The figure on real poverty in America is far worse than the Census Bureau recently reported. It found that nearly 40 million Americans are living in official poverty (less than $22,000 for a family of four). This is an 11-year high.

The Bureau figure does not take into account the number of persons tossed into poverty in the past year, the worst year so far of the recession. It also undercounts real unemployment. Officially, nearly 10 percent of Americans are unemployed. Economists say that if seasonal and discouraged workers are counted the real unemployment figure exceeds 16 percent. As always, blacks and Hispanics have by far the highest poverty rate.

Despite the massive economic hardship, “poverty” is still a dirty word. Politicians, much of the media and the public have largely ignored the crisis.

Click here for the full article >

Obama encourages new programs such as debate in publc and private schools.

PROBLEM AREA V: POVERTY

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States.

Unfortunately, more than four decades after Michael Harrington identified those living in poverty as “The Other America,” poverty is still an endemic problem in the United States. In 2005, close to 13 percent of the total U.S. population – about 37 million people – were counted as living below the poverty line, a number that essentially remained unchanged from 2004. Of these, 12.3 million were children. Poverty is associated with many harmful outcomes, including poor health, crime, educational difficulties, and other social problems. Poverty continues to plague our society despite over four decades of national effort and trillions of dollars in federal spending to combat it. In a nation as wealthy as the United States, such a high level of poverty is certainly appropriate for the examination and reflection provided by a variety of debates on the topic. Affirmatives advocating this topic will be able to defend a wide range of social services designed to both ameliorate the harms of poverty and to reduce the number of people living in poverty. These services would include expanding child care, health care, food stamps, housing assistance, mental health care, educational assistance, Early Head Start and job training, among others. Negatives would be able to debate against the harms of poverty, questioning the ability of various plans to solve the problems identified and offering many disadvantages, including spending, politics, federalism and net widening. They would also be able to counterplan many of the affirmative plans with the state counterplan. The negative would also have several critical options, including objectivism, statism, dependency, and even critiquing the use of the term poverty.

Author: Chuck Ballingall, California

This excerpt was originally produced by the National Federation of High Schools