War on Poverty: Effectiveness of Anti-Poverty

Research Report #17 November 2014

Chien-Chung Huang

Juliann Vikse

Rutgers University

In the 1960s the U.S. crafted and implemented an array of social assistance and social insurance policies aimed atalleviating poverty. Fifty years later, many of these programs and policies—or variations of them—are still in effect. Primarily using data from literature, this paper ana- lyzes the effectiveness of antipoverty programs over the last half-century.We find that social insurance programs have had much stronger effects on reducing poverty rates than have social assistance programs. Overall, the U.S. social welfare system tends to favor in-kind over cash benefits, and has expanded the scope and reach of its provision of medical care, food, and tax benefits.

While antipoverty programs and policies have been somewhat successful in alleviating poverty among the elderly and disabled, they have failed to alleviate poverty among single mothers and their children. 1

Introduction it” (Johnson, 1964). Thiswar on poverty “New Right,” was suspicious of gov- By the 1960smore thanone fifth centered on several key pieces of legis- ernment programs, and viewed wel- of the U.S. populationlived in poverty. lation. The Food Stamp Act (1964) gave fare as weakening traditional family Rates of poverty were highest among permanent legislative authority to the structure and morality (Stern & Axinn, the elderly (35%), followed by children pilot program, which had been created 2012). Over time, the New Right’s bat- (27%) (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & in 1962 to raise levels of nutrition tle for conservative fiscal and social Smith, 2013).Although the nation had among low-income households. The policies contributed to a shift in public enjoyed close to a decade of postwar Economic Opportunity Act (1964) cen- opinion (Trattner, 1999; Stern & Axinn, economic prosperity,a host of internal tered on job training, work incentives, 2012). and external conflicts posed new chal- and social services, established pro- Since the 1990s, antipoverty lenges (Trattner, 1999; Stern & Axinn, grams to provide the education, skills, programs and policies have continued 2012).An increased flow of immigrants training, and experience deemed nec- to undergo significant changes. While and refugees from Europe, Latin essary for success(e.g. Job Corps, the 1990s began in the shadow of a America and Asia, and changing birth VISTA, and federal work-study), cre- recession, unemployment and inflation and death rates, led to an enormous ated specialized programs to combat rates quickly decreased as technologi- increase in population size—132 mil- rural poverty, and established the Of- cal advances led to increased produc- lion in 1940, to 205 million in 1970— fice of Economic Opportunity (OEO). tivity and standards of living (Stern & which in turn created new social wel- The Social Security Amendments Axinn, 2012). At the same time, racial fare needs (Stern & Axinn, (1965) established Medicare and Medi- and ethnic demographic shifts, increas- 2012).Urbanization posed another set caid and expanded Social Security ing rates of incarceration, divorce and of challenges. The percentage of the benefits. Also enacted in 1965, the Ele- single motherhood, and the increasing population living in urban areas grew mentary and Secondary Education Act visibility of gay and lesbian popula- from 64% in 1950 to 72% in 1970, and established Title I, which distributed tions, have challenged some of the key urban centers experienced worsening federal funding to low-income assumptions of many antipoverty pro- conditions(Trattner, 1999; Stern & Ax- schools.Finally, the1965 Appalachian grams and policies (Bailey & Danziger, inn, 2012).Redlining practices left poor Regional Development Act (ARDA) 2013). Program and policy reforms families with limited access to building created the Appalachian Regional during this period, most notably the loans, urban renewal projects dis- Commission (ARC) to expand eco- 1996 welfare reforms, have made the placed predominantly nonwhite resi- nomic opportunities, human capital, American social safety net more work- dents, and pollution intensified (Pager transportation, and other forms of in- based. In addition, the system has & Shepherd, 2008). In Appalachian frastructure(Trattner, 1999; Stern & shifted further in favor of social insur- communities,there were high rates of Axinn, 2012). ance programs and tax incentives, high school dropout, incarceration, Following the 1960s, the war which do not necessarily target the and joblessness (Gillette, 2010; Ziliak, on poverty encountered several key poor (Ziliak, 2011). 2010). Several notable books, including shifts. Although numerous social, po- The purpose of this paper is to Michael Harrington’s The Other Amer- litical, and economic factors shaped analyze the effectiveness of antipov- ica: Poverty in the United States and social welfare developments during erty programs over the last fifty years. Dwight MacDonald’s Our Invisible the 1970-1990 period, two particularly Certainly, antipoverty programs and Poor , helped sparkpublic discourse framed its history. The first was a con- policies are closely tied to changing aboutboth urban and rural poverty. At fluence of slow economic growth, high cultural, political and economic con- the same time, the intensifying Civil inflation, and high unemployment, texts. Before exploring some of these Rights Movement drew widespread which left limited resources to pay for issues further, and considering their attention to the state of inequalityand expanding social welfare demands. effects on antipoverty effectiveness, discrimination. Wage growth slowed significantly dur- this paper will first provide a brief President Lyndon B. Johnson’s ing the 1970s, which meant that eco- overview of a number of key pro- ambitious “unconditional war on pov- nomic growth had less of an effect on grams . erty,” which he launched within raising the wages of low-skilled work- Types and Content of Anti- months of taking office, aimed to “not ers (Bailey & Danziger, 2013).Second, Poverty Programs the veto of 1971 marked a substantial only relieve the symptom of poverty, Social Assistance Programs ideological shift in the sphere of social but to cure it and, above all, to prevent Social assistance programs are welfare. The political right, dubbed the

2 aimed at alleviating poverty among viation have changed dramatically shifted dramatically toward work sup- low-income individuals and families. since this latter set of reforms, when port (Trisi & Pavetti, 2012). These are means tested programs that the Clinton administration and Repub- SSI. Created in 1974, Supple- require recipients to meet specific sets lican Congress focused on “making mental Security Income (SSI) provides of requirements. In particular, Tempo- work pay” and “ending welfare as we means-tested income for adults over rary Assistance to Needy Families know it.” Currently, TANF provides a the age of 65 and the permanently dis- (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutri- basic block grant of $16.5 billion to all abled. The federal government admin- tion Assistance Program (SNAP) pro- statesand requires states to contribute isters this program, which is indexed vide benefits to very low-income re- a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) re- to keep pace with inflation, and sev- cipients; SNAP is the largest income quirement of at least $10.4 billion an- eral states, including New Jersey, pro- support program in the U.S. The tax nually (CRS, 2012). As of 2011 there vide supplemental SSI funding. Recipi- system is another important means of were 1.9 billion needy families receiv- ents of SSI are automatically eligible delivering cash assistance to low- ing TANF cash assistance—a 58% de- for Medicaid.In the decades following income families with children, through cline since 1998 (Trisi & Pavetti, 2012). its passage, the number of Americans tax credits like the Earned Income Tax One important distinguishing feature receiving SSI was limited; numerous Credit (EITC), Child Tax Credit, struc- of the TANF program is its lifetime applications were denied, despite seri- tural aspects of the tax code, and cred- limitation on receiving benefits. The ous income inadequacy. its such as the Child Tax Credit (CTC) maximum, federal limit is 60 months, As with Social Security, the SSI and Child and Dependent Care Credit and many states have imposed shorter program is criticized for having struc- (CDCC),that provide greater benefits limits—as low as 21 months (CRS, tural work disincentives; recipients to lower-income families. 2013). Recipients also face strict job experience a “cash cliff” (i.e. suddenly TANF . The 1935 Aid to De- search and work requirements (20-30 lose benefits) when they engage in any pendent Children (ADC) program, hours per week), a feature that was so-called “substantial gainful activity created by the Social Security Act, instituted as a means to offset the risk (SGA)” (Guzman et al., 2013). Some functioned as a fully funded assistance for disincentivizing work. In many states have addressed this problem by approach to poverty alleviation. This respects, TANF also allows for greater developing “benefit offset” initiatives. program was aimed at poor, single, flexibility on the part of states, both in However, researchers have found that white mothers, who were expected to terms of monthly benefit amounts and such policies have thus far had little remain at home with their children— work requirement exemptions. For effect on labor force participation and thus reinforced women’s roles as instance, the maximum monthly bene- (Weathers & Hemmeter, 2011).There wives and homemakers (Tolleson- fit for a family of 3 in 2011 was $170 in were 7,912,266 recipients of federally Rinehart & Josephson, 2005). In 1962, Mississippi, and $704 in California administered SSI payments in 2010, partly in response to concerns about (CRS, 2013). Additionally, while 6 1,183,853 of them aged; 2,385,933 of all the program’s discouraging marriage, states make no allowances for parents recipients also received state supple- ADC was renamed Aid to Families caring for young children, 12 states mentation. On average, an individual with Dependent Children (AFDC). By (including New Jersey) provide 3 receiving SSI in 2012 received $8,376 the 1990s, mothers were seen as em- months of exemption from work re- annually (CRS, 2012). ployable and were expected to work, quirements (CRS, 2013). EITC. The Earned Income Tax and a subsequent wave of welfare re- While TANF did expand Credit (EITC) is a refundable tax credit forms imposed time limits and more childcare options for recipients, it for low- and medium-income families stringent work requirements on all failed to require states to offer educa- and individuals, enacted in 1975. It is recipients. The Personal Responsibility tional and training opportunities. In one form of tax expenditure, which is a and Work Opportunity Reconciliation turn, many states adopted a “rapid cost in foregone revenue attributable Act was passed and signed into law in attachment” strategy, which entailed to tax provisions that are incurred 1996, and effectively ended families’ moving welfare recipients into low- when the tax system is used as a entitlement to cash assistance. This wage jobs as quickly as possible, with- means to attain social outcomes or marked the transition from AFDC to out proper skills matching or job train- goals. Tax expenditures are generally Temporary Assistance for Needy ing. In the decade following the 1996 used to measure income, distribute Families (TANF). welfare reforms TANF caseloads fell fiscal benefits and burdens according The programs and policies by at least 27% in every state, and by to ability to pay, and promote socially aimed at poverty prevention and alle- over 50% in 36 states, as policies desirable ends. While they do not in-

