Your April 20 editorial (“Our View: Poverty is harmful, in and out of widespread emergencies”) contrasts two approaches to poverty. On the one hand is the one you advocate, which involves providing food stamps and other assistance programs to those in need. This is aligned with the Democratic Party.

On the other hand is the one you criticize, which involves cutting food, housing and health care assistance. This is aligned with the Republican Party.

Although it might appear that these two alternatives exhaust the possibilities, there is a third way that neither traps the poor in a state of dependence, nor simply leaves them to fend for themselves.

This would involve evaluating each person in need, and recommending a course of action that allows that person to become independent. It would involve some short-term education (e.g., how to use a spreadsheet), and perhaps some advice about personal habits. For example, according to Bob Funk, CEO and founder of Express Employment Professionals, a person needs both hard skills (such as how to perform various tasks) and soft skills (“the top five traits employers look for are as follows: attitude, work ethic/integrity, communication, culture fit, critical thinking”).

Unfortunately, providing a person with food stamps or other forms of assistance does very little in terms of improving either hard skills or soft skills; neither does simply cutting benefits. Only an approach of the sort mentioned above could accomplish what is actually needed: a positive change in the behavior of those in need.

William Vaughan Jr.

Chebeague Island

Copy the Story Link