Poverty

Surge in Welfare Rolls Testing Last Wave Of Reforms

Jenny Choi — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:29:17 -0500

One major fallout of our current recession that could gain some visibility in the coming months is the swell in welfare rolls, a result of a last month's sharp rise in unemployment. The Washington Post puts the issue in grave context, suggesting that this could be the first significant test for the nation's welfare system since it underwent an overhaul a dozen years ago. To refresh everyone's memory, the welfare legislation, enacted in 1996 and up for renewal in 2010, requires recipients to work in exchange for government assistance and places a five-year time limit on cash benefits. At the center of the debate at the time was the pervasive concern that the previous program placed many participants in an indefinite situation of "welfare dependency," rather than giving them temporary assistance that helped to lift them out of poverty.

Welfare rolls decreased after the new system was implemented, and the law was successful and popular on many fronts, but the Post points out: "How much of that decline, politicans and scientists debated, was due to the programs' tough new rules -- and how much to the good economic times?" Surely, the current shortage of jobs and surge in layoffs, not to mention a suffering economy, is bound to put an inordinate amount of strain on the entire welfare system. One expert who held a position in the Clinton administration is advocating for a suspension of these rules, saying "The whole construct is to go out and find jobs. So it's a Catch-22. It's kind of an impossibility."

Add to these questions the fact that many states are already facing budget deficits, having spent their fixed annual amount of federal welfare dollars to mitigate other areas of poverty like child care and training programs.

Most opinion surveys have been fairly silent on the topic of welfare, but public attitudes after the 1996 welfare legislation still carry a great deal of relevance to these issues. Those Americans who were informed about the reform law said it works well because of the work requirement, and in fact, people tended to resent the values of the old system more than the cost. Majorities of Americans said they believe government should be responsible for the needy, though they are divided on government assistance if it means going deeper into debt. Still, many were divided on whether we were spending enough to assist the poor.

Bush Pushes for Sustained Commitment to Foreign Aid

Jenny Choi — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:30:01 -0400

President Bush urged against curtailing U.S. aid to foreign nations at a White House summit yesterday on global development. He spoke directly to issues of America's current economic crisis, national security and moral authority in pushing for a sustained commitment to impoverished nations. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice echoed his statements, saying: "Some will ask the inevitable question in these troubled times: 'How can we afford it?' I would ask instead, 'How can we not afford it?' "

A critical point to make here is that U.S. spending on foreign aid remains roughly one percent of the total federal budget. So while federal spending overall has proved to be a major sticking point for both presidential campaigns in the current climate, John McCain and Barack Obama have both said the current economic downturn would not have an impact on their plans for foreign assistance.

Our Confidence in Foreign Policy Index has indicated that the public generally favors global development. In fact, majorities consider helping other countries struck by natural disasters (73 percent), cooperating with other countries on the environment and the spread of disease (75 percent), and helping countries develop clean water supplies (74 percent) all "very important" foreign policy goals. Longer-term projects, like helping people in poor countries to get an education (59 percent) or helping countries move out of poverty (53 percent), rank lower. But on the whole, the public doesn't view these efforts as instrumental national security strategies; in other words, global development simply doesn't rank high as something that Americans think will make them safer.

Be sure to visit our Voter's Survival Kit on the federal budget, the economy and foreign policy for information on these key election issues.

Point Of Bipartisan Agreement: Poverty Stats Need Work

Francie Grace — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:15:22 -0400

From free market purists to advocates of government jobs programs, there's a great deal of disagreement across the political spectrum on what should be done to help America's poorest, but many people of various political stripes agree that an update is definitely in order for the formula the government uses to set the poverty rate. The method of determining the poverty rate – the income below which a person or family is officially considered to be poor – has changed very little since the 1960s, when it was viewed as a tool in the War on Poverty.

The New York Times reports pressure is mounting to improve the index, which affects public policy both in assessing problems and in calculations used to develop solutions. A House Democrat is about to introduce legislation to require an update; a House Republican introduced a bill last year; and the city of New York, which already has its own poverty index, is offering technical assistance to cities considering similar updates.

Advocates for the poor have long argued that the current poverty level understates the number of Americans who are struggling to meet their basic needs. The U.S. Census Bureau's latest statistics indicate that the poverty rate held steady in 2007, with 12.5 percent of Americans – that's 37.3 million people – living below the poverty line, defined as an annual income of $21,203 for a family of four.

Polls show strong public support for measures to help the poor, such as expanding daycare, increasing the minimum wage and increased public spending on low income housing. Support varies when pollsters also ask about other priorities jockeying for position in the federal budget. A 2006 Pew Research Center survey found that while more than half of survey participants said dealing with the problems of poor and needy people should be a priority for Congress, many other issues were ranked as higher in importance.

These same mixed feelings also turn up when pollsters ask about policies concerning welfare and homelessness, with an overwhelming majority saying a homeless person who refused help and has caused no trouble to anyone should not be removed from the streets and forced to get help.

For more on this problem, check out our Poverty and Welfare issue guide and our Public Engagement discussion guide, which helps citizens consider some of the policy options that have been proposed.

Fewer Americans Without Health Insurance, But the Good News Ends There

Jenny Choi — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:07:05 -0400

The number of Americans without health insurance decreased by one million last year, down by half a percentage point from 2006, according to annual figures from the U.S. Census Bureau released today. But the good news was undercut by the Census' findings from the same report that the average household income, when adjusted for inflation, has not increased significantly since 2000. The poverty rate also held steady. Keep in mind that the Census figures are for 2007, so the effects of the recent economic downturn are not reflected here.