3 volve directly spending government considered a handout, although it is discouraged. However, in-kind bene- money, as do government programs, technically a form of government fits such as SNAP also constrain tax expenditures such as EITC do en- spending, and is aimed at helping choice, potentially stigmatize the re- tail foregone revenue and are therefore working individuals and families sup- cipients, incur administrative costs, considered a form of government port themselves through autonomy and in some cases, encourage illegal spending. Politically, Republicans tend and self-reliance. behavior to circumvent the constraint to support tax expenditures, while De- SNAP . In 1965 the U.S. created (e.g., selling food stamps). During the mocrats are more supportive of gov- the federal Food Stamps program to 1990s welfare reforms, SNAP was ernment programs. provide food to low-income families. made to phase out paper coupons in Taxexpenditures have also Replaced in 2008 by the Supplemental favor of Electronic Benefit Transfer shifted substantially in recent decades; Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), (EBT) cards, and restrict eligibility. The they have arguably become the gov- it is a means tested program but does 2002 Farm Bill expanded eligibility ernment’s primary means of providing not consider age or family structure. once again, and the program was fur- cash assistance to low-income families Thus, SNAP reaches a broader target ther liberalized in 2008. In 2013 the (Eissa & Hoynes, 2011; Guzman et al., population than other social assistance program participation was 47,636,000, 2013). The EITC was a relatively small programs (Ziliak, 2011). One out of and recipients received $133.07 per program until1994, when credit levels every seven Americans, and one out of month on average (FNS, 2014). were increased and eligibility was ex- every five American children, accesses Medicaid . Medicaid is the tended to the entire U.S. population. In this program, and all who receive largest social assistance program in the the wake of the financial crisis of 2007 TANF or General Assistance (GA) are U.S. Its coverage extends to individu- and 2008, to strengthen the weakened eligible. There is also a specialized als with certain disabilities, and to low- economy the U.S. government ex- variation of the program, DSNAP, income adults and their children. Any- panded EITC and instituted addi- which is designed to provide food as- one who receives SSI is automatically tional, temporary tax credits. These sistance in disaster relief situations. eligible to enroll in Medicaid. Jointly included the “Making Work Pay” pro- Although SNAP is the largest funded by the federal and state gov- vision of the American Recovery and food assistance program, others exist ernments, Medicaid covers almost all Reinvestment Act of 2009, which pro- for particularly vulnerable segments of health care costs and dental service vided a refundable tax credit of up to the population. The supplemental costs incurred by recipients. While the $400 for working individuals and up to feeding program for Women, Infants, majority of recipients are single moth- $800 for married taxpayers (IRS, 2014), and Children (WIC) is premised on the ers and their children, the elderly incur and a tax exclusion for the first $2,400 idea that ensuring pregnant and the majority of expenditures. Under of unemployment benefits received breastfeeding mothers’ access to the Patient Protection and Affordable (IRS, 2012). In 2011, 28 million working healthy foods is in the public interest. Care Act (PPACA), enacted in 2010, families with children with annual in- This program covers the cost of many states have the option to increase eligi- comes between $37,900 and $51,600 essential food products for mothers, bility to Medicaid. received EITC. The benefits received including dairy, fresh produce, and There are a number of other depend on marital status, number of infant formula. Through the School programs that subsidize health-related children, and household income; on Lunch program, free and reduced costs for low-income Americans. Phar- average, EITC for a family with chil- price breakfast and lunch meals are maceutical Assistance to the Aged and dren was $2,905 (CRS, 2012). offered to low-income children in a Disabled (PAAD) is a means-tested America’s anti-poverty pro- school-based setting. Eligibility for program that permits recipients to fill grams are rooted in America’s strong- both of these programs is income- any prescription and pay no more than est virtues: the desire for fairness, com- based. $5 in co-payment. Through Ryan passion, and a sense of community. The SNAP program is an ex- White programs, which are adminis- However, these values are tempered ample of an “in-kind” benefit, as it en- tered by the Department of Health, the by strong beliefs in work, autonomy tails limited choice on the part of re- federal government subsidizes the and self-reliance, and the “primacy of cipients. The primary advantages of in- costs of pediatric HIV/AIDS medica- the family” (Ellwood, 1988). Because of kind benefits are that recipients are tions. Federally Qualified Health Care this, among U.S. social assistance pro- encouraged to use the benefits toward Centers (FQHC) are federally funded, grams, EITC is perhaps most in line the needs of themselves and their community-based medical centers in with Americans’ preferences. It is not families, and that misuse of funds is low-income regions with poor access

