On the cover of a recent issue of a black community periodical is the phrase," Black is the warm feeling you have knowing you've created so many good jobs for whites in the Poverty Program." Some segment of the American poor—and it is no small proportion—see themselves as the exploited, even under those respectable efforts specifically designed to alleviate their poverty. Indeed, even Michael Harrington, among the first to" popularize" sympathetically the poor in the last decade, recently wrote in Harpers that the private business efforts to provide solutions to poverty were themselves exploitive acts designed to make profits for business. In The Great Society's Poor Law, Sar Levitan tries humbly and with skill to present a mountain of factual evidence documenting attempts of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 to deal in manifold ways with the problem of poverty in America in the 1960's. In general, however, he does not deal with the issue of who is running the program and for what purposes, although, on occasion, he reflects his own view of those who raise the question. Commenting on Kenneth Clark's testimony before a Senate Committee when Clark pointed to the threat of the poor's involvement as a threat to those controlling the funds, Levitan states:" The assumption is that once the poor obtain power, they will be in a position to demand delivery of services. It appears to be rather fuzzy thinking to assume that such power will be of long-term value without the education and training necessary to exercise it."(p. 117). Yet, there are those who claim that the end of poverty depends heavily upon the involvement of the poor, their training in responsible decision-making