The Colorado Half in Ten campaign is leading community meetings throughout the state—from Grand Junction to Alamosa to Boulder—to compile personal stories and solutions from those directly affected by poverty. It plans to then share the compiled information with the Economic Opportunity and Poverty Reduction Task Force, a body of the state legislature charged with cutting poverty in Colorado in half over the next decade. You can read stories and solutions from Colorado Half in Ten’s meetings on the Economic Opportunity Poverty Reduction Task Force blog.

Colorado has also doubled its individual Half in Ten supporters and expanded organizational endorsers to include homeless advocates, faith leaders, job training sites, and others directly working with ending poverty.

More than 31 million children benefit from the national school lunch program, 62 percent of whom receive free or reduced-price meals. But only one in six of these kids will receive a similarly subsidized summer meal during the summer months. This column outlines specific policy solutions to address the “summer hunger gap” as Congress considers the Child Nutrition bill.

The full article could be read here.

What is the Earned Income Tax Credit and why does it matter?

The Earned Income Tax Credit is one of the single most important ways to make work pay. The EITC is a refundable federal income tax credit for low-wage working individuals and families. Refundable means that if a worker’s credit exceeds the amount of taxes owed, they can receive the difference in the form of a tax refund. Congress originally approved this program in 1975 in part to offset the burden of payroll taxes and to provide an incentive to work. Today, the EITC remains essential to promote economic security and allow low-income workers maintain a decent standard of living.

The EITC is a public policy that reflects basic values—at its core is the belief that individuals who work full time at minimum wage simply should not be forced to raise families below the poverty line. The EITC helps these Americans earn a sufficient amount so that work pays more than welfare. Parents who earn $10,000 to $20,000 each year are eligible under EITC for the highest credit, and the credit amount decreases as annual earnings increase.

Download this fact sheet (pdf)

How was the EITC improved in 2009?

Congress improved the EITC last year so that it would work better for low-income families with three or more children. Before the change, EITC provided the same amount to families with three or more children as it did to families with fewer children, putting larger low-income families at a greater risk of falling into poverty.

Congress’s critical 2009 EITC improvements changed EITC eligibility so that families with three or more children can receive up to $600 more annually. This important public policy reform better accounts for the increased costs of raising a larger family and helps to make sure that work pays more than welfare for hard-working, low-wage families of all sizes. These reforms also lessened the so-called “marriage penalty,” which had previously unfairly penalized low-income workers because it meant that two low-income workers who married could lose some or all of their EITC benefits. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, together, these two improvements helped over 7 million people, and kept 3 million people out of poverty.

The 2009 EITC changes helped to bring this important public policy more in line with basic values by making work pay and allowing hard-working individuals and families to stay out of poverty.

Congressional action needed

The 2009 changes to the Earned Income Tax Credit are set to expire at the end of 2010. Eligibility for this program will revert to the pre-2009 status quo if Congress does not act to make these improvements permanent. This would mean an increase in the “marriage penalty” and a decrease in eligibility for a number of low-income working parents. Low income working families with three or more children would be among the hardest hit.

Ensuring that hard work pays off is a vital step toward strengthening our families, our economy, and our country. Congress needs to make the current provisions of the EITC permanent to make work pay for low- and moderate-income workers and families.

Download this fact sheet (pdf)

What is the Child Tax Credit and why does it matter?

The Child Tax Credit is one of the most important ways to protect families’ economic security. The CTC gives working parents additional funds to help them cope with the rising costs of maintaining a household and raising their children. Depending on the family’s earnings, the CTC allows families to claim up to $1,000 for each child. It represents an essential way to help families achieve and maintain their basic quality of life.

Yet the CTC’s effectiveness depends a great deal on how the credit is structured. The credit was not able to meet its full potential in the past because program rules often denied low-income families the full benefits of the credit. In fact, annual earnings below $13,000 were not considered in calculating tax credit, denying the credit to those who needed it most. Congress made sensible reforms to the CTC last year that allow families to count their yearly earnings below $13,000, but these changes are temporary and are scheduled to expire at the end of 2010.

An end of these improvements would be devastating for low-wage families across America. A parent who works full time in a minimum wage position will have his or her credit reduced from $1,800 to $320 at the end of 2010 if Congress does not make the change permanent. This reduction would seriously threaten the ability of low-income, hard-working families to maintain their economic security and self-sufficiency. And it would push 600,000 children of working families into poverty.

Download this fact sheet (pdf).

The Child Tax Credit in action: Meet the Smiths

The Smith family has two parents, two children, and combined yearly earnings of $14,050. The Smiths would not be able to count any of their earned income below $13,000 in calculating their additional child tax credit if not for last year’s improvements. Their pre-2010 credit would have equaled 15 percent of their income above $13,000, or $157.50. The 2010 improvement makes the credit 15 percent of their income above $3,000 up to $1,000 per child, or $1,657.50. If Congress allows the income level to rise back up to $13,000, the Smiths’ credit will drop back down from $1,657.50 to $157.50 next year.

