Americans recognize a problem when we see it. But what happens when that problem continues to worsen year after year, and leaders are reluctant to speak its name?

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the percentage of workers under the federal poverty line rose to a 20 year high in 2010, the last year analyzed. The number of working poor families in America, many who work multiple jobs, has steadily risen each year since 2005, even before the recession.

Still, after three Presidential debates, neither candidate has spoken about how to address this issue. To be fair, Governor Romney has mentioned poverty five times, and President Obama has spoken about those “who want to climb to the middle class” without being explicit. But neither took the opportunity to detail how their policy agenda will help the working poor. Thought leaders as diverse as Michael Reagan, the pundit and son of President Ronald Reagan, the USA Today editorial board, and former Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Lynn Woolsey have each expressed surprise or dismay that the working poor are not a part of this campaign’s debates.

Speaking up for the working poor is not only vital, but it is a winning argument that resonates with a majority of Americans who want to find viable solutions.

Ignoring the issue of poverty is a missed opportunity according to new polling commissioned by the American Values Network. In total, 87 percent of voters, a strong majority of respondents across ideological lines, believe the working poor should be a top or important government priority.

The next Congress and President will make decisions that could significantly impact these families’ income and economic mobility. The survey tested which arguments voters found most compelling in support of policies addressing poverty and for cutting such efforts. When asked to choose between the best argument in support of government initiatives to help struggling families and the best argument for cutting those programs, 58% of respondents found the messages supporting government poverty programs more convincing. Whoever is on Capitol Hill or in the White House after this election should take note.

The poll, conducted among 1005 voters nationwide by the Prime Group between September 26-30, also found voters say candidates who address the issue of poverty as more trustworthy and authentic than those who focus solely on the middle class.

And we’re seeing renewed political interest as American s have come together across the country and online to elevate the discussion of the working poor. Earlier this month, Oxfam joined with Sojourners, World Vision and Bread for the World to launch the documentary film, “The Line”, to highlight the story of hard working American families doing everything right but still struggling in poverty. We could never have imagined the response: over 2,000 screenings in churches, community centers and homes in every state in the union, attended by tens of thousands of people since the film premiered Oct 2. People have gathered to talk about growing poverty in our communities and start a conversation they do not see their leaders having. You can still sign up at http://thelinemovie.com/ to host a screening and join the conversation.

At the film’s premiere, Rev. Jim Wallis encouraged a crowd of 400 in DC plus online viewers to encourage our Presidential candidates to #TalkPoverty and take the conversation to social media. The Half in Ten Campaign has spearheaded the response by grassroots communities who have used Twitter to ask our leaders to discuss their plans for addressing poverty. In 24 hours after the second Presidential debate, these messages reached over 700,000 followers.

Americans care about these issues and they are not afraid to act. But will our leaders listen?

It was an interesting debate. The thrust and parry.

But it was a big disappointment for those of us who wanted to hear about foreign policy. Very little beyond the “Middle East”, Afghanistan, with a little China thrown in. Heavy on the big D. Light on the lesser d’s.

“Poor” appeared twice—in the context of Medicaid. “Poverty” not at all. Romney mentioned “foreign aid” in the context of how to spur economic development.

See the word cloud:  http://www.usglc.org/2012/10/23/word-cloud/

There’s still a couple weeks, so maybe the candidates will remember the rest of the world.

Tonight’s the last debate between President Obama and Governor Romney. This one is advertised as the “foreign policy” debate.

US foreign engagement is often described as resting on a three-legged stool; the three “Ds”. Defense, diplomacy, and development. The Obama administration, and Secretary Clinton in particular, has always emphasized that diplomacy and development are equal partners of the three. In past Presidential debates, US financial contributions to foreign assistance and reducing poverty were occasionally topics. During a 2000 debate, then-Governor Bush and Vice President Gore talked about their views, prodded by a question from Jim Lehrer.

I’m guessing that the last “D”, development, will be missing this time round.

CBS newsman Bob Schieffer will moderate tonight and has announced an agenda with topics ranging from Afghanistan to the Middle East, with a bit of terrorism thrown in. Also China. But no airtime for development, foreign assistance. There’s a lot to talk about, actually; the outstanding progress made on some counts and the terrible failure on others. The fate of initiatives launched by President Bush during his term to address AIDS and new foreign aid programs for poor countries with good governance. The new initiatives launched under President Obama on food security and health.