4 to services. Finally, the State Chil- preschool children. It is financed feder- typically funded via payroll tax, and dren’s Health Insurance Program ally to local, community-based organi- pay out cash benefits to qualifying par- (SCHIP), also referred to as CHIP, pro- zations. The Child Care and Develop- ticipants. vides matching funds to states for the ment Block Grant (CCDBG), which OASDI . The Social Security purpose of insuring low-income chil- was passed along with TANF, heavily Act in 1935 was the major piece of leg- dren whose families do not qualify for subsidizes childcare for low-income islation resulting from the New Deal, Medicaid.In 2013 the Medicaid served families. Every county in the U.S. fea- and was an important landmark for 71.7 million beneficiaries, and the tures a “lead” childcare agency, where U.S. social welfare policy. This act CHIP program served 8.4 million—a eligible community members may ob- placed responsibility for social welfare total of 80.1 million enrollees. tain vouchers redeemable at participat- on the federal government, and re- Other In-Kind Pro- ing, licensed, and approved childcare flected a shift from public concern for grams .Housing assistance in the U.S. centers—whether center-based or property rights, to concern for the takes a number of different forms. home-based. rights of people (Trattner, 1999; Stern These include public housing; Emer- The War on Poverty also es- & Axinn, 2012). In its final version, the gency Assistance (EA), which may tablished several educational and col- SSA was considerably more conserva- consist of a hotel, motel, or transitional lege-preparation programs, aimed at tive than had been envisioned by the housing facility; Temporary Rental reducing poverty through expanding Committee on Economic Security; it Assistance (TRA), for those who owe opportunities for young Americans did not include provisions for health back rent or mortgage payments; and (Haskins & Rouse, 2013). The EOA or disability insurance, and entailed Section 8 Rental Assistance vouchers, (1965) and the Higher Education Act only fiscal administration of unem- which subsidize rental costs for pri- (1968) authorized the Upward Bound ployment insurance and relief pro- vately owned housing. These housing (UB), Student Support Services (SSS), grams. However, by introducing old assistance programs are implemented Educational Opportunity Grants, and age insurance, unemployment com- by more than 2,400 local housing au- Educational Talent Search (ETS) pro- pensation, and relief for vulnerable thorities, which set guidelines on eligi- grams, and in the late 1990s several populations (e.g. widows and chil- bility and oversee public housing programs were added, including the dren), the SSA drew attention to the maintenance (Ziliak, 2011). As of McNair Scholars program (1986), Up- limitations of an unfettered market, 2011, there were over 14,000 public ward Bound Math-Science (1990) and and the need for government interven- housing units serving 2.3 million GEAR UP (1998). These programs dif- tion. Subsequent amendments ex- Americans, most of them elderly or fer modestly, but all center on helping tended coverage and benefits to survi- disabled (Ziliak, 2011). Insufficient low-income students graduate from vors and family dependents (1939) and funding and maintenance has led to high school and college. They provide to the disabled (1954), added Medicare widespread demolition of public hous- participating colleges and nonprofits health care benefits (1965), and man- ing in recent years, and in such situa- funding, and offer students educa- dated cost-of-living adjustments tions Section 8 vouchers are often used tional preparation and summer school. (1977). to partially subsidize rental fees for In addition, ETS aims to inform low- Older Age Survivors and Dis- displaced residents. In 1992 the HOPE income students about educational ability Insurance (OASDI) includes VI program was launched to replace opportunities and available aid. retirement benefits and Social Security poor-quality public housing units with Social Insurance Programs Disability Insurance (DI). Qualified mixed-income developments, but Social insurance programs and retirees may begin receiving reduced funding has been cut substantially in policies also expect certain require- cash benefits at age 62, or full benefits recent years. ments of beneficiaries, but are univer- at 65. Like other insurance programs, Childcare is an increasingly sal and not means tested. These pro- dependent children and spouses are important economic instrument, as grams are intended to protect people also eligible to receive benefits. The DI more and more U.S. families rely on from normal vacillations in the labor program provides cash assistance to two incomes. Head Start, an evidence- market, and to assist the elderly and qualified workers who have experi- based, means tested program, is cen- disabled who are not able to fully par- enced mental or physical disabilities tered on providing nutritional support ticipate in the labor market. In certain that impact their ability to engage in and health screenings, fostering paren- cases, social insurance programs can “significant gainful activity” (SGA). tal involvement, and developing be costly, large-scale, and potentially Recipients of DI must have significant school readiness among low-income unsustainable (CRS, 2012). They are history of earnings, and are made eligi-

5 ble for Medicare (Ben-Shalom et al., capped after a state-determined period rity Administration, and implemented 2011). Both of these programs are fed- of time, typically six months, but the in 1965. In 1969, the U.S. Bureau of the erally financed and are moderately federal government provides extended Budget designated a revised version of progressive and redistributive; while payments during economic downturns these poverty thresholds as the federal benefits are positively related to contri- (Ben-Shalom et al., 2011). They range government’s official statistical defini- butions, replacement rates are higher widely by state; for instance, in 2012 tion of poverty (Fisher, 1992). This for low-income workers (Ben-Shalom, the weekly maximums in Mississippi standard is based on the concept of a 2011). and Massachusetts were $235 and family being able to afford minimally In 2013 over 59 million Ameri- $653, respectively. Unemployment In- nutritious food. In the late 1950s, the cans received Social Security benefits. surance Benefits (UIB) are also avail- federal government used the nation- The average monthly benefits for re- able to those who have worked a cer- ally representative Consumer Expendi- tired workers was $1,294; for disabled tain number of quarters, with cover- ture Survey to analyze the distribution workers, $1,146; and for survivors, age, and have been discharged at no of Americans’ expenditures. As fami- $1,244(Social Security Administration, fault of their own. Workers’ Compen- lies spent about one third of their in- n.d.).There were a number of changes sation, a state program, provides cash come on food at that time, the measure made to Social Security eligibility re- and medical benefits to those who ex- estimated a minimum food budget, quirements and benefit amounts in perience temporary or permanent and multiplied this by three (Cofer, 2014. The cost-of-living adjustment work-related injuries, and to depend- Grossman & Clark, 1962; Orshansky, (COLA) was increased in response to a ents of workers whose deaths were job 1965). rise in the Consumer Price Index (CPI- -related. This program allows workers Today this measure is still in W), and while tax rates remained the to file claims with their employers, and use, having been updated annually for same, maximum taxable earnings were if substantiated, receive medical care inflation according to the Consumer increased from $113,700 to $117,000 fees and lost wages through their em- Price Index, as well as for family size, (U.S. House of Representatives, ployers’ insurance.Temporary Disabil- family composition, and age. Income, 2013;Social Security Administration, ity Insurance (TDI), also referred to as dividends and accrued interest, child n.d.). cash sickness benefits, is a state-level support, and cash assistance are in- Medicare . Medicare, a federal program that was first enacted in cluded in the measure, while non-cash entitlement program, was developed Rhode Island in 1942. In most states benefits (such as food stamps and tax in 1965 to provide medical benefits to TDI covers commercial and industrial benefits) are excluded. According to adults aged 65 or older, and to SSDI wage and salary workers who are pri- the U.S. Census Bureau, the poverty recipients under 65. Benefits are dis- vately employed, and several states threshold in 2012 was $11,722 for a tributed by the Center for Medicare include government employees and single person household, $14,960 for a Services (CMS), and cover hospital agricultural workers (SSA, n.d.). Typi- two-person household, $18,287 for 3 expenses, prescription drugs, and phy- cally, claimants must have specified people, $23,497 for 4, $27,815 for 5, sician charges. The federal government amounts of past earnings and be un- 31,485 for 6, $35,811 for 7, $39,872 for 8, is solely responsible for financing this able to perform regular work due to a and $47,536 for 9 or more (U.S. Census program, and therefore Congress de- physical or mental disability (SSA, Bureau, 2012). termines all eligibility and benefit for- n.d.).Finally, the Family Medical Leave In addition to the poverty line, mulas (Ben-Shalom et al., 2011). Cover- Act (FMLA) provides guaranteed in- it is important to consider several age is limited, and many recipients surance, and in some cases monetary other categories of poverty in the U.S. choose to supplement their Medicare benefits, to those who cannot work Currently, 5% of the U.S. population benefits with privately sold “Medigap” while on medical leave. This law pro- lives in “chronic poverty,” meaning policies. In 2012 Medicare covered ap- vides job protection and income secu- they consistently live at or below the proximately 50 million individuals, rity for the general population. poverty line for at least a two-year pe- and total spending was $555.9 billion. Measuring Poverty riod. Transitory poverty entails being Employment . Unemployment Official U.S. Measure poor at any time during a two-year Insurance (UI) is a state-level program The U.S. uses an absolute stan- period; this rate is currently 28% that provides cash payments to those dard to measure poverty, based on (Duclos, Araar, & Giles, 2006). These who have been involuntarily laid off, thresholds developed in 1959 by distinctions have been used by govern- and who have adequate employment Mollie Orshansky of the Social Secu- ments and social commentators histories. These benefits are often throughout history to analyze policy