Congressional action needed

Congress must improve and preserve the Child Tax Credit. Congress should at minimum act to permanently extend the improvements to the CTC made last year in the Recovery Act. There is considerable room for additional federal leadership through extensions of the Child Tax Credit to help low-income working families even more by counting all of a family’s earnings toward the 15 percent credit. There is no justification for failing to count a minimum wage earner’s first $3,000 in pay. What is essential above all is that we continue to progress rather than regress by allowing the current provisions of the CTC to expire at the end of the year.

A strong economy depends on having strong families who can achieve economic security through their hard work. Continuation of the CTC improvements is a vital step toward helping families support themselves. We need to take action to extend and expand smart public policies that reflect and respond to modern economic realities.

Download this fact sheet (pdf).

A national dialogue is developing around America’s relationship with food. As it moves forward, there is a need to recognize that far too many low-income children simply do not have enough nutritious food to eat. More than 16 million of them live in food insecure households. This threatens the health and well-being of children and generally places great strain on their families.

The Obama administration, with the leadership of Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, has made a commitment to address the problem while Congress is in the process of reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act. These circumstances provide a genuine opportunity for meaningful change. Charitable efforts and other policies aimed at reducing poverty also play an important role in finally achieving the goal of ending childhood hunger in America. This event will mark the release of a new Half In Ten/CAP paper, “Feeding Opportunity: Ending Child Hunger Furthers the Goal of Cutting U.S. Poverty in Half Over the Next Decade.”

Introduction by:
Winnie Stachelberg, Senior Vice President of External Affairs, Center for American Progress

Keynote Speaker:
Secretary Tom Vilsack, Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture

Featured Panelists:
Joel Berg, Executive Director, New York City Coalition Against Hunger
Tianna Gaines, Parent Advocate, Witnesses to Hunger
Michelle Gilliard, Senior Director, Walmart Foundation
Jim Weill, President, Food Research and Action Center

Moderated by:
Joy Moses, Senior Policy Analyst, Center for American Progress

View the slides presented by Terry Schooley and Mari Brennan Barrera at the May 14 briefing.

Peter Beard, the Senior Vice President for Impact Priorities for United Way Worldwide, described anti-poverty work in the philanthropic sector and explained United Way’s focus on three critical goal areas: education, financial stability, and health. This emphasis allows the organization to adopt a systemic perspective and develop innovative ways to fix leakages in the system itself. Beard explained that United Way both analyzes the big picture and works on the ground to provide funding and support to communities in ways that engage all of its members. A community-based strategy better serves individuals across the economic spectrum, from those who are already in a state of poverty to those who are in danger of falling below the poverty line. Within a community, it is essential to help individuals connect to resources and obtain the benefits to which they are entitled. By pairing community-based action with bold imperatives and goals to reduce poverty, such as the “Challenge to America,” United Way increases awareness of what is at stake, helps individuals and families, and motivates coalition partners to join them in the anti-poverty fight.

Mari Brennan Barrera of the Eos Foundation of Massachusetts stressed how the nonprofit community can make a difference in the fight against poverty. Specifically, the Eos Foundation invests in children’s futures and supports nonprofit organizations, public policies and systemic solutions aimed at nourishing children’s bodies, nurturing their minds, and building families’ economic security. Eos believes that investments in these program areas must have both a short-term and a long-term impact. Barrera underscored the importance of both investing in direct services and working to reform and enhance public policy in order to create real change in larger societal systems. To this end, the Foundation has created Boston Rising: A Fund to Fight Poverty, a cause which is particularly important in light of the fact that Massachusetts has the largest rich-poor gap for quality of life for any state in the United States. Boston Rising engages members of the community to lift individuals, families, and neighborhoods out of poverty.

Eos’ experiences in Boston neighborhoods underscore that a major issue is a gap in support for working families as they emerge from poverty, known as the “cliff effect.” The “cliff effect” refers to the abrupt end of benefits for workers once they reach a relatively low threshold level of earnings, which leaves working families with a gap in support as they seek to lift their families out of poverty. Since benefits end abruptly rather than tapering off, workers are counterproductively punished for their workplace success as they suddenly find themselves without much-needed childcare or other benefits. To address this pressing problem, the philanthropic and governmental sectors need to work together to remove barriers for families seeking to move out of poverty.

Delaware State Representative (DE-23) Terry Schooley exemplifies the progress that can be made when members of the government incorporate the voices of the nonprofit sector and commit to the anti-poverty cause. As a member of the Child Poverty Task Force in Delaware, she has helped to develop a ten year plan to reduce child poverty by 50%. Her efforts rely on building a very broad based coalition, including the Chamber of Commerce, so that a full spectrum of community voices can support anti-poverty efforts. In particular, Schooley explained the importance of incorporating public input alongside knowledge from the nonprofit sector to fully appreciate the lived experiences of those who struggle with poverty. As conversations develop around poverty issues, one critical voice that is all too often missing is that of legislators themselves. To determine and act on critical next steps in the fight against poverty, members of government must be a consistent part of any dialogue. In particular, government can fight for a better definition of poverty and develop strategies to combat the “cliff effect” which hurts so many working families. Schooley’s experiences reveal that state governments can make a meaningful difference for families and children and also emphasize the need for more funding and support at both a state and a federal level to continue to progress, especially in light of the recent economic downturn.

