Food Stamps, Supplemental Social Security Income and TANF cash assistance? These programs were intended to meet the basic needs of low income citizens. It is extremely distressing to see that the official government policy for feeding hungry people is to rely on the charity of food pantries and soup kitchens.

Forty years ago the Food Stamp program was established to end hunger in America. Yet, it was only designed to provide 75% of what the U.S. Department of Agriculture determined necessary to meet minimum nutritional needs. Poor families were expected to make up the rest with cash. Unfortunately, that is nearly impossible for those who must rely on SSI or TANF. The payment levels for these programs are very low. It is difficult for these people to find extra cash to buy food when they spend every dime available for rent, utilities, and other essentials. As a result our food pantries must deal with constant demands from people who are already receiving help from the safety net.

This is unconscionable. This is not the Depression. People need to be able to get their food from the grocery store and should not have to wait in lines to get a meal or box of food. We cannot continue to rely on the kindness of volunteers and donations to meet a responsibility that we all have towards our less fortunate neighbors. We must insist that our government officials ensure that our safety net does its job.

]]> By: adjfs http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-532703 adjfs Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:23:49 +0000 http://www.one.org/blog/2007/12/20/one-to-one-letter-5/#comment-532703 There are currently 5.5 million children living in extreme poverty in the United States. Extreme poverty is defined as living in a family whose income is less than 50 percent of poverty. The 2007 poverty level for a family of three is $17,170 annually. That means for a family of three living in extreme poverty, their income would be less than $8,585 a year. These children live in desperate conditions of homelessness, unsafe housing, hunger and isolation. Their basic needs of food, shelter, clothing and transportation are not being met, let alone their ability to be kids by participating in school or community activities. These children are isolated from society because they are poor. These families suffer, trying to make ends meet without the financial means to do so. As a result, many turn to the welfare system for help. The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program has evolved from a safety net designed to help children and their families to one which insures their deprivation. This has happened in virtually all states at the hands of members of both political parties. TANF cash assistance caseloads dropped dramatically during the first years of welfare reform but have leveled off in the past five years. There are currently 3 million children nationwide that receive cash assistance through the TANF program. States have the flexibility to design the program to meet the needs of their unique situations, yet are setting policies and issuing benefits that they know will not meet the needs of these families. Most state TANF programs, by design, restrict the income of a family to less than 50 percent of poverty. These children live in families who comply with all of the strict rules of welfare reform, yet the benefits they receive are too low to meet basic human needs. The latest TANF reauthorization did not focus on the dynamics of why families are left on the cash assistance rolls, it focused more on paperwork. Instead of increasing maximum payment standards, states are choosing to spend less money on basic cash assistance and implementing new programs or increasing services through other programs like child care. Families who rely on cash assistance are desperate. Many cannot work or are struggling to find employment. Some are mentally or physically ill or disabled. Not that programs like child care or other support services for the working poor are unimportant; they are greatly needed. But families living at half the poverty level should not be asked to sacrifice their basic needs to support the working poor at much higher incomes. That support should come from those able to afford it. Meeting basic needs for our most needy citizens should be the first priority for TANF funds, not the last. Now is the time to provide a decent standard of living for America’s poorest children. Full report: http://athensjfs.blogspot.com/ There are currently 5.5 million children living in extreme poverty in the United States. Extreme poverty is defined as living in a family whose income is less than 50 percent of poverty. The 2007 poverty level for a family of three is $17,170 annually. That means for a family of three living in extreme poverty, their income would be less than $8,585 a year.

These children live in desperate conditions of homelessness, unsafe housing, hunger and isolation. Their basic needs of food, shelter, clothing and transportation are not being met, let alone their ability to be kids by participating in school or community activities. These children are isolated from society because they are poor. These families suffer, trying to make ends meet without the financial means to do so. As a result, many turn to the welfare system for help.

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program has evolved from a safety net designed to help children and their families to one which insures their deprivation. This has happened in virtually all states at the hands of members of both political parties. TANF cash assistance caseloads dropped dramatically during the first years of welfare reform but have leveled off in the past five years.

There are currently 3 million children nationwide that receive cash assistance through the TANF program. States have the flexibility to design the program to meet the needs of their unique situations, yet are setting policies and issuing benefits that they know will not meet the needs of these families. Most state TANF programs, by design, restrict the income of a family to less than 50 percent of poverty. These children live in families who comply with all of the strict rules of welfare reform, yet the benefits they receive are too low to meet basic human needs.

The latest TANF reauthorization did not focus on the dynamics of why families are left on the cash assistance rolls, it focused more on paperwork. Instead of increasing maximum payment standards, states are choosing to spend less money on basic cash assistance and implementing new programs or increasing services through other programs like child care. Families who rely on cash assistance are desperate. Many cannot work or are struggling to find employment. Some are mentally or physically ill or disabled. Not that programs like child care or other support services for the working poor are unimportant; they are greatly needed. But families living at half the poverty level should not be asked to sacrifice their basic needs to support the working poor at much higher incomes. That support should come from those able to afford it.

Meeting basic needs for our most needy citizens should be the first priority for TANF funds, not the last. Now is the time to provide a decent standard of living for America’s poorest children.

Full report: http://athensjfs.blogspot.com/

]]>