|
Mike Gravel on Welfare & Poverty
Libertarian for President; Former Dem. Senator (AK); withdrew from Presidential primary July 2019
|
|
Redistribute wealth nationally, like Alaska Permanent Fund
American wealth is overwhelmingly concentrated in the wealthiest five percent of households: the top one percent own about 40 percent of national wealth. Social wealth funds, the most famous example of which is Norway's, are designed to combat this
inequality. An American social wealth fund, a national version of the Alaska Permanent Fund, would put money in Americans' pockets and redistribute wealth.
The United States should establish an American National Fund (ANF), based on Matt Bruenig's proposal of an "American Solidarity Fund," with funds from the new financial transactions tax, as well as a tax
on initial public offerings and an increased estate tax. Each year, 5 percent of the fund would be used toward a universal dividend for all Americans 18 and older.
Source: 2020 Presidential campaign website MikeGravel.com
, Apr 9, 2019
Patchwork system addresses emergencies but not poverty
Liberals built a confusing bureaucratic structure of antipoverty and welfare programs, which robbed the middle class of their money and the poor of their incentive and integrity. These programs have been only a
hodgepodge of patchwork solutions applied sporadically to meet emergencies, as Katrina revealed. Indeed, these programs have not even been able to meet the emergencies. In the first place, the real money has gone for war preparation and war making.
In the second place, the liberals have left the basic political and economic structure of the country untouched. Our corrupt income tax system continues to rest heavily on the middle class, and even on the poor,
while it practically exempts the rich and the near-rich. The War on Poverty, unfortunately, also fostered the growth of poverty, alienation and urban blight.
Source: Citizen Power: A Mandate for Change, by Mike Gravel, p. 4-5
, Jan 24, 2008
No position on faith-based initiatives
Gravel has not taken a position on faith-based initiatives, according to campaign press secretary Alex Colvin
Source: The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
, Oct 25, 2007
US ranks low worldwide in poverty statistics
The US now ranks 22nd in childhood poverty, or second to last among developed nations; only Mexico ranks lower. The United States is 41st in the world for infant mortality; Cuba scores higher. Women are 70% more likely to die in childbirth in
America than in Europe.The World Health Organization ranked the US 37th [worldwide] for overall health performance and 54th for healthcare fairness. Yet the United States spends more per capita for healthcare than any other nation in the world.
Source: Press release, “Stepping Back From Imperialism”
, Nov 1, 2006
Citizens Wage: $5000 income from feds to banish poverty
[We should institute a] Citizen’s Wage, to which everyone is entitled at birth and which is available to the worker and the poor alike. The amount paid to the individual should maintain a minimum, decent standard of living. The Citizen’s Wage should also
become an effective tool for the long-run economic improvement of our entire society. The basic Citizen’s Wage would be $5,000 a year for a family of four, [with a sliding scale formula so that] anyone earning more than $10,000 would no longer receive
the Citizen’s Wage [Note: in 2007 dollars, the Citizen’s Wage would be about $20,000 a year, phasing out at an income level of about $40,000 -- ed.].
The intent of this plan is simple: to banish poverty and financial insecurity. One could say that this
plan comes down to a form of guaranteed income.
Presently we are spending $50 billion per year on welfare and Social Security programs which are totally inadequate. The Citizen’s Wage would cost only an additional $15 billion.
Source: Citizen Power, by Sen. Mike Gravel, p. 91-95
, Jan 1, 1972
Workfare is morally repugnant; why not “wealthwork”?
Our present attitude toward the poor, especially those receiving welfare, contributes to their alienation. This can be seen in the “workfare” philosophy. The program requires welfare mothers of children over 3 years old to go to work [on the theory that]
any amount of pay is better than none. The imposition of this discipline strikes me as highly singular, if not outright discriminatory. If work is so necessary to our national fiber, why not insist upon a program of “wealthwork” and force the nonworking
affluent to get jobs? I am trying to point out the dual standard which applies to the poor. We can compel the poor mothers to work because the government supports them. On the other hand, we don’t seem to care about the fellow who no longer has to
work because he has cleaned up on subsidies or other government largesse.
The whole idea of forcing welfare mothers to work is morally and philosophically repugnant. It’s a chain-gang tactic, illustrating how we keep the poor prisoners of poverty.
Source: Citizen Power, by Sen. Mike Gravel, p.107-108
, Jan 1, 1972
Page last updated: Dec 15, 2019