The Half in Ten Campaign’s briefing offered a unique chance to learn about the tremendous anti-poverty efforts currently occurring within the philanthropic, nonprofit, and governmental sectors as it simultaneously drew attention to the ways that combating poverty is a national challenge that requires greater federal support and action. As the economy begins to recover from the Great Recession, it is more important than ever that our federal government address the reality of poverty in America. Even if it is tempting in the short term to cut programs, the long-term success of workers, communities, and entire regions depends on public policy changes that effectively combat poverty. Innovative practices developed in the field point the way towards the greatest successes to date and also highlight where support is most needed to continue to make progress for the future.

View the slides presented by Terry Schooley and Mari Brennan Barrera at the May 14 briefing.

Read the full report (pdf)

Download the executive summary (pdf)

Download to mobile devices and e-readers from Scribd

Event: Ending Childhood Hunger in America

Child Hunger by the Numbers

Even before the worst of the current economic downturn, child hunger was a serious problem in the United States. In 2008, 16.6 million American children—more than one in five—lived in homes that couldn’t afford enough food for their families. The Great Recession has only made matters worse.

Child hunger in the world’s wealthiest nation is not only morally unacceptable, but it costs the U.S. economy at least $28 billion per year because poorly nourished children perform less well in school and require far more long-term health care spending. Further, food insufficiency severely hampers children’s emotional, intellectual, and physical development, and it strongly hinders the upward mobility of their parents.

President Barack Obama and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, have set a national goal of ending childhood hunger by 2015. Reaching this goal is critical to cutting poverty in half in 10 years, which is the primary aim of the Half In Ten Campaign, a partnership among the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the Coalition on Human Needs, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Poverty and hunger are interrelated problems, and the steps we take to eradicate child hunger will ultimately lay a solid foundation for realizing the ambitious but achievable poverty reduction target. Likewise, limiting poverty will reduce hunger and make it far less expensive for the nation to end hunger entirely.

CAP’s recent paper, “Doing What Works to End U.S. Hunger: Federal Programs Are Effective, but Can Work Even Better,” pointed out that due to $21 billion in additional antihunger spending that was included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009—the federal stimulus—there is significantly less hunger and food insecurity in America today than there otherwise would have been. Most of this spending went to the SNAP-Food Stamps Program. Since nearly half of all SNAP-Food Stamp recipients are children, one step necessary in reaching the 2015 goal would be to preserve nutrition policies that proved so successful in the Recovery Act.

But we can also build on the success of these provisions. All major federal child nutrition programs are set to be reauthorized by Congress this year by a bill usually referred to as the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act—the Senate version of which is now named, somewhat optimistically, the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. This bill provides one of the most effective vehicles to reach the 2015 hunger elimination goal and help the nation achieve First Lady Michelle Obama’s goal of dramatically reducing obesity in America.

This paper will discuss child hunger in America, how it functions as both a cause and effect of poverty, and the significant policy reforms Congress can take this year in the child nutrition programs to make a significant down payment on ending child hunger and fighting poverty. The paper argues that to end child hunger federal child nutrition programs will need at least an additional $4 billion each year, and the nation will also have to strengthen other income and work support programs to tackle the root cause of hunger: not having enough income to purchase nutritious food for your family.

President Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget proposal includes $1 billion extra per year for 10 years for the child nutrition bill as a serious down payment on ending child hunger. Congress must invest at least as much as the president’s request in the child nutrition bill to make significant progress, and it will need to undertake other efforts to create jobs and enhance work supports for low-income families.

The paper further argues that to end child hunger by 2015 the government must not only spend more money but make child nutrition programs even smarter through:

• Reducing paperwork and bureaucracy. An estimated $1 billion in tax dollars at the federal, state, and school district levels is spent each year solely on collecting and submitting required forms and daily meal counts for the school meals program (free, reduced-price, and full-price lunch and breakfast). Cutting this paperwork and simplifying applications could save a vast amount of money. And if the money saved were to be pumped back into feeding more children and making meals healthier that would help achieve both the hunger and obesity reduction goals.
• Expanding access to school breakfasts. I have previously argued that universal meals should be provided to all students. But policymakers’ concerns about the federal budget may delay such a goal. During this current reauthorization process, therefore, Congress should at a minimum make it a national priority to provide free, universal, nutritious breakfast to every student in a Title I school, which are those schools with the highest concentrations of poverty in the country. This would eliminate the costs and stigma associated with unnecessary paperwork for these programs and provide each child the opportunity to begin each school day with the fuel needed for effective learning.
• Improve and expand access to other meal programs. Children are in school 180 class days out of a 365-day year, and if every student received a nutritious school breakfast and lunch every day that would still equal only about 360 meals out of the 1,095 a child needs to eat each year. We must ensure that more children participate in summer meals, after-school meals, and supper programs so that they get the food they need.
• Rewarding states for improved performance in reducing child hunger, USDA should be authorized and funded to provide cash grants to governors to support innovative and effective state efforts such as reducing paperwork in the SNAPFood Stamp program, serving breakfasts in first period classrooms, or reducing the poverty that causes hunger.

