Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

by Guest Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:47 pm

Email I just received from the Coalition for Human Needs - Please read, call and pass it on!

Coalition on Human Needs

Deficit reduction deals should take cuts to programs for low- and moderate-income people off the table. President Obama is scheduled to meet with Senate leaders today to move a deal forward - please call the White House NOW! Call 1-888-245-0215 toll-free, so they know there is strong support for fair revenues to prevent slashing low-income services.

You've probably heard: Negotiations on reducing the deficit have hit a roadblock, and President Obama is taking a more active role. He is meeting with Senate leadership today. Vice President Biden had been working with a small group from Congress to get an agreement by July 1. They've been stalled because Republicans in the group want trillions of dollars in service cuts and are staking out a position opposed to replacing some of those cuts with increased revenues. The Administration is playing a critical role, and does support including increased revenues to protect low and moderate-income people. We need them to hold firm!

Call 1-888-245-0215 toll-free, and you'll be connected to the White House Comment Line. Call NOW and tell them:

"Please tell the President and the Vice President to hold firm and prevent harmful cuts or caps to low-income programs in the negotiations to reduce the deficit. Please insist on fair increases in revenues to prevent reckless cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, and other essential services.”

Major national organizations are also urging decision-makers to protect low-income people in deficit reduction plans. This morning a letter was circulated from organizations including United Way Worldwide, National Council of La Raza, Feeding America, Sojourners, Families USA and many more, including the Coalition on Human Needs.

Click here to see the letter and press statement: www.cbpp.org/ProtectLowIncome.html

Want to understand more about the dangers of slashing low-income programs?
Read Debbie Weinstein’s piece on Common Dreams.org,
Paving the Road to a Hungrier, Unhealthier, and Less-Educated Nation:
Massive spending cuts will make the future bleaker for millions of Americans

This piece describes the impact of massive SNAP/food stamp and Medicaid cuts in the House budget. Including 8 million fewer food stamp recipients, or cuts of $147/month for every 4-person family receiving food stamps - and cutting Medicaid caseloads nearly in half in most states.

The President and Vice President need your call now. Dial 1-888-245-0215 toll-free, and you'll be connected to the White House Comment Line.

==========================

Please forward this e-mail!

by tristen303 Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:58 pm

Yes that should not be

by Injeun Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:14 am

First off I'd like to say that it's worth calling. But something to consider is that the family of four might be getting between eight hundred and twelve hundred dollars a month in food stamps. So they won't be left without.....just cut back a little, probably back to just before the last increase in food stamps. In that light, I don't think the Republicans are out to hurt anyone. But are looking to save a little here and there.

by Guest Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:33 am

Injeun wrote:First off I'd like to say that it's worth calling. But something to consider is that the family of four might be getting between eight hundred and twelve hundred dollars a month in food stamps. So they won't be left without.....just cut back a little, probably back to just before the last increase in food stamps. In that light, I don't think the Republicans are out to hurt anyone. But are looking to save a little here and there.

When was the last time you went grocery shopping? I buy the BARE minimum, and I am lucky if my measley $200 lasts a little over a week! And the prices just keep going up!!! No, they aren't trying to "save a little here and there", they are forcing children to go hungry! If they really wanted to save, they would RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!!!!!!!! Starving average American citizens is not the answer!

by USA Citizen Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:06 am

Obama's tax cuts for the rich will be offset by putting the poor into greater poverty. Why are poor Americans being targeted in these deficit reductions?
Is it because they are poor or because they are Americans?

by Guest Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:15 am

USA Citizen wrote:Obama's tax cuts for the rich will be offset by putting the poor into greater poverty. Why are poor Americans being targeted in these deficit reductions?
Is it because they are poor or because they are Americans?

Obama had no choice than to extend the Bush Tax cuts for two more years. The GOP held unemployment benefits hostage for millions right before Christmas last year - he had NO choice. The majority of unemployed would have no benefits right now if he didn't do it! Not to mention what would have happened to to the economy, especially at that time of year, to take money away from such an enormous amount of consumers!

by couth11 Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:28 pm

Injeun wrote:First off I'd like to say that it's worth calling. But something to consider is that the family of four might be getting between eight hundred and twelve hundred dollars a month in food stamps. So they won't be left without.....just cut back a little, probably back to just before the last increase in food stamps. In that light, I don't think the Republicans are out to hurt anyone. But are looking to save a little here and there.

That's funny-I was told I qualified for 12.00-16.00 dollars per month, and would have to pay 30.00 per month for health plus copays, and anything else. My gross is approx. 13K.

by Guest Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:48 pm

I made my phone call. I also received a letter from NJ Family Services that my benefit amount for aid was being reduced by $15.00 through December and $30.00 by January. Last time I shopped my $200 which I religiously keep to, did not cover what I generally buy as prices have increased close to $40 per grocery order over the last 3 months. I keep a list, buy mostly the same items as they can be stretched further and get us through the month. Not anymore.

