A New Poverty Measure: So What?

Margy Waller

A New Poverty Measure: So What?

This week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed changing the formula for measuring poverty. Now Congressional leaders are holding a hearing on adopting a similar change at the national level.

This is all much ado about almost nothing.

At the national level, the proposal would move the bar ever so slightly, so that being poor equals household income of less than $21,818 for two adults with two children, up from the current $20,444.

To be sure, the new measure would be a better reflection of the rate of material deprivation in our nation than the current one.

Today’s measure still uses a formula based on 1950s household expenditures – before housing and transportation costs went up and two-income households became the requirement, causing average child care expenses to soar. In contrast, the new measure would allow for regional reflection of differences in the cost of living and would count some federally-funded employment benefits as income for the first time.

Yet, it’s important to note that we aren’t really accomplishing what we desire with this goal – even with a more accurate formula! This is especially true since this high-level reconsideration of the formula is occurring at a time when there are numerous calls for a national goal to reduce poverty by 50 percent over the next ten years.

What’s wrong with expending a whole lot of energy on this discussion?

First, it’s only a proposal to measure income and not the other resources that communities need for a strong economy and full participation in our democracy and civil society. The proposal isn’t about quality education or clean air or reasonable housing costs or access to health care or reducing prejudice…. and so on.

Second, a if we want a measure of income, a relative measure would be a much more useful test of how well our nation is doing at making sure all residents can contribute to a strong society. As higher income earners do better, low-wage workers must see increases in income relative to the higher earners – otherwise poverty increases. As one leading paper said of a new relative measure:

Certainly, the…relative poverty measure is hard to budge…Yet, when all the research shows that it is how one's income compares to the average that drives one's health, happiness and opportunity, the target must be the right one.

Third, while we do need a better standard for measuring progress as a nation on income deprivation, we’re not likely to succeed in achieving the goal of better policy outcomes if we insist on maintaining a subsistence standard. Indeed, if the goal is based on any measure of “poverty” as it is currently understood in this country – material deprivation blamed on immoral or ill-considered personal choices – we should not expect much policy progress on efforts to strengthen our economy.

At The Mobility Agenda, we’re engaged in a conversation about developing a goal that is more consistent with widely supported policy proposals – which tend to go way beyond income deprivation and which include paid time off at work, worker voices at the table for establishing workplace policy, fair wages, and access to affordable health insurance.

When we put the poverty headline over these policy options, policymakers face real resistance created by the widely-held public beliefs about causes of poverty. We cannot change these beliefs by adopting a goal to end or reduce poverty – regardless of which formula we use to define the term.

Of course, we should adopt a more current measure of income deprivation. Mayor Bloomberg and members of the House should be applauded for their effort to make the more up-to-date but unofficial Census measure more official.

Unfortunately, we're not doing so well on the policy front as it is, and changing the formula will not have much of an impact on this reality. Progress on policy requires a different goal and new measures for testing our progress toward that goal.

Comments

Well, a better-thought-out measure of poverty is not the second coming, won't produce social justice (in and of itself) and won't bring down the price of gas.

However, more realistic measurement may make for more realistic planning. Therefore, I have a only a little sympathy for your sneer at Mr. Bloomberg's admittedly small step forward. It's not what it could be and it's not what it should be, to mangle the words of an inspirer of the Drum Major Institute, but it's better than what it was.

Posted by: Daniel Millstone | July 17, 2008 11:20 AM

Daniel Millstone,

We agree. I support improving the measure.

But, I fear that others want to improve the measure in order to achieve policy outcomes related to the recent call for a national goal to reduce poverty. And that won’t work.

So, it’s not worth investing a lot of energy or resources in changing the measure. And no one should think that changing the measure will lead to better policy outcomes.

The announcement of the Congressional subcommittee hearing on a new measure today includes this statement:

This new measure would augment, not replace, the current official poverty measurement. It would therefore not have any direct impact on public program eligibility or on the distribution of Federal funds (any decision to base program eligibility or the distribution of funds on the new modern poverty measure would have to occur on a program-by-program basis).

