We think of political campaigns as vehicles through which politicians remind voters of important issues. Yet, unlike most topics chosen with utmost political precision, poverty almost never makes the cut.
With one in six Americans living in poverty every day, according to a recent NPR story, it is clear that politicians in Washington aren’t taking strides to reduce the poverty rate, but are actually moving backwards, keeping things stagnant.
This shouldn’t surprise us. Most politically oriented people realize that politicians’ main job is not necessarily to fix problems or to come up with new solutions — their main job is to get elected.
Understanding this detail changes how we understand political strategies. Popular talking points currently range from the “death” of Big Bird to Romney's evil corporation while voters lose valuable time to hear about plans to reduce the number of homeless and hungry people in America.
It began in 1964, when former President Lyndon Johnson declared the “unconventional war on poverty” and promised not to spare any resource on the new war. During the Great Society, the creation of Johnson's so-called ideal government, the poverty rate was 19 percent.
Since that brave declaration of war, the federal government kept its promise, sparing nothing in government resources to fight the poverty war. While the federal government spends over $12 trillion on successful programs, the poverty rate has not fallen under 10.5 percent. Now, the U.S. faces a rising 15.1 percent poverty rate. If we’re talking about war, poverty has been a smarter opponent than Washington’s bureaucrats.
A recent Cato Institute study found that there are about 126 federal government programs with the goal of tackling the poverty monster. These programs fail because they’re based on the assumption that government can do it all.
There seems to be no end in sight for programs that waste resources and create dependency, the main contributors to a cycle of poverty. We should ask more of politicians and we need to become more skeptical of government programs that claim to rescue people from the throes of poverty.
Finishing school, finding employment and remaining childless until marriage. These are the three most significant ways in which we can fight poverty. High school dropouts have a higher chance of ending up in poverty, three and a half times more likely than those who do get their high school degree. Only 2.6 percent of full-time workers live in poverty, and children who live in single parent households are four times more likely to be poor than those who live with both parents. If we are to attack the growing poverty rate, this is a great place to start.
In order to truly fight poverty, it is essential that we stop looking at government for answers. Politicians want to get elected, bureaucrats want to keep their jobs and government officials receive their salaries, often regardless of their job performance. It shouldn't be a surprise to find that these government programs don't work. With over $16 trillion dollars in debt and a very slow or nonexistent recovery, we cannot afford to support the welfare state.
Carlos Alfaro is an executive board member for Students For Liberty.
Reach the columnist at calfaro2@asu.edu or follow him at @AlfaroAmericano
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