These steps will also have the added benefit of reducing child obesity if they are implemented appropriately with an eye toward making available meals healthier. Ultimately, this would improve children’s quality of life throughout their lifetime while also decreasing the amount of money the nation spends on health care and other costs. Taking simple and cost-effective measures could end child hunger in America, and they would be an important down payment toward the Half in Ten Campaign’s goal of cutting U.S. poverty in half within a decade.

Read the full report (pdf)

Download the executive summary (pdf)

Download to mobile devices and e-readers from Scribd

Event: Ending Childhood Hunger in America

Child Hunger by the Numbers

At this event, Delaware State Representative Terry Schooley (DE-23) will share some of the best practices that have developed in Delaware’s poverty commission as an example of how state government can play a role in fighting poverty. Andrea Silbert, the president of Massachusetts’ Eos Foundation, will offer a glimpse into the work of the nonprofit sector in supporting children and families. Stacey Stewart, the executive vice president at United Way Worldwide, will explore the impact of the philanthropic sector in shaping a global response to poverty.

Date: May 14, 2010

Time: 11:00 AM -12:30 PM

Room: Congressional Meeting Room SOUTH (CVC 217)

Speakers

Terry Schooley, Delaware State Representative (DE-23)

Andrea Silbert, President, Eos Foundation of Massachusetts

Stacey D. Stewart, Executive Vice President at United Way Worldwide, Center for Community Leadership and Community Impact Leadership

Please RSVP to asolow-niederman@americanprogress.org.

Listen to a podcast featuring anti-poverty experts Beth Mattingly, Elizabeth Kneebone, and Daniel Dodd, as well as Half in Ten Campaign Manager Melissa Boteach.

View the slides presented by Beth Mattingly, Elizabeth Kneebone, and Daniel Dodd at the April 9 briefing.

Beth Mattingly of the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey Institute, whose research focuses on the well-being of women, children, and families, revealed on the rural face of poverty. Mattingly explained that the need for transportation and child care present major challenges for many rural workers and families. In fact, rural poor families spend as much as a third of their income on child care. When child care costs are coupled with the expense of maintaining a car in communities that lack public transportation, many low-wage jobs simply do not provide adequate pay.

Elizabeth Kneebone, the senior research analyst for the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program, also emphasized the importance of transportation in developing solutions to suburban poverty. The number of suburban poor is growing at an alarming rate: since 2002, there has been about a 25% increase in the number of suburban poor, a figure which outpaces national growth as well as the increase in any other type of community. To combat the growing issue of suburban poverty, Kneebone stressed the need for innovative policy that considers the issues of transit, housing, and job creation. It is imperative to think about where and how people actually live and work so that policy makers can develop regional policy solutions that assist individuals, families, and the community as a whole.

Daniel Dodd of Step Up Savannah, who pioneered a program to reduce poverty in the urban setting of Savannah, Georgia, also addressed the need for long-term, big-picture solutions to fight poverty in ways that involve the broader community. Dodd explained how he has made significant progress by framing poverty as an economic issue and thereby involving organizations, corporations, and business interests in anti-poverty efforts. In Dodd’s own words, “Poverty is a business issue as much as it is a human issue.” Especially in urban communities, doing what’s right may depend on making it clear to all members of the community that fighting poverty is in their own best interests.

The Half in Ten Campaign’s briefing revealed that combating poverty is a national challenge and that greater recognition of the unique characteristics of each region is needed to develop anti-poverty policy solutions. Fighting poverty across rural, suburban, and urban districts requires federal leadership to pave the way for dynamic, innovative, place-based strategies that allow for economic recovery and opportunity for residents of every type of community.

Listen to a podcast featuring anti-poverty experts Beth Mattingly, Elizabeth Kneebone, and Daniel Dodd, as well as Half in Ten Campaign Manager Melissa Boteach.

View the slides presented by Beth Mattingly, Elizabeth Kneebone, and Daniel Dodd at the April 9 briefing.

The Half in Ten campaign’s briefing “Strategies to Tackle Poverty in Your State and District: Rural, Suburban, and Urban Solutions,” will focus on place-based solutions to cut poverty and promote economic opportunity. This is the second briefing in the series, “Restoring Economic Opportunity: The Need for a Recovery that Cuts Poverty in Half in Ten Years,”
At this event, Step Up Savannah Executive Director Daniel Dodd will offer best practices in fighting poverty in urban areas, using his experiences in Savannah, Georgia as an example of how government can work with different sectors to help families achieve self-sufficiency. Beth Mattingly of The Carsey Institute will address the specific needs of low-income families in rural communities. And the Brookings Institution’s Elizabeth Kneebone will address the growing issue of suburban poverty and economic insecurity.

Date: April 9, 2010

Time: 11:00 AM -12:30 PM

Room: To Be Determined.

Speakers

Daniel Dodd, Executive Director, Step Up Savannah, Inc., a collaborative of organizations, businesses, and government agencies that seek to move families toward economic self sufficiency.