Some politicians (former and possibly future) still think it’s worth talking about and supporting.

But, in all likelihood, issues that matter to the roughly 1.3 billion people who live in and with poverty—and to the hundreds of millions of US taxpayers who pay for these programs—won’t make an appearance.

To make the debates go better, a lot of my friends play drinking games. They’re generally designed to crystalize and shatter the clichés, pierce the banality, and give life to the predictable.

So, I’ll make a game of it. If either candidate mentions “poverty” or “poor people” or even something close, I’ll give $25 to their campaign. If either candidate makes something like a defense of foreign aid, or talks about US obligations—moral and otherwise—to the least of us, I’ll donate $100.

Should make it more interesting.

Editor’s note:  At 9 pm tonight, hundreds of Oxfam America supporters will raise their voices to change the conversation by calling attention to the fight to end hunger and poverty during the debates. How? By signing up on Thunderclap to tweet and post to Facebook. Join us.  

The campaign rhetoric and the media coverage of an election focused on our economy have largely overlooked a major national economic shift: the number of working families living under the poverty line grew by over 25% since 2007. A recent study found national media has devoted a mere 0.2% of its election coverage to the challenge of poverty.

Maybe candidates can look away from more working mothers bringing home checks that place their families below the poverty line or one job loss or medical bill away from financial disaster. Maybe they can brush aside the impact of public policy helping struggling families find better opportunity in reducing costs to taxpayers and the economy. But even if you can ignore all this, how can you ignore the politics?

The official poverty rate rose to 15.9% this month. Since 2007, 10.4 million more Americans have seen their incomes fall below the federal poverty mark, $23,500 for a family of four. Now over one in four Americans live either in poverty or near poverty, a number that has grown by 22.6% since 2007, far outpacing the growth even of the nation’s Latino population (14.3%), a demographic shift with significant electoral implications.

Most of this campaign’s rhetoric has focused on the candidates plans to create jobs and help the middle class, implying job creation alone is still a ticket into prosperity. But even as unemployment begins to go down slowly, and economic growth improves, the amount of workers and families in poverty continues to rise, a trend economists believe may continue. Research shows that many of the few jobs being created so far in the economic recovery are low and poverty wage jobs, highlighting that job growth alone will not address the plight of hard-working poor families.

In 2008 voters in households earning under $30,000 accounted for 18% of the vote. Despite the recent debate around the voting habits of the 47% of Americans who do not pay federal income taxes, the working poor are among the closest thing in the electorate to political free agents. Working poor and near poor families benefit from policies that have had bipartisan support in the past like the earned income tax credit, a policy created by Republicans and strengthened by Democrats. According to Gallup a full 50% of poor voters are political independents. Voters earning under $20,000 account for a higher percentage (8%) of undecided voters than any other income bracket in recent polls.

Politicians ignore low income working families at their political peril in 2012. Battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia saw a combined rise in the ranks of poor and near poor grow of 3.7 million since 2007, an increase of 27.9%, well above the national average. In Florida, Nevada, North Carolina and Virginia, these newly poor or near poor individuals outnumber the number of voters who made up the margin of victory in each state’s 2008 Presidential general election.

Sources: US Census Bureau, US Election Atlas.org

Additionally, according to a recent survey by the Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity, 88 percent of voters across all incomes said a candidate’s position on reducing poverty is important in deciding their vote.

Working poor families and the people who care about them make up a significant portion of voters still up for grabs. Democrats and Republicans would do well in the next 41 days to speak to their challenges and offer solutions.

In order to elevate this discussion, Oxfam America has worked to support a groundbreaking documentary, “The Line,” which shines a light on the reality of poverty in America, and especially the working poor. We helped feature Ronnie Duplessis, an oysterman from Davant, LA, who tells his heartbreaking story of the struggle to survive after the BP spill. And we’re partnering with Sojourners, World Vision, Bread for the World, and other organizations to help bring this topic into the presidential campaign.

Please join us in spreading the word! Already over 1000 people across the country have agreed to host film screenings already. You can still sign up to host a screening on October 2 and receive a free DVD to premier the film with friends, family, and neighbors! Let’s start the conversation about reducing poverty, increasing economic opportunity, and about the dignity and rights of all of us to prosper.