Please all, make the call. Saving at the expense of those with next to nothing will do absolutely nothing to reduce the deficit. The tax cuts were agreed to in order to get the unemployment extension passed for the balance of 2011 without constantly needing to be voted on. Now the states have taken it upon themselves to cut back and cut back. Now they are going to reduce programs of $200 which is all some people have to buy food with, while corporations and the top 2% see and feel no pain. Unthinkable.

by USA Citizen Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:25 pm

DesperateInRI wrote:
USA Citizen wrote:Obama's tax cuts for the rich will be offset by putting the poor into greater poverty. Why are poor Americans being targeted in these deficit reductions?
Is it because they are poor or because they are Americans?
Obama had no choice than to extend the Bush Tax cuts for two more years. The GOP held unemployment benefits hostage for millions right before Christmas last year - he had NO choice. The majority of unemployed would have no benefits right now if he didn't do it! Not to mention what would have happened to to the economy, especially at that time of year, to take money away from such an enormous amount of consumers!

Obama will have NO choice but to cut food stamps and programs for the poor because the GOP will not raise the debt ceiling unless the poor go hungry. The GOP is holding America hostage. Obama has NO choice but to do whatever the Republicans ask him to do. Obama is now a Republican puppet.

by Falcon7 Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:35 pm

You are correct, he is a total WUSS!

by Guest Tue Jun 28, 2011 3:43 pm

DesperateInRI wrote:
Injeun wrote:First off I'd like to say that it's worth calling. But something to consider is that the family of four might be getting between eight hundred and twelve hundred dollars a month in food stamps. So they won't be left without.....just cut back a little, probably back to just before the last increase in food stamps. In that light, I don't think the Republicans are out to hurt anyone. But are looking to save a little here and there.

When was the last time you went grocery shopping? I buy the BARE minimum, and I am lucky if my measley $200 lasts a little over a week! And the prices just keep going up!!! No, they aren't trying to "save a little here and there", they are forcing children to go hungry! If they really wanted to save, they would RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH!!!!!!!! Starving average American citizens is not the answer!

The maximum amount for a family of four for foodstamps is 667 per month here is mass. Let me tell you, with food prices soaring we run out a week and a half before the next deposit. We shop at Bj's and it helps A LOT to buy meat and cereal and stuff like that in bulk. I am forever grateful for it and dont know what we would do with out it, but with the price of food now a days we just barely make it through the month. I cant imagine if it were to be cut back.

As for the Republicans, They may not be directly saying "lets stick it to the poor, middle class, and elderly" but after seeing what they are trying to do and have done and judging by remarks some of them have made THEY DO NOT GIVE A FLYING LEAP who they are hurting and how, as long as its not their rich benefactors!! They dont give a dam. If they did, they would be listening to citizens and economists and would be trying to do things to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Instead they are fighting for MORE tax cuts for the rich and less help for those who are struggling through no fault of their own.

They are hell bent on unseating Obama and will run over anyone to do it! They should not be playing games with the debt ceiling either. Its too important and should be an issue on its own.

by tristen303 Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:50 pm

Debt ceiling should not be increased period and the people that earn money the money is theirs not for the government to decide who gets what from another person by virtue of their success. That is their money not the goevernment not mine not anybody elses.I think our founding fathers got it right;

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
-Benjamin Franklin

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
-Thomas Jefferson

FYI for those a little slow the quote about labor was describing pursuit to earn money not that the labor Union BS is special or entitled any individual that does anything that allows them to earn money gets to keep not redistribute it

by Redpossum Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:05 pm

Injeun wrote:First off I'd like to say that it's worth calling. But something to consider is that the family of four might be getting between eight hundred and twelve hundred dollars a month in food stamps. So they won't be left without.....just cut back a little, probably back to just before the last increase in food stamps. In that light, I don't think the Republicans are out to hurt anyone. But are looking to save a little here and there.

You are absolutely wrong in those amounts. I don't know where you got them from, but the reality is far, far less than that. If you're going to throw numbers around, how about you back them up with facts, hmm?

As a 99er, I would have been going hungry for the last year if not for Food Stamps. You want to know what I get? $200 a month, to feed myself in Southern California.

Now, I'm grateful to have it, but very unhappy with your distorted and baseless claims.

by TR11005 Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:46 pm

Not to get anyone mad, but I think President Obama should have let the tax cuts for the rich expire. Sure it would have not helped the unemployed that didn't expire there benefits. This would have caused much more problems. People would have been at Congress and Senate screaming. That would have been a good thing. Strength in numbers.

Better yet the rich would be paying their taxes , this would have reduce the deficit. Now the Republicans want to attack other social programs, knowing they have two years before they might have to start paying. We were stupid in not letting it expire at all cost.

With that extra money in the tax system, all the Unemployment could have been paid including the exhustees.

Do you think I have something? "The Tan Man," said it had to be paid for. What a better way. Where are the jobs?

by Guest Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:50 pm

TR11005 wrote:Not to get anyone mad, but I think President Obama should have let the tax cuts for the rich expire. Sure it would have not helped the unemployed that didn't expire there benefits. This would have caused much more problems. People would have been at Congress and Senate screaming. That would have been a good thing. Strength in numbers.

Better yet the rich would be paying their taxes , this would have reduce the deficit. Now the Republicans want to attack other social programs, knowing they have two years before they might have to start paying. We were stupid in not letting it expire at all cost.

With that extra money in the tax system, all the Unemployment could have been paid including the exhustees.

Do you think I have something? "The Tan Man," said it had to be paid for. What a better way. Where are the jobs?

I agree with you. President Obama should have never given in to extending the tax cuts. IMO, they wouldn't have been able to hold unemployment benefits hostage too long, the hit on the economy, especially at that time of year, would have been devastating and it would have exposed the GOP for what they are!

by Sponsored content

Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Re: Protect the Poor in Deficit Reduction

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31