6 needs and effectiveness (Duclos, are not easily defined, as demand for tionally. Araar, & Giles, 2006). It is important to goods and services generally stem The Supplemental Poverty consider these categories of poverty, as from both size and composition of a Measure (SPM) is an alternative pov- the rates of each may respond differ- household (Logan, 2008). In addition, erty measure that has recently gained ently to policies (Chronic Poverty Re- income and substitution effects work interest. The U.S. government adopted search Centre, 2004). differently according to the consumed the SPM in its last census, albeit sup- Criticisms goodsand services in question (Logan, plementally. The SPM is a means to The current measure was cre- 2008).In fact, trends have revealed that extend the information found in the ated at a period of time when food food expenditures in this country have official poverty measure, and includes typically represented one third of a been particularly inconsistent in rela- many of the assistance programs that family’s budget. However, this is infre- tion to household scale economies are not included in the latter (Short, quently the case today, given the (Logan, 2008). Economies of scale also 2012). In addition to income, the SPM higher relative expense of health care, vary according to the economic cli- considers other factors. Payroll taxes childcare, and housing costs. While the mate, and over time. For instance, rela- are accounted for, but assets are not. measure is adjusted for inflation, it tive price changes have been shown to The SPM counts out medical payments does not account for rapidly increasing have strong effects on economies of that are paid out-of-pocket, and counts standards, and costs, of living scale during large or sudden relative in health care costs and in-kind bene- (Guzman et al., 2013). In 2011 the pov- price shifts in transition economies fits. It accounts for geography, and erty threshold for a family of four was (Lanjouw et al., 2009). makes adjustments on the basis of 37% of the median, whereas in 1963 it Finally, the current measure is housing costs, family size, and family had represented 50% (U.S. Census Bu- based on income—but income report- composition. In effect, the SPM raises reau, 2012). An individual who works ing, from the U.S. Census and surveys, poverty thresholds. For example, for a full time at the minimum wage, cur- does not account for the homeless, in- family of four the threshold is $22,811 rently $7.25 per hour, will earn only stitutionalized, incarcerated, or un- according to the federal poverty line, $14,500 annually—nearly $4,000 less documented. These populations are but $25,703 according to the SPM than the poverty threshold for a single particularly vulnerable and at-risk for (Short, 2012). However, its differences parent with two children ($18,123). being poor, yet are involuntarily ex- vary by demographics. While poverty Additionally, the poverty cluded from the processes that deter- rates among the elderly are drastically measure is critiqued because it cannot mine their needs. This exemplifies higher according to the SPM, likely assess the impacts of anti-poverty pro- what scholars term “social exclu- due to out of pocket medical expenses, grams, as it does not account for non- sion”—a phenomenon that prevents the child poverty rate is lower. By ac- cash benefits. In-kind transfers such as particular individuals and groups counting more comprehensively for Medicaid, public housing, and SNAP, from fully participating in society the various outflows of spending and are ultimately not counted (Guzman et (Atkinson & Marlier, 2010; Nolan & various inflows of money, the SPM al., 2013). The measure is also not ad- Whelan, 2010). addresses some of the aforementioned justed for geographical differences. Alternative Measures critiques of the official measure States use the Federal Poverty Thresh- Most OECD countries, and the (Guzman et al., 2012; Short, 2012). old (FPT) for distribution of benefits, European Union, use a relative pov- Effectiveness of Anti-Poverty but there are stark differences among erty measure that compares house- Programs states’ living and out-of-pocket ex- holds to the median household in- Trends in Poverty Rates penses (Hutto et al., 2011). come. For instance, a number of Euro- Between 1959 and 2012 the Household economies of scale pean countries use 50% of the median poverty rate has gradually declined, create further complication in measur- equivalized disposable income as their from 22.5% to 15.0%, while the number ing living standards and poverty. poverty line. This is based on the idea of Americans living in poverty has When no economies of scale are as- that median income is an indicator of increased from approximately 40 to sumed, children—who often live in what is considered normal in a society, 46.5 million, see Figure 1 (DeNavas- relatively large families—are higher and should therefore be the basis of Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2013). The pov- risk of poverty than the elderly, and identifying those at risk for exclusion erty rates differ widely by demograph- when strong economies of scale are (UNICEF, 2012). Relative poverty ics. While elderly poverty rates have used, the opposite is true (World Bank, measures inherently account for ine- declined substantially, from approxi- 2000). Household economies of scale quality, and are comparable interna-

7 mately 35% in 1959 to 9.1% in 2012, the ond has been from the nonelderly and counted for, Medicaid and SSI reduced poverty rates of adults (17.0% to nondisabled to the elderly and dis- the overall poverty rate from 29.0% to 13.7%) and children (27.0% to 21.8%) abled, as a product of greatly increased 25.2% and 28.6%, respectively, and have fallen only slightly, see Figure 2 expenditures on OASDI, Medicare, reduced the deep poverty rate from (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, and Medicaid (Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, & 21.3% to 14.7% and 19.5%. On the 2013). Poverty is lowest among non- Scholz, 2011). Overall, antipoverty pro- other hand, TANF, EITC, and SNAP Hispanic whites (9.7%) and Asians gram spending has reflected an in- had very effects, reducing the poverty (11.7%), and highest among blacks creasing focus on elderly and families rate to 28.9%, 28.1% and 28.6%. Hous- (27.2%) and Hispanics (25.6%). Family and individuals, as well as those with ing assistance did reduce the deep structure and composition also play disabilities. While program expendi- poverty rate to 19.7%, and EITC re- important roles. Poverty rates among tures for single-parent families de- duced the percentage of Americans families headed by single women are creased by 20% between 1984 and living at or below 150% of the poverty highest (30.9%), followed by single 2004, spending on the elderly and dis- line from 39.6% to 38.6%, but overall households headed by men (16.4%); abled over the same period increased there was very limited impact. married-couple households have rela- by 12% and 16%, respectively, see Ta- Although social assistance tively low poverty rates, at 6.3%. ble 2 (Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, & Scholz, programs do not necessarilyhave sig- America’s poverty rates are sharply 2011). The U.S. system has also favored nificant effects on poverty rates, they higher than those of many other eco- workers over workers, given the sig- have hadother important impacts on nomically developed OECD countries nificant expansion of EITC alongside poverty in the U.S. The food and nutri- (Gould & Wething, 2012). declining TANF spending. tion programs created and expanded Expenditures of Anti-Poverty Pro- Effects of Anti-Poverty Programs on during the War on Poverty have been grams Poverty successful, in that they have success- Social insurance programs Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, and fully combated food insecurity and have experienced significant growth, Scholz (2011) calculated the effects of hunger, and improved related out- particularly OASI and Medicare anti-poverty programs on poverty; see comes for low-income families (Ziliak, 2011), see Table 1. Expendi- Table 3. According to their study (Hoynes & Schanzenbach, tures on OASI, Medicare, Unemploy- theofficial poverty rate in 2004 would 2011;Waldfogel, 2013). Using the SPM ment Insurance and Disability Insur- have been 29% without government to account for in-kind benefits, re- ance were each more than 100 billion intervention, and would have de- searchers have shown that child pov- dollars in 2009, and with Workers’ creased to 13.5% after accounting for erty in 2010 would have been three Compensation, totaled 1,389 billion. In all anti-poverty programs. The overall percentage points higher if SNAP comparison, spending on social assis- reduction in poverty by these pro- benefits were not counted as income, tance programs totaled only 587 billion grams was about 53% in 2004. The and one additional percentage point in the same year—less than half that rates were 56.7% and 52.3% in 1993 higher if free and reduced price school spent on social insurance programs. and 1984, respectively. There is evi- lunches were not counted (Wimer et Spending on means-tested programs dence that anti-poverty programs have al., 2013). has fluctuated over the last 40 years. had strong effects on reducing deep The EITC has played an im- While AFDC (TANF) spending has poverty, but that the rate of deep pov- portant role in poverty reduction since increased very slightly since its peak in erty has increased over time. For ex- its inception in 1975, and currently is the mid-1970s, with long periods of 0% ample, anti-poverty programs reduced the largest income support program growth, Food Stamps (SNAP), housing deep poverty by 69% [(21.3-6.6)/21.3] for low-income families with children aid, SSI, and EITC expenditures have in 2004, while the rate of deep poverty (Waldfogel, 2013). Using the SPM, re- grown more substantially (Ben-Shalom in that year increased to 6.6%, from searchers estimate that the child pov- et al., 2011). 4.5% in 1984. In measuring150 percent erty rate would have been four per- These antipoverty program of thepoverty line, the reduction effects centage points higher if the EITC were expenditure trends have resulted in a of anti-poverty programs appear not counted as income (Wimer et al., “double redistribution” of wealth in stronger over time, from 26.9% in 1984 2013). Other research has explored the U.S. The first has been from the to 36.1% in 2004. whether, and how, EITC and other tax very poor, to the less poor and near Social assistance programs credits have altered recipients’ behav- poor, likely owed to increased expen- currently have limited effects on pov- ior and circumstances (Athreya, Reilly ditures on SNAP and EITC. The sec- erty in the United States. Once ac- & Simpson, 2010; Guzman et al., 2013;

