Consider Arizona’s poor before budget cuts

When the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in 1968 while in Memphis to support the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees sanitation workers’ strike, he was organizing the Poor People’s Campaign for social and economic justice.

He believed that economic security, as well as racial equality, was a basic human right. “What good is the right to sit at a lunch counter,” King asked, “if one can’t afford the price of a meal?”

In many ways, the Poor People’s Campaign is still with us. Today in Arizona, there are nearly 900,000 people living in poverty, of which 350,000 are children under the age of 18.

The number of working poor in Arizona is 2 million. In October, more than 700,000 people were receiving food stamps, a 21 percent increase in participation since October 2007.

In November, nearly 90,000 households received an emergency food box through the Association of Arizona Food Banks member food banks – a 34 percent increase since November 2007.

With record home foreclosures, restrictions in the credit market and increasing gasoline and food costs, all Arizonans are impacted by the economy.

Economic hardship means more demand for essential safety net services. AHCCCS, food stamps, unemployment claims and other caseload numbers are rising significantly.

This is not a time to cut critical health and human services which contribute to the economy and quality of life. As the economy worsens, the government must enable individuals and families to meet their basic needs, regain their stability and support their return to the work force.

The Martin Luther King Jr. holiday was a time to reflect on our moral obligation to condemn social and economic systems that rob people of dignity and equal opportunity.

It was a time to remember the philosophy of nonviolent action for creating positive social change. The holiday invites us to act – act in a way that reaches out to those in most need and in a way that will have our elected officials understand that investment in human capital pays great dividends.

To commemorate Dr. King in a way that does not mock his legacy, I would suggest that our lawmakers, as they consider plans and proposals to deal with the state budget deficit, measure funding reductions with health and human services against the yardstick of King’s hope and dream.

James Kimes

Prescott Valley

Congress fiddled as the economy burned

When a business needs to make an important and urgent decision, it forms a small committee to investigate the facts and to submit a report to the company president for final determination.

Contrast that with the spectacle of 535 members of Congress, each a self-appointed economics expert, debating with President Obama about how to save the economy.

One wants more tax cuts; one wants fewer. One wants tax cuts for the poor; another for the middle class; yet another for business. One wants more money for roads; another, more for bridges; yet another, more for flood control.

Then there are the demands for more focus on job creation, bankruptcy modification, education, poverty relief, consumer loan relief, mortgage relief, lending stimuli, oil exploration, clean energy, alternative energy, global warming, health care, Social Security and national defense.

Some want more total money spent, some want lower deficits. Some want the impossibility of both.

Each of the 535 has at least one important project in mind, while all 535 agree to avoid “pork” projects – “pork” being any project in someone else’s district.

Visualize a huge fire. The fire chief quickly tells the firefighters what each will do – who will carry hose, who will go into the building, who will go on the roof. Time is critical.

But, rather than taking action, the men begin to debate. Each has his own opinion about how the fire should be fought. More water here; more water there. Chop this wall; don’t chop this wall. As the fire rages on, the damage becomes greater and greater. But the men continue to debate, until the building burns to the ground.

And that is how the U.S. Congress has handled our economic crisis for the past 13 months. And that is how we got into this mess and why we can’t get out.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Wilmette, Ill.

Dems had fleeting brush with morality

Democratic leaders – including President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – are rapidly backing away from their initial stance that hopelessly tainted Senate appointee Roland Burris should not be seated.

This isn’t surprising. What’s surprising is that the Democrats took a moral stance at all, no matter that they capitulated so quickly.

On most issues, the Democrats eagerly embrace the immoral viewpoint starting from the very first nanosecond.

Mark Kalinowski

New York

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 21st, 2009 at 12:00 am and is filed under Opinion. Tags for this post: Letters, Opinion-Letters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.