Our Moral Choice

The following is from Sojourner's Magazine weekly e-mail. I had been thinking of writing something on this topic but could not possibly say it better than Jim Wallis, my hero.

Our Moral Choice
by Jim Wallis
On Tuesday, March 7, Jim Wallis spoke on Capitol Hill at a "Rally to Protect America's Priorities" on the proposed 2007 budget, sponsored by the Emergency Campaign for America's Priorities, ACORN, and the U.S. Student Association. Following are his remarks.
I want to begin with what the Religious Community said all last year: A budget is a moral document! That was our clarion cry in the 2006 budget debate. If some political leaders haven't got the message yet - just wait until this year.
You see, we believe that fiscal choices, economic choices are also moral choices and, for us, even religious choices. Who is important? And who is not? What is important? And what is not? Who do we most value? And who don't we value at all? They are fiscal choices, but also moral and religious matters.
Jesus actually got uncharacteristically judgmental about these kinds of choices. He said, "As you have done to the least of these, you have done to me." Are you paying attention yet, members of Congress?
Because of moral pressure - much of it from the religious community who every day care for the poor that our national politics neglect - last year's budget almost didn't pass. It took a fast trip home from Dick Cheney to pass the budget in the Senate and, in the House, the final budget measure only passed by a few votes. Some elected officials were making new moral choices. But the White House and the Republican leadership seem not to have gotten this message from the religious community, by the look of the new budget they now propose. I thought we were supposed to be their base?
You see a budget process is just a series of moral choices: tax cuts for the wealthiest, or services for the poorest? Congressional pork and earmarks, or investments in the common good? Searching for security through endless expenditures for war, or seeking to end the insecurity of poverty to make our nation stronger? Ignoring the costs of deficits for our children's children, and making the most vulnerable pay the price of fiscal responsibility; or sharing the burdens of financial responsibility more fairly by not asking the poor to carry the heaviest load?
These are all moral choices. Those with the power to make budget proposals have made their moral choices; and so will we. They are choosing to bestow more windfalls of benefit on their wealthy donors - that's their moral choice. We will stand up for the low-income families that we know and serve and whom they will again ignore - no, assault - that's our moral choice.
They are choosing the corruption of rewarding the special interests who pay for them - that's their moral choice. We will defend those who have the most need - that's our moral choice. They will place no limits on money for wars that have no end, and weapons systems that have no need - that's their moral choice. We will not let them cut vital programs of nutrition, health care, child care, and education to pay for their bad choices - that's our moral choice.
Here is what the biblical prophet Isaiah says about their moral choices: "Woe to the legislators of infamous laws, to those who issue tyrannical decrees, who refuse justice to the unfortunate and cheat the poor among my people of their rights, and make widows their prey and rob the orphan."
Last Dec. 14, 115 Christians who work with the poor every day, interrupted their works of compassion to come to the Capitol-to pray, preach, and prophesy. And we were taken to jail. Mary Nelson, from Chicago, looked up at the congressional staff and members looking out their windows and invited them, "Come walk with us."
John Perkins, 75-year-old evangelical and Black church leader who has spent his life in faithful ministry with poor people, told the story of his mother's death from a nutritional deficiency when he was seven months old. John said he was breastfeeding at the time and thought for years that he had killed her. Only later, he said, did I realize that a white society doesn't care about the nutrition of poor black women and their families. And now they're trying to cut food stamps from this budget. Then he emotionally said, "This is my last stand," before he was arrested.
Due in part to the pressure from religious community - we saved food stamps from cuts. Now, the proposed cuts stamps are back. People should know that many of those arrested last December voted for George Bush, some twice. Now they get arrested to protest his moral choices. They were his base, they are no longer.
The media noted that the words religious, Christian, even evangelical, are no longer just alongside the words abortion and gay marriage, but now alongside words like food stamps, health care, and education. Get used to it. When the politicians pat faith-based organizations on the back for doing such a wonderful job, they are now turning around and saying, "Stop hurting the people we work with and care about!" Come walk with us.
After the vote, Republicans e-mailed me, "I just want you to know that I voted against this budget and am listening to the religious community." Bless you. Overcoming poverty must be a bipartisan commitment and a nonpartisan cause. The religious community will ask Democrats to stand firm against this budget violence against poor people, to make the moral choice of favoring the poor over the rich - which is also a biblical choice. Democrats must get religion on the budget.
And we will ask Republicans: Follow your conscience, not your party. Help your party make better moral choices than favoring the rich over the poor - stop turning the biblical wisdom upside down - and then having the nerve to claim that you are the religion-friendly party! It's time for Republicans to get religion on this budget.
We've had a year of organizing around the budget in the religious community. We are watching this debate very carefully. We will hold our elected officials accountable in 2006 and 2008 for their votes on this budget - whether they vote for or against poor families.
If you think we were aroused last year, we were just getting started. Budgets are moral documents and we will fight this budget. And that's our moral choice.

