What's Wrong with "Poverty"

Like Dean Baker, I have some advice for candidates. (Only mine is not just cheap, but free.)

Over the weekend, Senator Obama announced his candidacy (finally!) and spoke aspirationally (and inspirationally) about ending poverty. Meanwhile, Senator Edwards has made anti-poverty rhetoric a key feature of his campaign – establishing the goal of eliminating poverty in 30 years is the third bullet point on his list of issues.

A presidential campaign season focused in part on the goal of eliminating poverty is a welcome advancement. Highlighting an issue that has been of little (political) interest to most candidates in recent years – except as a way to demonize and set the stage for funding cuts – shows leadership, confidence, and commitment. And using the campaign season bullhorn could advance policy solutions to address systemic failures that create barriers for communities seeking to create better jobs and a stronger local economy.

But, I wish the candidates would review the evidence: it’s better not to talk about “poverty”, and instead focus on strengthening the economy with better jobs. At least it’s a better communications strategy if the goal is more public support for policy solutions addressing structural and systemic issues that create poverty.

In fact, it’s hard to imagine that these candidates and their policy staff are unfamiliar with the academic literature on communications for changing the debate over poverty. If they have read these reports, why do they discount the findings?

What worries me is that focusing attention on eliminating “poverty”, at least as too many people in this country currently understand it, will undermine the candidacies of those who take the bold step of making poverty elimination a campaign promise, as well as our efforts to start a new conversation.