Lim, Livermore & Davis, 2010). For the deep poverty rate. ures. While the Johnson White House instance, because of regional cost-of- Social Security has been the was notably sensitive to the plight of living variations, EITC recipients in most important tool in alleviating pov- the rural poor, the massive population high-cost areas receive lower benefits erty among the elderly (McGarry, shift from rural areas to urban centers and are more prone to lose eligibility 2013). After the 1964 amendments to gave rise to a public perception that (Fitzpatrick & Thompson, 2010). Over- the SSA significantly increased bene- rural economies were disappearing all, EITC has been shown to improve fits, elderly poverty rates declined and therefore not worth investing in the employment and earnings of work- more sharply than that of other age (Gillette, 2010; Ziliak, 2010). ing-age women, reduce the number of groups, and have continued to fall. The systemic problems that female-headed households receiving The program has meaningfully con- existed in the 1960s continue to cripple cash welfare, and improve children’s tributed to the circumstances of Amer- many Appalachian communities: ex- health and educational outcomes (Dahl ica’s elder poor; in 2008 Social Security cess natural resource extraction by ab- & Lochner, 2012; Marr, Charite & comprised 84% of income for those in sent landowners has poured money Huang, 2013; Meyer & Rosenbaum, the lowest income quartile, and only out of the region, and severely de- 2014). Using the SPM, researchers 20% of income for those in the top graded the environment (APA, 2014; found that the EITC lifted 9.4 million quartile (McGarry, 2013). Burns, 2007; Shapiro, 2010). The grow- people (including 4.9 million children) Medicare has also been suc- ing prevalence of mountaintop coal out of poverty in 2011 (Marr, Charite, cessful in alleviating poverty among mining has also led to significantly & Huang, 2013). the elderly and disabled. Within a dec- worsened health outcomes, higher While researchers provide dif- ade of Medicare’s establishment, low- mortality rates, and higher poverty ferent estimates for the percent of poor income elderly were as likely as high- rates in Appalachian counties reliant households moved out of poverty by income elderly to visit a physician on this form of mining (Hendryx, TANF, a program that provides much (Davis & Schoen, 1978). Medicare also 2011). Fifty years after the War on Pov- more modest benefits, it has certainly hastened the racial desegregation of erty, employment has stagnated in the reduced the depth of poverty over hospitals, which expanded access to ARC region, and many counties suffer time (Waldfogel, 2013). However, the quality healthcare among low-income, high rates of family dissolution, im- decline in TANF caseloads since poli- nonwhite elderly (Swartz, 2013). To- prisonment, and prescription drug cies shifted toward work support in day, however, rising health care costs abuse (Gabriel, 2014). the mid-1990s has arguably under- and gains in life expectancy are plac- There have been some modest mined the program’s supportiveness ing the effectiveness and sustainability gains, however. Research shows that and effectiveness (Bane, 2009). While of Medicare at risk. Medicare Part B poverty rates in central Appalachia many former recipients are earning premiums and long-term care services dropped substantially between 1960 more than the welfare benefits they may become unaffordable for low- and 2000, from 59.4% to 23%, and that previously received, they continue to income elderly, if the program’s ineffi- income growth improved on average live in poverty and have not devel- ciencies and unsustainable financing (Ziliak, 2010). According to James oped the skills or education necessary mechanisms are not addressed Sundquist, a political scientist who to improve their circumstances (Bane, (Swartz, 2013). was involved in formulating War on 2009). Appalachia Poverty legislation, the most effective With respect to social insur- The War on Poverty entailed a programs for the Appalachian region ance programs, the programs have a unique, decades-long campaign in Ap- were those funded by the EOA: loans relatively stronger effect on reducing palachia, where poverty rates in 1960 and grants to poor farmers and small poverty rates than have social assis- were 10 percentage points higher, on business owners in the ARC region tance programs. Medicare and OASI average, than in the rest of the country. (Gillette, 2010). have decreasedthe poverty rate from To date, the Appalachian Regional Discussion 29.0% to 19.9% and 21.0%, respec- Commission is the second longest run- Overall, it seems that the U.S. tively, and deep poverty from 21.3% to ning, and geographically largest, place war on poverty policies and programs 12% and 13.8%, respectively. Although -based regional development program have had quite varied impacts on pov- the DI, UI, and Worker’s Compensa- in the U.S. (Ziliak, 2010). Some reform- erty levels. While social insurance pro- tion programshave only slightly de- ers at the time viewed measures to grams have had significant impacts on creased the overall poverty rate, they address rural poverty as “gestures,” reducing poverty among the elderly have had modest impacts on reducing secondary to urban antipoverty meas-

9 and disabled populations, social assis- & Danziger, 2013). Along with CAP, a larly those that were education-based, tance programs have had negligible number of “national emphasis pro- such as Head Start, were informed by effects on poverty levels. However, in grams” were developed to empower cultural deprivation theory. This the- considering the effects of the war on low-income individuals, families and ory was based on maternal and sen- poverty it is important to consider the communities. These included legal aid sory deprivation experiments, but ulti- historical, social, economic, and cul- programs; job training programs; edu- mately lacked empirical validation tural factors that have shaped the im- cational programs such as Head Start, (Raz, 2013). Rather than considering plementation of antipoverty policies Follow Through, and Upward Bound; alternative forms of support that were and programs in the U.S. The histori- and community-based programs to more salient to rural, working class, cal context of the war on poverty ini- fund and coordinate comprehensive and minority communities (e.g. ex- tially shaped antipoverty programs community health and family plan- tended kinship networks), many war and policies, and since that time, issues ning centers. on poverty policies and programs such as race, gender, economic devel- From the outset of War on aimed to overcompensate for the per- opment, and party politics have fur- Poverty programs’ and policies’ imple- ceived inadequacies and deficiencies of ther contributed to the direction in mentation, strong waves of political poor families, based largely on prevail- which they have moved. While this opposition and backlash undermined ing stereotypes (Fagan, 1995; Huffman, study does not directly analyze the their effectiveness. The regulatory and 2010; Raz, 2013). effects of context, the following section political context of the 1960s was rela- American Values will briefly explore some of these ex- tively inhospitable for an antipoverty In discussing and evaluating ternal issues that have impacted the movement rooted in community-based U.S. anti-poverty programs, it is also effectiveness of antipoverty programs initiatives and the “maximum feasible important to consider the attitudes, and policies over the last 50 years. participation” of the poor (Melish, values, and philosophies that shape While the war on poverty is 2014). City mayors were politically U.S. political platforms. Conflicting often criticized for its limited scope threatened by their lack of control over values have given rise to what David and impact, many historians laud its federally funded programs, and the Ellwood termed “helping conun- lasting legacies. It generated direct public was shaken by the perceived drums” (1988), which are further mag- government involvement in education, aggressiveness of newly empowered nified by regional and political differ- health, labor, and community develop- poor communities. In their quantita- ences. The first conundrum pertains to ment, and enacted antipoverty legislative analysis of the geographic distri- security and work—specifically, the tion that influenced subsequent pro- bution of spending through the EOA conflict between Americans’ desire to grams and policies (Bailey & Danziger, (a program designed to expand partici- support the needy, and their desire to 2013). It also importantly influenced patory engagement and equalize op- encourage self-support. When the gov- the grassroots style of politics that later portunity), Bailey & Duquett (2014) ernment provides financial security, emerged in the early 1970s, when ad- found that political variables had particularly in the form of cash secu- vocates worked to challenge the status played a very minor role in EOA fund- rity, to low-income individuals and quo through community action and ing; the authors believed that this families, and reduces benefits as their representational politics (Rosales, small role of politics partly explains earnings increase, it can reduce finan- 2000). the particularly strong backlash cial pressure and disincentivize work. In this vein, theCommunity against Johnson’s antipoverty pro- A second conflict exists,between sup- Action Program (CAP) was one of the grams, as political factions and lobby porting single parent families and un- most controversial initiatives of the groups were not sufficiently appeased. dermining incentives to marry— war on poverty (Gillette, 2010). To- Conceptual Framework although little empirical evidence sup- ward building self-sufficiency among Johnson’s war on poverty was ports this idea. low-income communities, CAP estab- rooted in certain social and cultural Finally, when the government lished and funded Community Action assumptions that have inherently af- targets the neediest, it is seen to Councils that called for the “maximum fected the long-term relevance and “change the rules,” label these recipi- feasible participation” of the poor. The effectiveness of the policies and pro- ents, and lower their incentives. In iso- program gave rise to a new form of grams it produced (Raz, 2013). Many lating and stigmatizing those in need, accountability—to participants. This of the programs and policies aimed at the U.S. inherently undermines the led to vital and dramatic changes in alleviating poverty among minority social and political support behind anti the U.S. social welfare system (Bailey and working class families, particu- -poverty programs (Ellwood,

