- MENU
- HOME
- SEARCH
- WORLD
- MAIN
- AFRICA
- ASIA
- BALKANS
- EUROPE
- LATIN AMERICA
- MIDDLE EAST
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Argentina
- Australia
- Austria
- Benelux
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- India
- Indonesia
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Korea
- Mexico
- New Zealand
- Pakistan
- Philippines
- Poland
- Russia
- South Africa
- Spain
- Taiwan
- Turkey
- USA
- BUSINESS
- WEALTH
- STOCKS
- TECH
- HEALTH
- LIFESTYLE
- ENTERTAINMENT
- SPORTS
- RSS
- iHaveNet.com: Politics
by Jesse Jackson
The silence is deafening.
Recently, The
Life expectancy in many ways is the measure of civilization. It rises as a society conquers deadly epidemics like smallpox or the plague. It rises as mothers giving birth receive adequate health care and nutrition. It rises as children are well fed and grow up in safe neighborhoods and stable families. It rises as adults earn enough to feed their families and afford health care for them. It rises as seniors gain dignity and adequate care at the end of a life of working. And, of course, it rises as medical science advances.
I remember the shock at the precipitous decline in Russian life expectancy with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Yet in the U.S., this report on our own decline came and went with little notice.
Poverty is at record levels in the U.S. -- now more than 48 million people. Wages are falling for working families. Health care, paid sick leave, adequate retirement pensions -- all have been cut drastically.
The
In many of our urban areas, junk food abounds, but fresh vegetables and fruit are scarce and expensive. Too many poor children go to schools without playgrounds or gyms. Obesity afflicts too many. In the ghettos and barrios of despair, drugs and violence threaten lives. But as we've seen, the drug epidemic extends even into rural areas scarred by meth addictions.
Life expectancy is a meter of our character, of what kind of society we are.
Yet this subject remains almost invisible on the campaign trail. President Obama has focused his message, sensibly enough, on reviving a broad middle class that has been sinking over the last decades. Republican Mitt Romney mentions poverty, but his agenda features a war on the poor rather than a war on poverty. He calls for more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, paid for by deep and harsh cuts in programs for the vulnerable --
The contrast with our great leaders is stark. Franklin Roosevelt summoned Americans to build an economic bill of rights that would seek to ensure good jobs, heath care and retirement security to all willing and able to work. Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty succeeded in reducing childhood poverty before it was lost in the jungles of Vietnam. Martin Luther King's March on Washington sought to rally the country to address the plight of the poor.
In the coming presidential debates, we're likely to see a lot of "gotcha questions" and sound-bite answers. But surely some focus should be on the spread of poverty and the shocking decline in life expectancy. Jesus said our character is measured by how we treat the least of these. The debates should probe how the candidates will deal with the most vulnerable among us.
AMERICAN POLITICS
WORLD | AFRICA | ASIA | EUROPE | LATIN AMERICA | MIDDLE EAST | UNITED STATES | ECONOMICS | EDUCATION | ENVIRONMENT | FOREIGN POLICY | POLITICS
An American Shame that Both Candidates Ignore | Politics
© Tribune Media Services, Inc