Beth Mattingly, Director of Research on Vulnerable Families, The Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire

Elizabeth Kneebone, Senior Research Analyst, Metropolitan Policy Program, The Brookings Institution

Moderated by Deborah Weinstein, Executive Director of the Coalition on Human Needs and Half in Ten partner

Please RSVP to lpereyra@americanprogress.org.

And save the date for the next briefing, which will be held on May 14th.

The Joint Religious Legislative Coalition just last week held a Day on the Hill at the Minnesota state capitol, where more than 1,000 activists learned about the Half in Ten campaign and advocated on state and federal issues to reduce poverty.

Nancy Maeker, the executive director of A Minnesota Without Poverty, keynoted three Bread for the World workshop events in late February, helping to gather more than 200 letters in support of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit.

And A Minnesota Without Poverty also hosted a statewide gathering in late February on five sites to report on the progress toward ending poverty and to issue a call to action. Affirmative Options Coalition and Joint Religious Legislative Coalition were two of the co-sponsors for the event which drew more than 400 people in St. Paul, Duluth, Moorhead, Willmar, and Rochester, with additional supporters joining the webcast program online. The call to action highlighted coordinating the Minnesota legislative agenda with the Half in Ten issues and encouraged advocates to support the Half in Ten campaign. After the formal program, all participants gathered around tables for discussion, letter writing, phone calling—and food.

You can view photos and an introductory video from the gathering on Facebook.

The Minnesota coalition will continue its work over the coming months and focus on priorities such as:

• Building more partner relationships, especially with organizations involving low-income people
• Developing a comprehensive communications plan to engage all sectors of society in fighting poverty and build the public will to act
• Organizing a presence at candidate forums to hear from those seeking elected office what they hope to do on poverty
• Collecting stories from diverse populations, including stories from people experiencing poverty and other sectors of society
• Participating in the Minnesota State Fair to educate attendees about specific issues relating to Minnesota and Half in Ten and to focus on the election process

Those attending the meeting included representatives from a wide and diverse group: service providers who run food and shelter programs, employment specialists, mental health counselors, economic justice activists, and faith leaders. They agreed to focus on three main concerns:

• Incorporating current actions and advocacy efforts into a broader campaign to cut poverty in half in Colorado during the next decade
• Developing a plan to reach even more community leaders with the coalition’s antipoverty message
• Reframing poverty by talking about how many issues intersect, including hunger, home foreclosure, faith, child care, education, and jobs

The coalition will soon begin to conduct an online and social media marketing campaign around raising awareness of the Half in 10 work in Colorado.
To get involved, email bridget@9to5.org.

As we develop policies to promote economic recovery and create jobs, it is essential that we recognize the hard truth about poverty in so many of our nation’s communities.  That is why I hope you can attend the first in the Half in Ten campaign’s briefing series, “Restoring Economic Opportunity: The Need for a Recovery that Cuts Poverty in Half in Ten Years”

The first briefing in the series is entitled “The Starting Line: Poverty and Economic Opportunity Before, During, and After the Recession.” At the briefing, Center for American Progress Action Fund economist Heather Boushey will discuss how the recession has brought economic hardship to many American families, the labor market problems underscoring this hardship, and policy solutions to help jumpstart job creation. She will be joined by Dr. Deborah A. Frank of Boston Medical Center’s Grow Clinic for Children, who will describe the long-term health effects on children of growing up with hunger and poverty and federal programs that can help in mitigating some of these effects. Finally, Kelly Dolberry, a resident of DC’s Park Road Family Shelter, will discuss how the recession has affected her family.

Date: March 12, 2010

Time: 11:00 AM -12:30 PM

Room: Capitol Visitors Center, Room HVC-200, Washington DC

Heather Boushey, Senior Economist, Center for American Progress Action Fund

Kelly Dolberry, Resident, Park Road Family Shelter

Dr. Deborah A. Frank, Director, Boston Medical Center’s Grow Clinic for Children

Moderated by Wade Henderson, President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and Half in Ten partner.

Please RSVP to lpereyra@americanprogress.org.

And save the date for the next briefing in our series, which will be held on April 9!

Here’s a closer look at how the president’s budget request matches up with Half in Ten’s principles.

Promoting decent work

The president rightly places a high priority on job creation in this budget, allocating nearly $100 billion to strategies that get Americans back to work in sectors such as clean energy, infrastructure, and small business. The president also includes funding for strategies that will help tackle the disproportionate unemployment rates and related hardships in low-income communities.

Double-digit unemployment rates and projections of a slow recovery in the labor market, however, underscore the need for a jobs package of a larger scale and scope. Similarly, disproportionate jobless rates among low-income and minority communities call for a more targeted approach to job creation. Temporary spending to spur job growth today will lay the ground for longer-term economic prosperity and deficit reduction.

That being said, there is much to like about the president’s jobs agenda. He invests in strategies to directly create jobs for vulnerable populations, providing helpful funding for transitional jobs and increased funding for youth employment programs. The budget also makes a considerable investment in Workforce Investment Act policies designed to help low- and moderate-income Americans prepare for decent-wage jobs in high-growth fields in the future.

