Kogan. Roaming and Beltran article use statistical data to support their claim, “Trump 2021 Budget would cut $1.6 Trillion From Low-Income Programs.” Would it be selfish to overlook people in poverty and not offer any type of government assistance? Poverty in the US remain a huge problem among children, veterans and seniors. Policy shifts in aid for poor families has had a big impact on the poverty rate, some adults do not have the resources to get ahead, so they are left in the dark with no income ladder.
Due to the lack of help from government assistance many people end up homeless living in the streets because there is no help with funding being cut, they are left with little or nothing. The Trump administration has cut funding over the past year to SNAP benefits for poor families, and a lot of needy people have lost healthcare coverage and there have been increases in health care costs (Richard, Kathleen, and Jennifer).
The Trisi and Saenz, article states on “Policy Brief: The deep poverty rate among children rose in the decade after the 1996 law” making a program for needy families (TANF) Temporary Assistance for Families.
Deep poverty is a problem among children with a single mother and unemployed parents that depend on government assistant, such as low-income housing, healthcare and SNAP benefits. There are some parents with do not have a high school education and feel they are unable to overcome poverty because of their lack of education.
The politician in the middle of the 1990s passed a law to help poor families, the program was Temporary Assistance for Families (TANF).
Poverty rose from 3.1 percent in 1995 to 3.5 percent in 2005 by using statistical data to support their claim (administrative caseload data). Deep poverty is at its highest point in 2020 and the politicians are not doing enough to stop hunger in the US. Many youth in high school and are force into work by their parents because they live in desperation of poverty, and they have an obligation to help sustain a household.
Many students live in poverty and cannot afford to continue their education due to the lack of government assistance, which causes the cycle of poverty to continue. Next, Kogan. Roaming and Beltran, article talk about unpleasant action to non-defense discretionary (NDD) cuts. The budget would cut $1.2 trillion over the next decade from programs such as Medicaid, SNAP, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) the evidence is factual claims from The Office of Management and Budget Baseline Projection (table 1) in the year 2020.
There is a problem with our government system, they do not want to budget for needy people, and they cut funding for healthcare and SNAP (Formerly food stamp). When children are left to the side with no programs to assist with housing or hot meals, these children are left to deal with themselves and their parents’ problems. The government is cutting these programs that are supposed to be helping families in need.
Children are sometimes living in a motel with no clean clothes or a safe environment which is an unacceptable quality of living (Richard, Kathleen and Jennifer). Also, Kogan. Roaming and Beltran, is giving statistical claims about low-income working families with children living in poverty are struggling with their income below “14,000 Thousand a year for a family of four.” For some people this becomes a problem and has such a negative effect on them that they become homeless. The reason for this problem is the gap between the rich and the poor is becoming wider.
In some urban areas in the US, wages are not kept up with the cost of living and the demand for living in these areas is high for poor families that cannot afford to drive long distance to go work or pay for childcare. When people become homeless, it causes one to feel uncertain and hopeless because they do not qualify to get social services or the help they need to be off the streets. This causes them to become victims of society with no help from the low-income housing and social services (Richard, Kathleen, and Jennifer). Last, Kogan. Roaming and Beltran, state that programs aiming to help with poverty face a $1.2 trillion, or 57% deficit. Without the proposed budget of $2.2 trillion over ten years, programs will be cut and families in need will suffer.
Under the Trump administration budget cut would be devastating for low-income families, as well as for other adults living below the poverty line, “1 out of 6 dollars for low-income mandatory programs will disappear” (Richard, Kathleen, and Jennifer). The budget will make it hard for needy families to put food on their table and it would take SNAP away from millions who are working less than 40 hours a week. The budget would also affect students and families in low-income neighborhoods who depend on free and reduce-price school meals. Trisi and Saenz, using statistical data to support their claim that during the Great Recession in the 2007, the government tried to assist policies to help children in poverty and deep poverty from growing stronger, in 1995.
Social services had a rise in poverty line 82 percent of children, the reason is the loss of cash assistance. Contrary to poverty trends, the child poverty rate declined between 1995 and 2005, and government assistance was helping more poor families with children although not by a statistically significant amount. City supply provided free food for poor families in low-income neighborhoods, but with time government benefits become less effective on helping children in deep poverty. Organizations like (Food Bank) have been fighting for hungry kids and homeless youth in the US and with the number growing each year, the supply is a big demand for poor families (Danilo and Matt).
Also, Trisi and Saenz, article states “The deep poverty rate in black and Latino children rose from 4.9 percent in 1995 to 6.3 percent in 2005; white children it appeared to dip slightly, but not by a statistically significant amount.” 1 in 8 children in the US never has a steady supply of food, determining the income of a poor family is based? on food, clothing, and shelter. If a family’s resource are below the poverty line, they are considered poor. Safety net program are targeted so that many people do not qualify, and they are restricted with conditions increasingly attach to them and all of this can lead to a bureaucracy nightmare to red tape. It is almost impossible to escape with no government support from the biggest riches’ country in the world (Danilo and Matt).
Last, Trisi and Saenz, article sates “Deep poverty among children was lower in 2016 (2.7 percent) than in 2005 (3.5 percent) due to stronger government assistance programs.” More than 160,000 thousand in California are homeless, about a quarter of the US homeless population. Amidst an affordable housing crisis that is potentially the worst in US history, a mother of six children living on Los Angeles (Skid Row) for 3 years could not afford her rent of $1,200 a month was forced into the streets. In northern California, it is estimated that there are five empty houses for every homeless person. Both journalists from who gathered their anecdotal and testimonial evidence from government policy, where on social services, which government did cut funding.
Both journalists had data to support their claims. While Richard, Kathleen and Jennifer focused on Trump administrant cuts, Danilo and Matt where more focused on stronger government help in the past decades. Both article where informative to read, and their tables where easy to read and understand the data given.