Poverty of ideas

I turned on the radio yesterday in the middle of a call to Ed Shultz from some guy claiming to be an ex-Republican. They were discussing Bush’s new health care ideas. I drove along listening to them for a while when the caller said something so outrageous I composed an entire blog entry right there in the car. His comments were not outrageous because they were unusual. On the contrary, I have heard the same from the likes of Rush and from lots of other right-wingers a million times. The comment was simply outrageous because of his complete lack of understanding of reality and the caller’s inability to grasp that other people are different from him. That alone deserves a paper.

This caller said that we should not give health care to Americans who have none because then there would be no reason for people to continue to work. He felt that people would have no motivation to work because they could live off the government. They could quit their jobs and get free health care and welfare and our country would be in turmoil. If it were just him spouting this reasoning I think you would have to laugh. This, however, has been a conservative talking point for years. An employee of my church actually made a similar type of comment a few years ago about me giving old items to the poor. The idea being that millions of Americans are hoping for the government to start passing out food and money and health care so they can stay home and watched re-runs of MASH and The Cosby Show. I must say it is an interesting theory. Who really believes, however, that people are going to give up their $60,000 a year jobs to get welfare and free health care? Or even $30,000 a year jobs. Ed Shultz suggested this point in his answer when he said that people are not going to give up their big screen TV sets and SUV’s so they can get free health care. He talked about the American drive and American spirit, which is true. He did not have the airtime, however, to truly explore the absurdity of this guy’s premise.

Now I think everyone is intelligent enough to realize that the majority of Americans making over the poverty level of income (I think it is around $17,000 right now but do not quote me on that) are not going to quit their job if the government starts providing health care for poor people. Actually, state governments already offer health care to very poor families, which is called Medicaid, Tenncare, or other various things depending on the state in which you live. I have not seen any people quit their jobs to get that. Frankly, no one in their right mind is going to quit making $3000 a month so they can get a $900 a month welfare check, food stamps and free health care. Forget what Ed said about the American entrepreneurial spirit. Americans are not going to live like that unless they have to. Who really is going to give up their 2000 square foot house, their 2 cars, cable TV, Karate for their kids and $200 dollars of groceries a week so they can get free healthcare. Give me a break. Maybe if mom has cancer and the family is going to lose their house anyway from the enormous health care bills to keep her alive. Maybe then they would consider giving up their job to get federally funded health care. Who could really blame them at that point though?

Okay, so let us give ex-republican caller the benefit of the doubt and pretend he did not really mean to say that all Americans would have no motivation to go to work. We know Americans are at least materialistic enough to continue working if not for other motivations. Let’s pretend he was talking about the working poor. Those people who are working a couple of jobs to make money even though they are still making less than the poverty line. These are the people who are working the jobs no one wants. They have no benefits, they have to work 80 hours a week to make enough to feed their families, and they are poor. These people usually are renting homes or apartments in the bad part of town but they work hard to keep their families off welfare. Why? For health insurance? Most of them do not get health insurance. Why are they working? They are working because no one wants to live on welfare. No one dreams of someday growing up and collecting a welfare check and some free trips to the local ER. No one wants that for their sons and daughters, no one wants that for themselves. Everyone wants the American dream. We want to do well. I guess I should not say no one. I am positive we could find someone out there who has no aspirations for a better life. So let’s say 99.9 percent of people living want more for themselves than a welfare check. People work because they want more. People work because they are ashamed of needing money from others. People work because they do not want to depend on anyone. People have pride in their accomplishments and people generally try their best. People are not going to all quit their jobs if the government starts offering healthcare to sick people with no insurance. The proof is that people could do that now and they do not.

This caller called Ed, or the democrats, a socialist. I think socialist is to democrat as fascist is to republican. If socialists are people who want to provide care to those who cannot care for themselves then I guess that makes democrats, Christians, and Jesus socialists. Of course, we all know that socialism is a little more complicated than that. People like to use these extreme words to scare people away from someone’s ideas. It is the same as my favorite, “If you don’t support he war then you are Anti American.” Republicans are certainly leaning toward many fascist ideas lately. Are they all fascists? I would have to say no, at least I hope not. Fascism, too, is a complicated political idea and although the neo-cons lean toward these ideas lately, I do not think they are ready to throw capitalism and democracy out the window completely. Nor do I believe democrats who are trying to build government programs to help the poor are trying to build a socialist society. Name calling aside, it just is not true.