Health care is a major issue for Americans, even though public opinion research indicates the public has yet to come to terms with the various tradeoffs involved in reform. Cost and access are seen as the most urgent health problems today, and most agree that the system currently needs either fundamental changes or to be rebuilt entirely. But support for a universal health care plan varies based on survey question wording -- especially when paying more in taxes or premiums is mentioned. And yet two-thirds say it is the responsibility of the federal government to guarantee health insurance for all Americans.

It's also worth mentioning the perception gap between experts and the public as to what might be driving these costs. Whereas experts consistently cite new medical technologies and treatments and a longer life expectancy as the biggest factors of rising costs, the public names company profits, malpractice suits and fraud and waste in the system.

Even In New Hampshire, Big Spikes Seen In Child Poverty Rate

Francie Grace — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:26:19 -0400

New Hampshire ranks last in the U.S. Census Bureau's state ranking of child poverty. But even there – and in at least two other states that are below the 18.3 national average – some alarming increases were seen between 2000 and 2006, when the rate rose by nine percent nationwide. The jump was 47 percent in New Hampshire, 45 percent in Delaware (which comes in at number 29 compared to other states), and 73 percent in Colorado (which is number 30 compared to other states).

A study by the Colorado Children's Campaign found minority children in that state were disproportionately affected, with the poverty rate rising 473 percent among American Indians and 116 percent among blacks, compared to a 57 percent increase among whites and a 10 percent decrease among Asians. [The study's authors found the data not helpful for separately counting Hispanics; the rate jumped 132 percent among the group identified racially as "other."]

"We have too many of our working class families who are actually slipping into low-income brackets and becoming families who are living in extreme poverty," says Colorado Children's Campaign president Megan Ferland, in a New York Times interview. The child poverty rate is worst in Washington D.C. (32.6 percent), Mississippi (29.5 percent), Louisiana (27.8 percent), New Mexico (25.6 percent) and West Virginia (25.2).

Economic worries continue to rank high in American minds, with 45 percent in a Gallup poll saying the U.S. is in a recession or depression, and one in four low income Americans saying the nation is in a depression. Sixty-nine percent of participants in another Gallup survey this year said they are "very dissatisfied" or "somewhat dissatisfied" with the nation's efforts to deal with poverty and homelessness. Sixty-five percent of participants in a November CNN/Opinion Research poll said the issues of poverty and homelessness will be "extremely important" or "very important" in determining their vote for president. Another 26 percent called the issues "moderately important" while 10 percent said they would be "not that important" in deciding their vote.

For more on poverty in America, check out our issue guide.

The "Deserving Poor" vs. "Welfare Recipients"

Jenny Choi — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:06:40 -0400

Opinion researchers have long observed that survey questions asking about "the poor" elicit far more positive attitudes than those asking about "welfare." For example, while majorities want the problems of the poor to be a priority for Congress, people are also divided on whether “welfare recipients” really need the help. In survey results, the poor are characterized as people who work hard, but just can’t earn enough money to support their families, and Americans show broad support for a number of proposals to help them make ends meet. By contrast, Public Agenda’s research has suggested that for most Americans, the term “welfare” seems to evoke a vision of a failed and fundamentally flawed government system reviled both by those on welfare and the general public. Perhaps surprisingly, just half of Americans say they know about the 1996 welfare reform, but among those who do, the vast majority say it works well because of the work requirement.

Neither Liberal or Conservative Approaches to Welfare

Jenny Choi — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:04:10 -0400

The public’s thinking on welfare does not fit easily into either liberal or conservative political frameworks. People support elements of the conservative approach, like time limits and work requirements, along with elements of the liberal approach, like more job training and child care for welfare mothers. Before the 1996 changes to the welfare laws, people distrusted both liberal and conservative predictions about the consequences of reform.

The Homeless: As Long as They Don't Bother Anybody...

Jenny Choi — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:02:58 -0400

The public is sympathetic toward the homeless (and the poor in general), but there's a libertarian streak in public attitudes. If someone refuses shelter and decides to sleep on the street, that's up to them, the public seems to say. But as with other questions involving rights and responsibilities, the public appears to draw a line: the rights of one person end where the rights of another begin. In a recent Public Agenda survey, only one in 10 said a homeless man who isn't bothering anyone should be forced off the street. Three-quarters say he should be left alone. But if a homeless man seems disturbed and verbally threatens people - even if he never acts on the threats - more than half say he should be removed. Half also say the homeless should be moved out of a public park if they're driving families away and 71 percent say homeless people should be moved if they're driving away customers from a shopping area. Even in the last two scenarios, however, there's a substantial minority who thinks the situation is "too tough to call."

What are the costs and likely consequences of each course of action?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:25:51 -0400

What are the costs and likely consequences of each course of action?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:24:40 -0400

What are the costs and likely consequences of each course of action?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:23:26 -0400

What does fairness require in the nation's efforts to achieve racial equality?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:19:26 -0400

What does fairness require in the nation's efforts to achieve racial equality?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:18:20 -0400

What does fairness require in the nation's efforts to achieve racial equality?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:16:45 -0400

What would be the impact of cutting back or eliminating racial preferences in college admissions decisions?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:14:48 -0400

What would be the impact of cutting back or eliminating racial preferences in college admissions decisions?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:13:03 -0400

What would be the impact of cutting back or eliminating racial preferences in college admissions decisions?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:11:21 -0400

What is a likely cost or tradeoff associated with each choice?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:05:05 -0400

What is a likely cost or tradeoff associated with each choice?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:03:04 -0400

What is a likely cost or tradeoff associated with each choice?

Peiting Chen — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:02:01 -0400