1988).Over the last 50 years, the U.S. tributes to Americans’ distrusting re- mists and researchers disagree on the social welfare system has also tended distributive policies and government scale of the problem, it is generally toward paternalism, imposing its con- intervention, and blaming poverty on recognized that reforms will be neces- sumption preferences on the poor (Ben the poor, at higher rates than many sary to correct potential financial -Shalom et al., 2011). In general, the other nationalities (Karabel & Lau- shortfalls (Aaron, 2011; Goda et al., U.S. system is heavily influenced by rison, 2012). 2011; Guzman et al., 2013; Kotlikoff, public perceptions of deservingness, Despite these challenges, 2011). Additionally, there is some re- and has increasingly subsidized the America’s anti-poverty programs are sistance, philosophically, to insurance low-income employed over nonem- ultimately rooted in America’s strong- programs such as social security shift- ployed men and women (Bane et al., est virtues: the desire for fairness, com- ing resources from single to married 2009; Ben-Shalom et al., 2011). It has passion, and a sense of community adults, from those with lower to higher also consistently favored those sub- (Ellwood, 1988). While American val- life expectancies, and from future gen- groups that are perceived as having ues are often thrown into conflict, they erations to current and past ones special needs, and thereby deserving also provide a strong philosophical (Guzman et al., 2013; Kotlikoff, 2011). support and services—for instance, basis for reforming poverty policies to Work Incentives & Disincentives individuals with disabilities, and the support individuals, strengthen fami- As previously discussed, em- elderly. lies, and provide dignity and security bedded in many U.S. anti-poverty pro- Changing social norms have to the poor (Cancian & Danziger, 2009) grams are so-called “cash cliffs” that certainly influenced the direction and Scale and Efficiency families encounter as their earnings scope of antipoverty programs. In par- One of the inherent problems increase, and benefits decrease. These ticular, attitudes about employment with “anti-poverty” programs is the cash cliffs arguably hurt the overall and marriage have evolved since the aforementioned difficulty, and contro- effectiveness of social assistance pro- 1960s. Currently, almost all adults be- versy, involved in defining and meas- grams in this country (Guzman et al., sides the elderly and disabled are uring poverty. As Guzman et al. (2013) 2013; Romich et al., 2007). Childcare widely expected to work, including point out, understanding and identify- costs and health care costs are of spe- parents of young children—however, ing the populations most in need of cial concern to low-income parents, despite an expanding job market, the assistance through social policy is a who worry about becoming ineligible employment rates and inflation- core challenge. Another difficulty is for subsidized daycare and health in- adjusted wages of uneducated workers that of determining and assessing the surance (Romich et al., 2007). have stagnated since 1973 (Cancian & mechanisms through which welfare Another long-debated issue in Danziger, 2009). Family structure has programs affect outcomes—for in- the formulation and implementation of also experienced stark changes, as stance, do School Breakfast and Lunch anti-poverty programs is the concept rates of divorce and out-of-wedlock programs incentivize school atten- of work incentives. Particularly among birth have increased dramatically dance among low-income children, or conservatives, criticism is often framed (Cancian & Danziger, 2009). do its arguable health effects lead stu- as the concept that participation in Party politics also plays an dents to achieve more academically? welfare programs shapes recipients’ important role in shaping public dis- This is a complicated task, as a wide attitudes and behaviors, and that such cussions about poverty. Conservatives range of factors must come into con- programs disincentivize labor force typically value programs that are sideration alongside program logistics. participation. As pointed out by Hoy- transferred through tax credits, and These include family makeup, educa- nes and Schanzenbach (2011), testing programs that incentivize educational tional opportunities, school environ- this idea as it pertains to welfare pro- attainment and labor market participa- ments, and community characteristics grams like TANF and SNAP is very tion. Liberals tend to support social (Bartfield & Kim, 2010). difficult because of their uniformity assistance programs, and feel govern- In financial terms, there are among states. Researchers, therefore, ment should play a more key role in key drawbacks specific to large social cannot analyze significant policy varia- providing equal opportunities and insurance programs. If these programs tions and their disparate outcomes. safety nets for those unable to fairly are not implemented sustainably, their Social insurance programs have also participate in the labor market. Over- sheer scale means that potential insol- fielded similar criticisms. Social Secu- all, Americans harbor strong beliefs in vency might bear important conse- rity, for example, begins to impose an work, autonomy and self-reliance, and quences for the U.S. economy (Aaron, “implicit tax” on workafter fourteen the “primacy of the family.” This con- 2011; Kotlikoff, 2011). Although econo- years of employment. At this point, the

11 value of Social Security taxes begins to Rinehart & Josephson, 2005). rates of socioeconomic mobility are exceed the discounted value of future Inequality & Economic Mobility relatively low. A multi-country study, benefits(Guzman et al., 2009). The In discussing the effectiveness the Cross-National Research on Inter- SSDI program likewise involves a se- of anti-poverty programs, it is impor- generational Transmission of Advan- ries of cash cliffs. In response, certain tant to also look at two related indica- tage (CRITA), assessed levels of eco- states have attempted to employ new tors: inequality and economic mobility. nomic mobility in ten countries policies to offset benefits, but these The programs and policies described (Smeeding et al., 2009). Its findings policies—while encouraging recipients in this article have not yet suitably ad- showed that differences in mobility are to earn slightly more—have not had dressed America’s severe levels of often established at a very early age, significant effects on labor force par- poverty, vast inequalities in wealth and that the U.S. consistently demon- ticipation (Weathers & Hemmeter, distribution, and limited economic mo- strated the strongest relationship be- 2011). bility. While the American people are tween family background and child Role of Discrimination typically attuned to the ways that un- outcomes. Given the wide range it Discrimination continues to bar fettered trade policies aggravate and found among developed countries, this access to education, employment, and sustain economic problems, they often study posits that policies and institu- other opportunities that can empower disregard (or at least fail to suitably tions bear important consequences for individuals and lift them out of pov- address) other factors that help to sus- the magnitude of these early gaps, and erty. Subsequently, discrimination tain cycles of poverty (Kreuger, 2003). later, lower levels of socioeconomic serves to widen inequalities and re- The level of a nation’s economic well- mobility. duce social mobility among the popu- being certainly depends on variables Conclusion lations it affects. In this vein, discrimi- such as policy, culture, social institu- Overall, the American social wel- nation drives a wedge between social tions, and the talents and virtues of its fare system tends to favor in-kind over equality and income equality, and per- people. However, equality and mobil- cash benefits. In turn, it has expanded haps more importantly, prevents the ity are likewise important, and often the scope and reach of its provision of attainment of income equality from the discounted, predictors of economic medical care, food, and tax benefits. start. This occurs because geographic success. Noted economists Torsten These preferences reflect the U.S. sys- isolation, often within portions of ur- Persson and Guido Tabellini have tem’s tendency toward paternalism—it ban areas, forces certain groups into shown that nations with higher rates of imposes its consumption preferences harsh circumstances, while keeping earnings inequality often have lower on the poor and is heavily influenced them removed from the majority, economic growth rates (Persson & Ta- by perceptions of deservingness. The power-wielding population. These bellini, 1995). While poverty inhibits a Americansocial welfare system, often circumstances, which propel a cycle of wide class of people from being pro- categorized as a “liberal” welfare re- injustice, include endemic poverty, ductive and entrepreneurial, seem- gime, is not based on a universal idea. inadequate resources, and high crime ingly guaranteed wealth encourages Instead, aspreviously discussed, it is rates. Researchers have found evidence unproductive, speculative spending. shaped by complex political and social demonstrating the existence of dis- American attitudes toward views that shift over time. Ultimately crimination in access to employment poverty and anti-poverty programs are dominated by the logic of the market, (albeit less discrimination in wage allo- certainly shaped, in part, by the belief however, U.S. welfare and benefits are cation), pervasive discrimination in in U.S. economic mobility. Yet, in the often modest and potentially stigma- rental and housing markets, and wide- United States economic mobility varies tizing. While research has shown that spread discrimination pertaining to according to socioeconomic stratus. In social-democratic welfare regimes credit markets and consumer transac- particular, being raised in deep pov- have the greatest impact on poverty tions (Pager & Shepherd, 2008). erty places poor children at a tremen- reduction, liberal regimes are less ef- Women are also importantly affected dous disadvantage in future endeav- fective than conservative and corpora- by discrimination. Policies and pro- ors. In addition, the “unusually large tist systems, which are largely status- grams often reinforce gendered cul- premiums that American employers based and have modest redistributive tural norms, such as occupational pay for college degrees” certainly mag- effects. goals and behavioral expectations, nifies the importance of family back- In determining whether the War which in turn affect the way that ground and parents’ educational tra- on Poverty was a failure or success, it women conceive of their own roles, jectories (DeParle, 2012). Compared to is important to consider its effects on a abilities, and limitations (Tolleson- other developed countries, America’s

