Bloomberg, Champion of the Poor
By MICHAEL B. KATZ, NYT
DURING New York City’s mayoral race, criticism of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg for neglecting the poor ignored his bold and unprecedented antipoverty measures. He may not have eliminated inequality or reversed the impact of the Great Recession — over the last two years, the poverty rate has crept up to 21.2 percent from 20.1 percent — but failure to acknowledge what he did in fact accomplish is not only unfair but also shortsighted. Usually depicted as a champion of the rich, Mr. Bloomberg mounted an antipoverty program at a moment when poverty as an issue was off the national radar and even politically toxic.
In March 2006, the mayor appointed a 32-member blue-ribbon commission to advise him on antipoverty strategy, at a time when no other mayor of a major American city had made poverty a priority. Mr. Bloomberg’s commission developed an alternative measure of the poverty line, prompting the United States Census Bureau to do the same, which calculated that more New Yorkers were poor in 2009 than the official measures suggested — 19.9 percent compared with 17.3 percent. The commission recommended directing the city’s resources to three groups that were especially at risk: the working poor, young adults between the of ages 16 and 24, and families with children below age 6.
Nine months later, Mr. Bloomberg announced the introduction of citywide antipoverty programs that incorporated virtually all of the commission’s recommendations. Responsibility for the individual programs, previously distributed throughout the various government departments, became the purview of a new Center for Economic Opportunity. The center was supported by an annual $100 million Innovation Fund, a public-private initiative that received more than half of its funding from the city. Programs like the Young Adult Internship Program stressed human capital development — education, job training and workplace skills. A program called $aveNYC offered a 50 percent match to low-income workers for saving a portion of their earned-income tax credit. Mr. Bloomberg also added a conditional cash transfer program, modeled on a program in Mexico and privately financed by foundations, which rewarded families with cash for specific behaviors related mainly to health and education. (This was the most criticized and, arguably, least successful component of his antipoverty effort.)
For the most part, however, the new programs offered few cash benefits. As The Economist observed, the Center for Economic Opportunity “bypassed” the city’s service delivery system by investing “a mixture of public and philanthropic money in social entrepreneurs’ ideas to help lift people out of poverty, particularly by emphasizing personal responsibility.” This market-based approach failed to provide much help for those trapped in deep poverty — an increasing part of the poor population — nor did it deploy redistributive measures that could have reduced economic inequality.
(More here.)
DURING New York City’s mayoral race, criticism of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg for neglecting the poor ignored his bold and unprecedented antipoverty measures. He may not have eliminated inequality or reversed the impact of the Great Recession — over the last two years, the poverty rate has crept up to 21.2 percent from 20.1 percent — but failure to acknowledge what he did in fact accomplish is not only unfair but also shortsighted. Usually depicted as a champion of the rich, Mr. Bloomberg mounted an antipoverty program at a moment when poverty as an issue was off the national radar and even politically toxic.
In March 2006, the mayor appointed a 32-member blue-ribbon commission to advise him on antipoverty strategy, at a time when no other mayor of a major American city had made poverty a priority. Mr. Bloomberg’s commission developed an alternative measure of the poverty line, prompting the United States Census Bureau to do the same, which calculated that more New Yorkers were poor in 2009 than the official measures suggested — 19.9 percent compared with 17.3 percent. The commission recommended directing the city’s resources to three groups that were especially at risk: the working poor, young adults between the of ages 16 and 24, and families with children below age 6.
Nine months later, Mr. Bloomberg announced the introduction of citywide antipoverty programs that incorporated virtually all of the commission’s recommendations. Responsibility for the individual programs, previously distributed throughout the various government departments, became the purview of a new Center for Economic Opportunity. The center was supported by an annual $100 million Innovation Fund, a public-private initiative that received more than half of its funding from the city. Programs like the Young Adult Internship Program stressed human capital development — education, job training and workplace skills. A program called $aveNYC offered a 50 percent match to low-income workers for saving a portion of their earned-income tax credit. Mr. Bloomberg also added a conditional cash transfer program, modeled on a program in Mexico and privately financed by foundations, which rewarded families with cash for specific behaviors related mainly to health and education. (This was the most criticized and, arguably, least successful component of his antipoverty effort.)
For the most part, however, the new programs offered few cash benefits. As The Economist observed, the Center for Economic Opportunity “bypassed” the city’s service delivery system by investing “a mixture of public and philanthropic money in social entrepreneurs’ ideas to help lift people out of poverty, particularly by emphasizing personal responsibility.” This market-based approach failed to provide much help for those trapped in deep poverty — an increasing part of the poor population — nor did it deploy redistributive measures that could have reduced economic inequality.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
Bloomberg is the embodiment of the young wealthy man in the biblical parable in Mark 10:17-23:
As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’”
“Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”
Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.
Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!”
Anyone can be a champion of the poor with other people's money. But, with their own wealth, as Jesus said, "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God". To put it bluntly, Bloomberg is a fraud.
Post a Comment
<< Home