Now I probably would not have devoted a paper to this topic had the caller not gone on to say more. Ed, in defending the American spirit, reminded the caller that not all people are as lucky as the two of them. The caller’s response was so absurd I would have laughed had I not felt like crying. He said that he was not lucky at all. Then he told his “pulled himself up by the bootstraps” story that ended with him putting himself through college working at a movie theatre. Unfortunately, Ed ran out of time (and I think he had better things to do). I hear this response from conservatives all the time and it absolutely has no basis in reality. Have you ever seen that e-mail that circulates that says if you have food on the table every night, you have more than so-many percent of humans? It goes through a whole bunch of stuff like a house, clothes, education, etc. It is true. If you had an adult taking care of you, a place to sleep every night, food three times a day, school for 12 years or more, and you did not have to work until you were out of elementary school or older then you have it better than 39 million children (or more)have it right now in our country. Having a dad who worked in a factory and working your way through college is not poverty. If you had that you had more than millions. Middle class Americans have become completely unaware of how people really live in this country and in the world. They think that trouble paying the cable bill and having a car that is 12 years old is hardship. I, too, fall into this category.

How many times have I prayed that we had money to pay our bills? Our credit card bills, our cable bill, our cell phone bill, our internet bill, our car payments, etc. This is distressing but not the type of financial hardship those living in poverty endure. Working your way through college is not hardship. It seems like hardship because we have so much. We have more than 99% of the world if we even have those bills to worry us. Ed was alluding to those other people in the world. The people who pray that they have enough money to pay for beans and rice. The people who want to be able to turn on the gas this winter and go without electricity so they can pay for their diabetes medication. The people who are evicted because they cannot pay $400 a month rent even though they work 60 hours a week. The best show I have ever seen on TV was 30 days. In the first episode, the producer and his girlfriend lived on minimum wage for 30 days. Sound easy. Watch the show. It is how the other half lives in America and not because they want to. People live in poverty for a variety of reasons. The number one reason for adults to be homeless is mental illness and the second is physical illness. The majority of people living in poverty are children. Many other people make terrible decisions, which keep them from getting ahead. Drug abuse, single parenthood and just plain lack of intelligence are all contributing factors to continued poverty. A large number of people who have grown up in extreme poverty lack any hope of ever getting ahead. Poverty has become a generational problem in our country. Our current system makes it rare for these people to break the cycle of poverty in their family.

Americans do not like to admit that our system keeps people exactly where they are in life. We of course like to quote the story of the ones who escape. Look at Oprah, we say. She worked hard and got ahead. People do work hard and overcome poverty. It happens all the time but to an extremely small percentage of impoverished people. We can point to the people who have done it because there are so few of them. Most people who live in this crushing poverty do not know anyone who has escaped (at least not legally). Poverty is a disease in America and to underestimate the power of that disease is naïve. Poverty breeds lack of education, poor choices and violence. Poverty breeds poor physical health, mental health problems and drug abuse. Poverty breeds child abuse and neglect, domestic violence and single parenthood. Then we middle class Americans blame the poor for having these problems and living in poverty. It is a nasty cycle that is hard for even the brightest and the best to break. When middle class Americans make bad choices we can recover from them. If we take drugs as a teen, we can frequently get into a wonderful treatment program and therapy. If we buy something we cannot afford we put it on credit. Our parents help us out and we have a support system in place to get us through the difficult times. My husband lost his job this year. I knew that my children would not starve or lack medical attention no matter how long it took him to find another. My parents would never let that happen. Our friends would never let that happen. We would find a way to survive even if that meant finding a lower paying job. Poor people do not have the luxury of that knowledge. Poor people have next to nothing and losing that leaves you with nothing.

Hurricane Katrina was a wake up call to Americans…for about a month. Then our defense mechanisms kicked in and we all felt better. “Those people should have left.” “They did not die because they were poor; they made the choice to stay.” “They are poor because they steal/take drugs/break the law.” “They are not poor because they are black. I know a black guy who lives in my neighborhood and he has lots of money.” “They are poor because they want to live off the government and do not want to work.” Fill in whichever defense mechanism generally works for you. We all do this to feel better and to sleep at night. What does Jesus say we should do? Should we ignore the poor and pretend they do not exist? Should we blame the poor for being stupid enough to end up poor? “There but for the Grace of God go I.” This should be what we say to ourselves when we see images of poverty. The vast majority of poor people were born poor. They grew up poor; they made choices based on what they learned from their poor caregivers and what they knew from their lives. Poor people are generally poor because they know of nothing else. They grew up with poor health, poor education and little or no resources. It is only through God’s intervention that you were born into the situation of your birth. “There but for the Grace of God.”

Never would I suggest that poor people are completely blameless in their current situations. Poor people make bad choices for themselves, just as all people make bad choices. Bad choices made by poor people, however, tends to have more impact on their lives than bad choices made by people who have more. It is common sense really. If you have more, then losing a little due to a bad choice has little impact. If you have very little, then making a bad choice tends to wipe out whatever you do have and devastate your life even further. Look at hurricane Katrina. People were told to go to the dome for safety if they had no alternative. The people who had money for gas or hotels drove away. The people who did not, followed directions and went to the dome. After the storm they went back to their homes. They had no resources to stay away. It was not until the next days that the levies broke and a wall of water came in. It was certainly a bad choice to go back to their homes. Upper class, middle class and even lower middle class people have no concept of the idea that people have no alternatives. People are forced into bad decisions by their circumstances, by their lack of knowledge and their lack of resources.