12 number of different groups. Antipov- erty programs and policies have been successful in alleviating poverty among the elderly and disabled, but have failed to alleviate poverty among single mothers and their children. Over one fifth of American children live in single mother families, whose poverty rate is 80% before transfers, and 67% after transfers are accounted for. In light of these dismalstatistics it is perhaps warranted to claim that the U.S. social welfare system, while pro- tecting many vulnerable individuals and families, is failing to sufficiently support the new generation of Ameri- cans.

Table 1: Total Expenditures of Anti-Poverty Programs, 1999-2009

Unit: Billion$ 1999 2009 % Change

Social Insurance

OASI 424 568 34.0

Medicare 270 519 92.2

UI 26 122 369.2

DI 65 121 86.2

Workers Compensation 55 59 7.3

Social Assistance

Medicaid 260 392 50.8

EITC 40 59 47.5

SNAP 23 55 139.1

SSI 39 47 20.5

Housing 36 41 13.9

TANF 29 29 0.0 Source: Ziliak, 2011, Table 1.

Table 2: Average Monthly Expenditures per Family

Monthly Expenditures per Family 1984 1993 2004 % Change

Nonelderly, Nondisabled

Single-parent families 624 623 501 -20

Two-parent families 199 224 322 62

Childless families and individuals 143 164 153 7

Employed families 130 156 210 62

Nonemployed families 693 718 544 -22

Elderly families and individuals 1177 1304 1324 12

Disabled families and individuals 1247 1305 1445 16

Source: Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, &Scholz, 2011, Table 2.

Table 3: Effects of Anti-Poverty Programs on Poverty

% Poor % Deep Poverty 150% Poverty

Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post

2004 29.0 13.5 21.3 6.6 39.6 25.3

1993 30.3 13.1 20.8 4.5 43.7 29.4

1984 32.1 15.3 20.4 4.5 49.7 36.3

Source: Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, &Scholz, 2011, Table 3.

Table 4: Effects of Poverty Reduction, by Programs

Level of Poverty Poor Deep 150%

Pre-Transfer 29.0 21.3 39.6

Effects of the Program

Medicaid 25.2 14.7 35.3

SSI 28.6 19.5 39.3

TANF 28.9 21.0 39.6

EITC 28.1 20.9 38.6

SNAP 28.6 20.8 39.4

Housing 28.4 19.7 39.3

OASI 21.0 13.8 32.3

DI 27.2 18.5 38.4

Medicare 19.9 12 32.7

UI 28.1 20.2 39

Workers Compensation 28.7 21.1 39.3

Source: Ben-Shalom, Moffitt, &Scholz, 2011, Table 5.

Figure 1: Numbers and Rates of Poverty, 1959-2012

Source: DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2013, Figure 4.

Figure 2: Poverty Rates by Age, 1959-2012

Source: DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2013, Figure 5.

References Sage Foundation. care, the great society, and the Aaron, H.J. (2011). Social security re- Chronic Poverty Research Centre aged. In Health and the War considered, National Tax Jour- (2004). The Chronic Poverty Re- on Poverty – A Ten-Year Ap- nal 64 (2), 385-414. port 2004-05 . Manchester: praisal. Burris, T.L. (2014, January). Appala- CPRC/University of Manches- DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & chian cultural consequences ter. Smith, J. C. (2013). U.S. Census from the war on poverty. Re- Cofer, E., Grossman, E., & Clark, F. Bureau, Current Population trieved from apa.org. (1962). Family food plans and Reports, P60-245, Income, Pov- Athreya, K.B., Reilly, D., & Simpson, food costs. U.S. Department of erty, and Health Insurance N.B. (2010). Earned income tax Agriculture, Agricultural Re- Coverage in the United States: credit recipients: Income, mar- search Service. Home Econom- 2012, U.S. Government Print- ginal tax rates, wealth, and ics Research Report No. 20. ing Office, Washington, DC, credit constraints, Economic CRS (2012a). Social security: The mini- 2013. Quarterly 96 (3), 229-258. mum benefit provision. Re- DeParle, J. (2012, January 4). For many Atkinson, A.B. &Marlier, E. (Eds.) trieved from green- poor students, leap to college (2010). Income and Living Con- book.waysandmeans.house.go ends in a hard fall. Retrieved ditions in Europe . Luxembourg: v. from www.nytimes.com. Publications Office of the CRS (2012b). The earned income tax Duclos, J., Araar, A.& Giles, J. (2006). European Union. credit (EITC): An overview. Chronic and transient poverty: Bailey, M.J. &Duquette, N.J. (2014). Retrieved from green- Measurement and estimation How Johnson fought the war book.waysandmeans.house.go with evidence from China, on poverty: The economics v. Institute for the Study of La- and politics of funding at the CRS (2012c). The temporary assistance bor. Discussion Paper No. Office of Economic Opportu- for needy families (TANF) 2078. nity, The Journal of Economic block grant: A primer on Eissa, N. &Hoynes, H. (2011). Redistri- History74 , 351-388. TANF financing and federal bution and tax expenditures: Bane, M.J. (2009).Poverty, policy and requirements. Retrieved from The earned income tax credit, politics.In M. Cancian& S. green- National Tax Journal 64 (2): 689– Danziger (Eds.), Changing Pov- book.waysandmeans.house.go 729. erty, Changing Policies . New v. Ellwood, D. (1988). Values and the York: Russell Sage. CRS (2013). The temporary assistance helping conundrums. In Poor Bartfield, J. & Kim, M. (2010). Partici- for needy families (TANF) Support: Poverty in the American pation in the school breakfast block grant: Responses to fre- Family . New York: Basic program: New evidence from quently asked questions. Re- Books, Inc. the ECLS-K, Social Service Re- trieved from green- Fagan, G.H. (1995). Culture, politics, view 84 (4), 541-562. book.waysandmeans.house.go and Irish school dropouts: Ben-Shalom, Y., Moffitt, R. &Scholz, v. Constructing political identi- J.K. (2011). An assessment of Dahl, G. &Lochner, L. (2012). The im- ties. Westport, CT: Bergin and the effectiveness of anti- pact of family income on child Garvey. poverty programs in the achievement: Evidence from Fisher, G.M. (1992). Poverty guidelines United States, In P. Jefferson the earned income tax credit, for 1992, Social Security Bulle- (Ed.) Oxford Handbook of Eco- American Economic Review, tin , 55 (1): 46. nomics of Poverty . Oxford, U.K.: 1927-1956. Fitzpatrick, K. & Thompson, J.P. Oxford University Press. Danziger, S.H.,Schoeni, R.F., & Blank, (2010). The interaction of met- Burns, S. S. (2007). Bringing Down the R.M. (2008). Working and Poor: ropolitan cost-of-living and Mountains. Morgantown: West How Economic and Policy the federal earned income tax Virginia University Press. Changes Are Affecting Low- credit: One size fits Cancian, M. &Danziger, S.H. (2009). Wage Workers . New York: Rus- all?, National Tax Journal 63 (3), Changing Poverty, Changing sell Sage. 419-445. Policies . New York: Russell Gabriel, T. (2014, April 20). 50 years Davis, K. & Schoen, C. (1978). Medi- into the war on poverty, hard-