The budget embraces extended use of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Emergency Fund as well, calling for an additional $2.5 billion in fiscal year 2011. This policy represents an incredibly efficient way to create jobs directly because it can be used to fully reimburse states for creating subsidized employment opportunities for low-income families.

The president should also be applauded for requesting a $244 million boost in funding for national service programs, a policy that will offer opportunities for youth to enter the labor market and will provide needed volunteers to nonprofit organizations struggling to respond to growing need with shrinking resources.

Finally, the president’s budget proposes to save hundreds of thousands of jobs through aid to states and extensions of unemployment and health benefits. The budget includes approximately $25 billion for state fiscal relief—specifically for helping states with their Medicaid costs. This funding preserves decent-wage, public-sector jobs and prevents cuts in critical services that are helping vulnerable populations weather this recession. The budget also includes provisions for extended unemployment benefits and health subsidies for jobless workers. This investment both prevents jobless workers from slipping into poverty and puts money in the hands of people most likely to spend it, thereby boosting economic demand and creating and saving jobs in the private sector.

Half in Ten praises the president’s emphasis on job creation and his inclusion of policies to foster employment in low-income communities. We urge Congress to pass a budget resolution that builds on these commitments with additional investments in aid to states and direct job creation as well as targeting funds to ensure that people in communities hit hardest in the recession have the opportunity to access some of the jobs created in the clean-energy, infrastructure, and small business sectors.

Ensuring economic security

The president’s budget invests in creating jobs while recognizing that Americans should be able to live with dignity when they cannot work or work is unavailable, unstable, or pays too little to make ends meet. This commitment is evident by the fact that the president’s budget makes room for important investments in income and work supports in the context of an overall discretionary spending freeze.

One of the most important initiatives of the president’s budget for working families is that he asks Congress to make permanent the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s improvements to the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. Making these provisions permanent provides a three-fold return on investment: It puts money in the pockets of people most likely to spend it, thereby stimulating the economy; it “makes work pay” for millions of low-wage employees; and it lift millions of children out of poverty.

The president also reaffirms his commitment to ending child hunger by calling for $1 billion a year in new investments for child nutrition programs while fully funding the Women, Infants, and Children program that provides nutritious food packages to pregnant and nursing women and young children. And the budget sets forth an innovative legislative proposal, The Healthy Food Financing Initiative, to help bring grocery stores to “food deserts” or communities with little access to nutritious and affordable food.

Finally, the budget includes an innovative $500 million Fatherhood, Marriage, and Families Innovation Fund to encourage states to develop effective programs to promote responsible fatherhood and to improve services for single parents who face barriers to achieving self-sufficiency.

Providing opportunity for all

This budget acknowledges that even though we must tackle immediate needs, we must also invest in long-term economic growth by emphasizing education and workforce development. The president recognizes that “In the 21st century, the best antipoverty program around is a world-class education” and asks for a 6.2 percent increase in the budget for the Department of Education. This funding would help improve teacher quality, enhance afterschool enrichment programs, provide higher Pell grants for low- and moderate-income students struggling to pay for college, and invest in community colleges, among other things.

The president makes a historic commitment to childcare and early childhood education in this budget, too. The budget requests that the investments made in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for the Head Start and Early Head Start education programs be extended, which would allow an additional 64,000 children and families to be served. The president also requests an additional $1.6 billion in expanded funding for child care, which would allow states to provide subsidies to 235,000 more children than they could have otherwise. These investments create new jobs for childcare and Head Start workers, help low-income parents maintain steady employment, and provide an enriching environment for low-income children so that they are more on pace with their higher-income peers when they enter school.

Helping people build wealth

Last but not least, the president’s budget includes several provisions designed to build assets for long-term economic prosperity. As a cross-cutting initiative the president proposes asset-test reform so that families don’t have to spend down all of their assets before qualifying for services they need in tough economic times. The president proposes that families should be allowed to keep at least $10,000 in assets before losing eligibility for means-tested programs.
The president also proposes a large-scale initiative to increase retirement savings for low- and moderate-income families. Under this program employers who do not offer a retirement plan could automatically enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA plan, and employers who do offer such plans would be able to enroll their workers more easily. The plan would also provide incentives for low- and moderate-income Americans to save for retirement by providing a larger saver’s tax credit.

Conclusion

The president’s budget is more than numbers on a ledger—it is statement of priorities. And judging by this administration’s budget request to Congress, the president places high priority on laying the groundwork for a shared economic recovery and helping families hit the hardest in this recession get back on their feet.

We see the president’s commitment in his investments in the types of programs that reflect the four Half in Ten principles for cutting poverty in half in 10 years: decent work, economic security, opportunity for all, and building wealth.

The Half in Ten campaign looks forward to working with Congress to pass a budget resolution that reflects these principles and builds on the president’s request, particularly in the area of increased investments and additional targeting for job creation in economically distressed communities.

In short, the president’s budget request to Congress is a strong down payment on an agenda that invests in workers who want to participate in the economic recovery and families who aspire to join the middle class.

Melissa Boteach is the Half in Ten Manager at American Progress.

Click here to register and hear from the experts on what steps Congress can take to create employment opportunities in low-income and minority communities.

