How would you define the point at which a family is poor in this country? How about in San Francisco? Most people are shocked when they learn how the federal government measures poverty. If you’re unfamiliar with this number you too will be shocked. Especially if you are a Californian.

According to the Feds, a family of three has to be earning under $17,600 per year to be poor. Let’s put this into perspective: The average family income in San Francisco is $94,000 per year, according to HUD, and the average is about $50,000 per year for the entire United States. But there is no allowance to adjust poverty levels locally. In addition to being unfair, this is unreasonable.

The Federal Poverty Rate is an absolute dinosaur of policy tool. It might even be funny if its obsolescence didn’t make it so harmful for tens of millions of poor Americans. Mayors across the nation have long bemoaned this discrepancy – because it has shortchanged cities of cash they’ve needed to serve the huge number of poor people the federal government won’t recognize, due to where the poverty line rests.

But it appears local efforts at redefining a definition of poverty, by Mayors, has created some new momentum at the national level.

A September 1st, 2008 NY Times article describes a meaningful, bi-partisan effort in Congress to redefine the poverty line. According to the article, “Democrats and Republicans alike say [the federal policy level] is hopelessly outdated…This month, Representative Jim McDermott, the Democrat from Washington who is the chairman of the House subcommittee on income security, plans to introduce legislation that would require the government to develop a more modern and accurate method to determine who is poor.” For more click here.

What is now unclear is how the staggering $700 billion price tag on the bailout package might make reasonable legislators think twice before they expand the universe of people who become eligible for federal aid.