According to the U.S. official Federal Poverty Level (FPL), 14% of families living in upstate New York are living in poverty. But the FPL was developed in 1965 and has not been updated since 1974. It is no longer considered a realistic measurement of poverty even by government agencies that assess poverty levels to determine whether individuals or families are entitled to benefits.

Agencies, therefore, use multiples of the FPL to determine eligibility; for instance, the New York School Breakfast and Lunch Program uses eligibility based on a family’s earning up to 185% of the FPL to qualify for free or reduced lunches.

To get at a more realistic measure of poverty and need, the United Way of New York State (UWNYS) has joined a national program which identifies people who are Asset Limited, Income Constrained and Employed in a program called ALICE.

In a report (tinyurl.com/htnt84p) about ALICE, UWNYS writes, “We have produced this report to give an identity and voice to the people who work hard, often at more than one job, yet still struggle to make ends meet, whose wages are not sufficient to sustain them and their families, and who are one small emergency away from a major financial crisis.

“What this report shows us is startling—that 44% of all New Yorkers are ALICE or live below the FPL. This means they are not earning enough to ‘get by’ based on a Household Survival Budget that uses conservative estimates of monthly expenses for housing, child care, food, transportation, health care and taxes.”

According to the report, 46% of the 27,524 families in Sullivan County are ALICE families.

Many people receive assistance from the federal or state government to make up some of the difference between what people earn in wages and the cost of living in New York. The report says that ALICE and poverty-level families in the state receive $83.2 billion in government and nonprofit spending aid. However, because of the way the funds are distributed, that is not enough to bring poverty and ALICE families to sustainable levels of income.

Against that background, there is a lot of talk in Washington, DC about stark changes to social service programs that have benefitted consumers for decades. President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on a promise not to touch Social Security and Medicare.

But Trump picked Congressman Tom Price to become the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Price has long been an advocate for ending Medicare as it now exists. He wrote recently in an opinion piece, “Nothing has had a greater negative effect on the delivery of health care than the federal government’s intrusion into medicine through Medicare.” He has also said he wants to turn Medicaid into a voucher system program.

Republican efforts to privatize Social Security, at least partially, are also being discussed again as they have been by every Republican President since Ronald Reagan was voted into office in 1980. President George W. Bush tried to do the same thing in 2004, but he was unsuccessful because too many lawmakers were fearful of the political backlash such a move would spark.

It’s not clear if this time around the efforts regarding Social Security, Medicare and other programs will actually succeed, because it’s not clear where members of the House and Senate stand on these issues.

The Congressman-elect who represents Sullivan, Delaware and Ulster counties, John Faso, said during the election that he wanted to strengthen Social Security and Medicare to ensure that the programs would be available to future generations. A decade earlier, however, he said that partially privatizing Social Security might be beneficial because it would be a boon to Wall Street.

The River Reporter sent an email to Faso’s office asking for clarification about his positions on Social Security and Medicare but did not receive a reply. We suggest you contact your congressional representatives and let them know how you feel about these vital programs.