Speakers

• Larry Mishel, President, Economic Policy Institute
• Deepak Bhargava, Executive Director, Center for Community Change
• Alan Charney, Campaign Director, Jobs for America Now
• Deborah Weinstein, Executive Director, Coalition on Human Needs, Moderator

There are 6.4 jobseekers for every unfilled job – and that gap is growing. Two-thirds of Americans are close to someone who is out of work. And joblessness is worst for communities of color, youth, and women who head households. The private sector does not have the capacity to rebuild employment on its own. While the investments made through the federal economic recovery legislation have created or saved over 1 million jobs so far, the recession is so deep that more federal action is urgently needed.

Congress and the Obama Administration are working on job creation plans. What should they do? How can we build support for job creation that does not leave the poorest people behind? Register for the webinar and find out.

The updated standards for this Modern Poverty Measure would derive from a study independently conducted by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).  Whereas the current measure sets the poverty threshold according to the cost of food required for a minimal diet, the new measure would more accurately reflect the rising cost of other “basic physical necessities” such as clothing, housing, health care, and child care.  Improving the current measure, this legislation would also take into account income assistance (EITC, housing assistance, food stamps, etc.) and unavoidable expenses (due to taxes, work, medical bills), as well as adjust measurement based on regional differences in the cost of living.

In addition to an updated measurement standard, the MAP Act would commission the NAS to further develop a decent living standard and a medical care risk measure – to calculate people’s ability to pay for additional expenses and for necessary medical care, respectively.  Rep. McDermott clarified, “”The current economic crisis has reminded every American just how vulnerable we all are and I think it has renewed our sense of pulling together as one nation and one people.“ Parallel legislation in the Senate will be sponsored by Senator Chris Dodd in the coming weeks.

Our ability to gauge how many people are really left behind in our society is reduced to a simple and outdated statistic. This would not do if we looked at people as they are and not as they were… if we put faces to our numbers… if we followed the message of the book of Numbers.

While the inadequacies of the federal poverty measure may seem like a technical and wonky issue, how we determine the factors of poverty will wind up enabling us to conquer the reality of poverty. 

Read more here

New York City’s Crusade Against Poverty

Find out more about the event, and register to attend.

Read the release from NCCP here, with links to “Basic Facts About Low Income Children,” “Who Are America’s Poor Children?,” and “The Benefits Dilemma.”

Go the National Center for Children in Poverty’s website.

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) is sponsoring the Measuring American Poverty Act of 2008 (H.R. 6941), which would update the standard by which the government measures poverty. Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) is expected to introduce a similar bill in the Senate soon.

Read the text of the bill here.

Read more about the bill here.

Read more from Congressman McDermott’s office here.

The Half in Ten Campaign is writing in support of S.3636, the Measuring American Poverty Act, an important step toward improving the measure of poverty in this country.

The Center for American Progress Task Force on Poverty estimates that the cost of child poverty in the United States reaches approximately $500 billion a year. Addressing the issue of poverty is necessary both for increasing the opportunities available to vast numbers of Americans and improving the U. S. economy.

The current measure of poverty was developed in the 1960s, and does not accurately gauge modern poverty and its ramifications. Food is still cited as a family’s greatest expense, certain benefits are not included, and no consideration is given to regional disparities in the cost of living. An updated measure will better assess the actual costs families are facing, include tax credits and government aid, adjust for expenses such as child care and medical care, and better reflect regional price differences. In addition, with an improved standard, policy proposals can be better tailored to meet the needs of those they are intended to help.

Among Half in Ten’s proposals to decrease poverty are expansions of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, and increased access to child care. Because none of these are included in the current poverty measure, the effect of changes to these policies cannot be weighed. With a modernized standard, we will be better equipped to judge the effect such policies are having. If we are to seriously engage in efforts to reduce domestic poverty, there must be a reliable way to measure the impact of this work.

We also strongly support collaboration with the National Academy of Sciences in developing a Decent Living Standard threshold, and appreciate the inclusion of such a

study in this bill. Even with a modernized poverty measure, there are millions of Americans with incomes above the poverty line but far below what is needed for a comfortable standard of living. It is also important that the new standard created by this measure will not change eligibility for means-tested programs, and will leave the historical poverty measure in place for statistical purposes as well. Any use of the new measures for eligibility purposes should be considered over time and with care.

We applaud your decision to introduce legislation creating an improved poverty measure in the Senate. The Half in Ten Campaign is committed to cutting poverty in half in the United States over the next 10 years, focusing on practical policy solutions to promote decent work, provide opportunity for all, ensure economic security, and help people build wealth. We thank you for your leadership on this important issue, and we look forward to working with you further to reduce poverty in America.

Sincerely,

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

Center for American Progress Action Fund

Coalition on Human Needs

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

Read the text of the bill here.

Read a press release about the measure from Congressman McDermott’s office here.

Read more about the need for a new poverty measure:

“Bipartisan Calls for New Poverty Measure,” New York Times, September 1, 2008.

“City Refines Formula to Measure Poverty Rate,” New York Times, July 14, 2008.

“Mayor Bloomberg Tackles Poverty,” New York Times, January 22, 2008.