Many of my clients were women in relationships with abusive men. These women made terrible choices on a regular basis. It was frustrating. Women of all socioeconomic groups are in relationships with men who physically and/or sexually abuse them. These women are making a choice every day to stay with their abusers. In my opinion this is a bad choice. Women who are rich and women who are poor both have adverse consequences because of their bad choices. Women who are poor, however, have more negative consequences and therefore are usually less able to leave a violent situation. They are more likely to have many children who are undernourished, lack needed medical care and have more special education needs. Women who are poor and who are being abused usually lack a safe place to go or a support system within their family or circle of friends to help them. Women who are poor frequently lack the job skills or life skills to manage on their own if they do leave. My clients frequently felt they could not leave because they could not get their welfare checks transferred, because they would have no transportation, they would have no health care or childcare if they did work. Women who have been raised in poverty rarely see that a better life is possible. Some of this is also true of middle class women, however to a lesser extent. Their children are generally fed and clothed and attend school. The psychological impact of the abuse is the same but the fact that their basic needs are met makes the decision less destructive.

It was very frustrating to work with poor people at a mental health center. It was frustrating because many of them worked very hard to try to make a better life for themselves and their children. Their mental and physical health issues constantly got in the way of their ability to make positive steps in their lives. Their lack of education and knowledge of ways to get ahead put up barriers at every turn. I used to send many of my clients to Victory Center, which was a job rehabilitation program for individuals with mental health issues. Few of them ever completed the program. They had issues with transportation, child care, domestic violence, health problems, and anxiety. Many poor people are evicted regularly or live with different people each week. Just keeping track of their location so that they can get services is complicated. None of the people I worked with had any drug or alcohol issues. Most of them were women in abusive relationships or women who had been abused most of their lives. Most of my clients were born in poverty and were raised by mothers, fathers, grandmothers or caregivers who lived in poverty. Although their situations were frustrating, it was impossible for me to blame them for the circumstances that brought them to me. As Christians, we are not called to judge how these people arrived in their current situation; but to help them correct the problem.

Jesus had a lot to say about poverty. He said more about poverty than he said about sex, being nice to others or murder. Why then do we focus our energy on so many other topics and then ignore his advice about the poor? Mathew 25 verse 31-40 says:

When the Son of Man comes as King and all the angels with him, he will sit on his royal throne, and the people of all the nations will be gathered before him. Then he will divide them into two groups, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the righteous people at his right and the others at his left. Then the King will say to the people on this right, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father! Come and possess the kingdom which has been prepared for you ever since the creation of the world. I was hungry and you fed me, thirsty and you gave me drink; I was a stranger and you received me in your homes, naked and you clothed me; I was sick and you took care of me, in prison and you visited me.’ The righteous will then answer him, ‘When, Lord, did we ever see you sick or in prison, and visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘I tell you, whenever you did this for one of the least important of these brothers of mine, you did it for me!’

Jesus is telling us directly what is important if we are to make it into the kingdom of God. He did not divide up the people by sexual practices or number of times they went to church. He did not put the sinners on the left and the non-sinners on the right. He said that the King will divide the people who have helped the poor from those who have not.
The ways in which we are to help the poor include feeding, giving drink, giving shelter and clothing, and giving medical help. Yes, healthcare for those who are sick. One might argue that he was not talking about the government in this passage but only individuals. That would be true had the current administration not run on the ticket of superior Christian values and insight. In an administration that claims to be following Jesus Christ and the Bible, all of these items should be included as important parts of the budget and the plan to help the people of America. I would assume that helping the least important of the people in this country would be the most important item on the agenda for a bunch of politicians claiming to be led by their Christian beliefs. Why then is helping the richest of Americans instead the priority over and over and over again? Why then are the least of these ignored not only by Mr. ex-republican caller (who never claimed to be Christian and may not be held by these imperatives) but also by his ex-party and the administration and majority of congress who claim to be led by the Bible and their Christian beliefs? You cannot have it both ways. You cannot get votes for being the “best Christian” and then ignore your Christianity when it is less convenient financially.

My eight year old and I just read an American Girl story in which the girl is cross-stitching the saying, “Actions speak louder than words.” I was explaining this to her and she immediately saw the connection to our current administration. The actions of our President, his administration and his cabinet should speak to us louder than his claims of a superior knowledge of Christianity. Saying is not doing. I would like to see a lot more doing and I hope that people will not blindly trust the words and will require the actions behind them in the future.