ship hits back. Retrieved from Lyndon B. Johnson Library. Russell Sage. www.nytimes.com. Retrieved from: http:// Melish, T. (2014). Maximum feasible Gillette, M.L. (2010). Launching the War www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/ participation of the poor: New on Poverty: An Oral History . johnson/archives.hom/ governance, new accountabil- New York: Oxford University speeches.hom/640108.asp ity, and a 21 st century war on Press. Karabel, J. &Laurison, D. (2012). An the sources of poverty. Yale Goda, G.S.,Shoven, J.B., &Slavov, S.N. exceptional nation?American Human Rights and Development (2011). How well are social political values in comparative Journal 13 (1), 1-134. security recipients protected perspective. Working Paper Meyer, B.D. & Rosenbaum, D.T. (2014). from inflation?, National Tax for Institute for Research on Welfare, the earned income tax Journal 64 (2), 429-449. Labor and Employment at UC credit, and the labor supply of Gould, E. &Wething, H. (2012). U.S. Berkeley. single mothers, Quarterly Jour- poverty rates higher, safety net Kotlikoff, L.J. (2011). Fixing social se- nal of Economics 116(3): 1063- weaker than in peer countries, curity: What would Bismarck 2014. Economic Policy Institute Is- do?, National Tax Journal 64( 2), Nolan, B. and C. T. Whelan (2010). Us- sue Brief 339. 415-428. ing non-monetary deprivation Guzman, T., Pirog, M.A.,&Seefeldt, K. Krueger, A.B. (2007). Inequality, too indicators to analyse poverty (2013). Social policy: What much of a good thing. In and social exclusion: Lessons have we learned?, Policy Studies Grusky&Szelenyi (Eds.), Ine- from Europe?, Journal of Policy Journal 41 , 53-70. quality Reader: Contemporary Analysis andManagement29 (2), Haskins, R. & Rouse, C.E. (2013). Time and Foundational Readings in 305-325. for change: A new federal Race, Class, and Gender. Cam- Orshansky, M. (1988). Counting the strategy to prepare disadvan- bridge, MA: Westview Press. poor: Another look at the pov- taged students for college, Lanjouw, P., Milanovic, B. erty profile, Social Security Bul- Princeton-Brookings Policy &Paternostro, S. (2009). Econo- letin , 51 (10), 25-51. Brief. mies of scale and poverty: The Pager, D. & Shepherd, H. (2008). The Hendryx, M. (2011). Poverty and mor- impact of relative price shifts sociology of discrimination: tality disparities in central Ap- during economic transition. Racial discrimination in em- palachia: Mountaintop mining Report for the World Bank. ployment, housing, credit, and and environmental justice, Lim, Y., Livermore, M., & Davis, B. C. consumer markets, Annual Journal of Health Disparities Re- (2010). Material hardship Review of Sociology 34 , 181-209. search and Practice 4 (3), 44-53. among banked and unbanked Persson, T. & and Tabellini, G. (1995). Hoynes, Hilary Williamson, and Diane EITC-eligible families. Journal Is inequality harmful for Whitmore Schanzenbach. of Poverty, 14 (3), 266–284. growth? American Economic 2011. “Work Incentives and Logan, T.D. (2008). Economies of scale Review 84 . the Food Stamp Program.” in the household: Puzzles and Raz, M. (2013). What’s Wrong with the Journal of Public Economics 96 (1 patterns from the American Poor? Psychiatry, Race, and the –2): 151–62. past. Working Paper 13869. War on Poverty. Chapel Hill: Huffman, T. (2010). Theoretical per- Cambridge, MA: National Bu- UNC Press. spectives on American Indian reau of Economic Research. Romich, J., Simmelink, J. & Holt, S. education: Taking a new look Marr, C., Charite, J. & Huang, C. (2013, (2007). When working harder at academic success and the April 9). Earned income tax does not pay: Low-income achievement gap. credit promotes work, encour- working families, tax liabili- Hutto, Nathan, Jane Waldfogel, Neera- ages children’s success at ties, and benefit reductions, jKaushal, and Irv Garfinkel school, research finds, Center Families in Society 88 (3), 418- (2011). Improving themeasure- on Budget and Policy Priori- 426. ment of poverty, Social Service ties. Rosales, R. (2000). The Illusion of Inclu- Review 35 (1): 39-74. McGarry, K. (2013). The safety net for sion: The Untold Political Story Johnson, L.B. (1964, January 8). Annual the elderly, In M. Bailey & S. of San Antonio, Texas. Texas: Message to Congress on the Danziger (Eds.) Legacies of the University of Texas Press. State of the Union.Austin, TX: War on Poverty . New York: Shapiro, T. (2010). Mountain justice:

Homegrown resistance to moun- Washington, D. C.: U.S. Gov- taintop removal for the future of ernment Printing Office. us all. Oakland, CA: AK Press. UnicefInnocenti Centre (2010). Chil- Short, K. (2012). The research: Supple- dren left behind: A league ta- mental poverty measure 2011, ble of inequality in child well- Current Population Reports . US being in the worlds’ rich coun- Census Bureau, 1-20. tries, Innocenti Centre Report Smeeding, T.M., Wing, C., & Robson, Card 9 . Florence, Italy. K. (2009). Differences in social Waldfogel, J. (2013). The social safsety transfer support and poverty net for families with children, for immigrant families with In M. Bailey & S. Danziger children: Lessons from the LIS. (Eds.) Legacies of the War on In E. Grigorenko and R. Ta- Poverty . New York: Russell kanishi (Eds.), Immigration, Sage. diversity, and education . New Weathers, R.R. &Hemmeter, J. (2011). York: Routledge. The impact of changing finan- Social Security Administration. (n.d.). cial work incentives on the 2014 social security changes. earnings of social security dis- Retrieved from ssa.gov. ability insurance (SSD() benefi- Stern, M. J &Axinn, J. (2012). Social Wel- ciaries, Journal of Policy Analy- fare: A History of the American sis and Management 30 (4), 708- Response to Need (8th ed.). New 728. York: Pearson. Wimer, C., Fox, L., Garfinkel, I., Swartz, K. (2013). The war on pov- Kaushal, N. &Waldfogel, J. erty’s effects on health care use (2013). Trends in poverty with of the elderly, In M. Bailey & an anchored supplemental S. Danziger (Eds.) Legacies of poverty measure.CPRC Work- the War on Poverty . New York: ing Paper No. 13-01. Russell Sage. Ziliak, J.P. (2010). Alternative poverty Tolleson-Rinehart & Josephson (2005). measures and the geographic Gender and American Politics: distribution of poverty in the Women, Men, and the Political United States. Report prepared Process. Armonk, NY: M.E. for the Office of the Assistant Sharpe. Secretary for Planning and Trattner, W. I. (1999). From Poor Law to Evaluation, U.S. Department Welfare State (6th ed.). New of Health and Human Ser- York: Free Press. vices. Trisi, D. &Pavetti, L. (2012, March 13). Ziliak, J. (2011). Recent developments TANF weakening as a safety in antipoverty policies in the net for poor families, Center United States, Institute for Re- on Budget and Policy Priori- search on Poverty Discussion Pa- ties. per No. 1396-11. U.S. Census Bureau (2012).Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States, 2011, Current Population Re- ports , 60-243. U.S. House of Representatives, Com- mittee on Ways and Means (2013). Overview of Entitlement Programs.2012 Green Book .

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey School of Social Work 390 George Street, Room 503 New Brunswick, NJ 08901 848-932-5383, ext. 25383 socialwork.rutgers.edu/huamin