The Half in Ten Campaign is writing in support of H.R. 6941, the Measuring American Poverty Act, an important step toward improving the measure of poverty in this country, and to thank you for your introduction of this legislation.

The Half in Ten Campaign is committed to cutting poverty in half in the United States over the next 10 years, focusing on practical policy solutions to promote decent work, provide opportunity for all, ensure economic security, and help people build wealth. The cost of child poverty in the United States reaches approximately $500 billion a year, and addressing the issue of poverty is necessary both for increasing the opportunities available to vast numbers of Americans and improving the U. S. economy.

The current measure of poverty was developed in the 1960s, and does not accurately gauge modern poverty and its ramifications. Food is still cited as a family’s greatest expense, certain benefits are not included, and no consideration is given to regional disparities in the cost of living. An updated measure will better assess the actual costs families are facing, include tax credits and government aid, adjust for expenses such as child care and medical care, and better reflect regional price differences. In addition, with an improved standard, policy proposals can be better tailored to meet the needs of those they are intended to help.

Among the Half in Ten campaign’s proposals to decrease poverty are expansions of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, and increased access to child care. Because none of these are included in the current poverty measure, the effect of changes to these policies cannot be weighed. With a modernized standard, we will be better equipped to judge the effect such policies are having. If we are to seriously engage in efforts to reduce domestic poverty, there must be a reliable way to measure the impact of this work.

We also strongly support collaboration with the National Academy of Sciences in developing a Decent Living Standard threshold, and appreciate the inclusion of such a study in this bill. Even with a modernized poverty measure, there are millions of Americans with incomes above the poverty line but far below what is needed for a comfortable standard of living. It is also important that the new standard created by this measure will not change eligibility for means-tested programs, and will leave the historical poverty measure in place for statistical purposes as well. Any use of the new measures for eligibility purposes should be considered over time and with care.

We thank you for your leadership on this important issue, and we look forward to working with you in the future.

Sincerely,

Half in Ten

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

Center for American Progress Action Fund

Coalition on Human Needs

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

See these data, and get additional resources here.

Go to the Coalition on Human Needs website here.

New York City has begun a concerted effort to reduce poverty. They found that they needed a more accurate measure of income and expenditures among low-income people in order to assess whether their proposed anti-poverty policies would work. Mark Levitan, Director of Poverty Research for the New York City Center for Economic Opportunity, was one of several researchers and policy experts who testified in favor of modernizing the nation’s poverty standard at a hearing held by the House Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support (of the House Committee on Ways and Means) on Thursday, July 17. The hearing sought comments on draft legislation called the Measuring American Poverty Act of 2008, sponsored by the Subcommittee Chair, Jim McDermott (D-WA).

Dr. Levitan and the others testifying pointed out that the poverty measure currently in use was devised in the 1960s, and based on research then that showed poor people spent about one-third of their income on food. The poverty standard originally developed estimated a barebones diet, adjusted for differing family sizes, and simply multiplied by three. Since that time, apart from adjusting for inflation, very little has changed about the measure. But much has changed in the lives of poor people. Food is now one-seventh of a family’s budget, according to Douglas Nelson, President and C.E.O. of The Annie E. Casey Foundation, who presented testimony at the hearing. Rising costs of housing and work-related expenses such as child care and transportation are not counted. Neither are regional differences in costs.

Another important shortcoming in the current measure is that it does not include the value of certain public benefits such as food stamps, refundable tax credits, and housing assistance in calculating income. As a result, when Congress increases any of these programs, the impact is never shown in the official poverty figures released every year.

Chairman McDermott’s draft bill is based on recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences for changing the way the poverty standard is derived. The bill updates what is counted both as income and expenditure. It also calls for regional differences in the poverty standard. Recognizing that measuring deprivation is not a substitute for assessing what it takes to have an adequate standard of living, the bill further calls for the development of a Decent Living Standard. This higher level would likely be similar to measures such as the Self-Sufficiency Standard utilized by Wider Opportunities for Women, which takes into account actual costs incurred in meeting family needs.

Of great importance, the McDermott draft states that the new standard will not change eligibility for means-tested programs. Under current practice, the Census Bureau sets its annual poverty threshold for research purposes, while the White House Office of Management and Budget establishes poverty guidelines for calculating program eligibility. They are similar but not identical. The new legislation would not change eligibility determination, although it may be that the new poverty measure it creates for research may eventually lead to some changes.

While researchers have pointed out flaws in the poverty measure for years, the New York City experience shows an important new impetus for making the standard more accurate. New York is one of a number of cities or states starting to set anti-poverty goals. Advocates have called for a federal goal as well, such as the Half in Ten: From Poverty to Prosperity campaign. Concrete steps to do something about poverty require a gauge that shows whether those steps have the desired effect.

Chairman McDermott was impressed with the packed hearing room, but did not seem to expect quick action on this legislation. As with much else in Congress these days, the hearing set the stage for possible changes if a new Administration seeks to make poverty reduction a national goal.

Read CHN’s letter in support of modernizing the poverty measure.

Read more from CHN’s Human Needs Report.

Go to the Coalition on Human Needs website.