Congress Goes Out on Recess,
Leaving Unfinished Many Domestic Poverty Needs
by Mary A. Cooper
The weekend of October 8 Congress went into recess until after the elections,
leaving behind a substantial amount of undone work. A "lame duck" session
is expected to convene in mid-November and may resolve pending budget issues but
probably will leave program changes and reauthorizations to be dealt with by the
new Congress next year.
Poverty Increases
A factor that should influence all congressional and Administration proposals
regarding low-income programs is that poverty increased significantly in 2003,
according to the annual report of the U.S. Census Bureau, rising from 12.1% in
2002 to 12.5%. Children account for most of the increase and are one-third of
all poor people in the United States. Most alarmingly, nearly half of those counted
as "poor" live in what is defined as "deep poverty," with
incomes of less than half of the poverty line, the official government standard
for measuring poverty. In addition, the Census Bureau reported that another 1.4
million people have lost their health insurance, raising the number of people
without access to health care to 45 million.At the same time as poverty is growing,
however, welfare rolls are declining. The U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services proudly announced that only 50% of those eligible for welfare assistance
in 2001 were receiving it, compared with 80% in 1996; the same trend continues
up to the present. Secretary Tommy Thompson attributes the decrease to recipients
finding jobs, coupled with poor people's ability to find other ways to survive,
such as living with relatives or receiving charity, rather than applying for welfare.
Since the employment rate for single mothers is actually going down (from 73%
in 2000 to 69.8% in 2003), it seems unlikely that being employed could account
for this decline in welfare use. A more probable explanation is that poor people
are being discouraged from applying for welfare or are being rejected. Many states
make the application process difficult. Others divert potential applicants into
charitable programs instead of processing their welfare applications. Since the
federal welfare system was overhauled in 1996, much has been learned about what
works to help people leave public assistance programs such as TANF and Food Stamps.
It is clear that completing high school and receiving training for marketable
job skills will improve employment possibilities and income for impoverished workers;
and yet Congress is seeking to increase work hours, reduce educational opportunities,
and provide no additional job training. Likewise, it is known that the absence
of safe, high quality child care is the single greatest factor in keeping mothers
from working; yet Congress cannot agree on whether or how to address the severe
child care shortage.
The role of marriage in combating poverty is somewhat less clear. Studies
have shown that incomes are higher in two-parent families and that outcomes are
better for children when both parents are present. It is less clear that marriage
offers a solution to poverty for people who have children before they are married.
Many women who live apart from the fathers of their children do so in order to
escape domestic violence, mental health or drug and alcohol problems with the
fathers. Government-funded marriage promotion programs need to take seriously
the importance of counseling, social services, and treatment when they encourage
marriage as a route out of poverty.
Other barriers to employment as a means of leaving poverty include the absence
of entry-level jobs with livable salaries and benefits, the high cost of transportation
and lack of public transit to reach work, and the fact that inexpensive housing
is generally found only at a great distance from employment centers.The Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.), along with 24 national groups in the faith community, has sent
letters to both President Bush and Senator Kerry asking
them to outline their plans to decrease poverty in the U.S. and to increase access
to health care.
Temporary Assistance To Needy Families (TANF)
For the eighth time in just over two years, Congress has approved a short-term
extension of the current TANF program, this time through March 31, 2005. Authorization
for TANF — the federal cash assistance program for very low-income families
with children — expired in August 2002. Since then, Congress has been split
into two camps — those who want to reduce the program's rolls as rapidly
as possible and those who want to invest TANF's resources in providing social
services and education to recipients so that they can become employable.
In 2003 the House passed H.R. 4, which would have reauthorized TANF while
significantly increasing the work requirements, reducing educational and job training
opportunities, and providing only a slight increase in child care funding. The
Senate's debate on H.R. 4 collapsed when the leadership blocked a vote on an amendment
to increase the minimum wage for the first time in seven years. The Senate bill
also included a substantial increase in child care funding that would have been
rigorously opposed in the House.Subsequently, while a six-month funding extension
for TANF was being considered, Sens. Santorum (R-PA) and Bayh (D-IN) introduced
legislation to extend TANF for six months, while providing two years of funding
for marriage promotion and fatherhood initiatives. Funding for those new initiatives
would divert funds already being used for TANF-related services.
The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) joined with other faith community groups
to send a letter to Congress urging it to pass a "clean" (unamended)
extension of TANF until next year, unless the legislators were willing to consider
a wide range of proposals for improvements to the legislation, including child
care and child support improvements. Congress ended up passing a clean extension
of current law for six months.
The new Congress will have to face the issue of TANF extension or reauthorization
by March 31 next year.
Tax Cuts
On October 4 President Bush signed legislation extending several "middle
class" tax cuts that were due to expire this year. Several corporate tax
breaks were also included in the bill. Since no provision is made in the legislation
to pay for these tax cuts, their cost will become part of the debt burden being
developed for future generations.
The Working Families Tax Relief Act will:
- extend the $1,000 per child tax credit for five years;
- extend through 2008 the "marriage penalty" relief for married couples,
which benefits middle income but not very poor families;
- extend the 10% tax bracket through 2008;
- extend income exemptions for the alternate minimum tax for an additional year;
and
- move up by one year the date on which the child tax credit becomes refundable
for low-income families in the 15% tax category.
This provision means that families earning over $10,750 may apply for a refund
if the amount of the credit ($1,000) exceeds their income taxes for calendar year
2004. This provision does not apply to families with lower incomes.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has reported that only 9% of the
benefits from this legislation will go to the middle 20% of households in the
income spectrum covered, while 70% goes to higher earners.
Housing
Funding for Section 8 housing vouchers will continue to be an issue in the
"lame duck" session. The Senate Appropriations Committee has approved
an increase of $2.2 billion for the program that includes Section 8, but the House
Appropriations Committee did not approve any expansion. The Senate bill would
provide enough funds to cover all current vouchers and also requires that 75%
of the vouchers go to extremely low-income families. The Senate measure also includes
slight increases in funding for housing aid to low-income people who are elderly,
handicapped, or suffering from AIDS.
The Bush Administration has called for converting Section 8 into a block grant
to the states, a concept rejected by the Senate Appropriations Committee, which
also turned down a White House request to terminate the HOPE VI program to fund
renovation of deteriorated public housing.
Since the House bill would reduce funding for nearly every Housing and Urban
Development program, it is unlikely that the House and Senate will be able to
resolve their differences in the short "lame duck" session. Instead,
HUD funding will probably be part of an omnibus bill extending current funding
for all agencies whose budgets have not been approved by Congress already. |