Posted by: Margy Waller | July 17, 2008 01:35 PM

Guide line to help u in the future!!!!!!Busby Seo Challenge

Posted by: Busby Seo Challenge | August 27, 2008 05:49 PM

its such a good blog thanks for the view

Posted by: Busby SEO Test | November 11, 2008 06:59 PM

more realistic measurement may make for more realistic planning

Posted by: busby seo test | November 26, 2008 10:47 AM

you have a good research on this article.

Posted by: busbyseotest | December 21, 2008 11:21 AM

yeah, I think poverty is evil. Nice sharing on this.

Posted by: memulai bisnis online | January 14, 2009 02:51 AM

Actually poverty is prohibited...

Posted by: renantech | January 20, 2009 03:08 AM

Yes, this is information help us in the future, there are many people now suffering poverty...thanks for the info....

Posted by: Free Windows Registry Repair | February 11, 2009 04:01 AM

this was so informative post..

thank you for providing this article..

more power

Posted by: Hectic Capiznon bloggers 2009 | February 14, 2009 03:02 AM

informative post...thanks for providing this article

Posted by: Hectic Capiznon bloggers 2009 | February 14, 2009 03:05 AM

Its great to hear that someone was giving so much concern to avoid poverty. Thanks for this a very informative post.

Posted by: Microsoft Registry Cleaner | February 16, 2009 12:44 AM

Posted by: registry cleaner | February 20, 2009 07:49 PM

as long as this world exist, poverty never vanish.

Posted by: global gifting system team | February 24, 2009 04:14 AM

Indeed very informative, more of this.

Posted by: giving4prosperity | March 6, 2009 02:49 AM

Thanks for the tips, it’s really worthwhile coming on your page keep it up.

It’s a really great sharing your ideas, it really helps, thanks for posting.

BY:

Secured Homeowner Loan

Posted by: Secured Homeowner Loan | March 14, 2009 04:01 AM

this is a good post., good work pal.,

Posted by: Cash Gifting TV | March 16, 2009 11:50 PM

Thanks for sharing the information.

Posted by: goodpeoplegives | April 6, 2009 05:14 AM

Your post is great. Thanks a lot for sharing such valuable information with us.
¨Pret immobilier

Posted by: Simulation pret immobilier | May 14, 2009 11:15 PM

This post is really great, Keep on posting more informative article. bad credit payday loans

Posted by: bad credit | June 25, 2009 02:08 AM

This blog is nice thanks for posting this.
payday loans

Posted by: bad credit payday loans | June 25, 2009 03:57 AM

You show us so much important guide.

Posted by: cleaner reviews | October 24, 2009 08:22 AM

I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post.

Posted by: tayomismo | December 9, 2009 06:38 AM

Posted by: tayomismo | December 9, 2009 06:43 AM

I was very pleased to find this site. yeah, I think poverty is evil. Nice sharing on this.

Posted by: Labor Law Posters | December 11, 2009 02:15 AM

Posted by: Labor Law Posters | December 11, 2009 02:18 AM

This was very interesting I'm glad I had a chance to read it! Poverty is more than evil it's the devil him himself

Posted by: Rachel G | December 15, 2009 11:31 PM

Posted by: Rachel G | December 15, 2009 11:34 PM

This was very interesting I'm glad I had a chance to read it! Poverty is more than evil it's the devil himself

Posted by: Rachel G | December 15, 2009 11:36 PM

This was very interesting,very nice post

Posted by: Best Registry Cleaner | January 18, 2010 08:56 AM

I guess that the free term papers writing is the most time consuming process. But, people rely on the sociology essay writing service support every time when that's required.

Posted by: KATIEnc | February 17, 2010 08:54 PM

Great insights.

Posted by: SEO Organic Traffic | March 1, 2010 04:59 AM

I learn something new today. Thank you mate!

Posted by: Philwebservices | May 6, 2010 10:03 PM

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this issue.

Posted by: Refrigerator Water Filter | August 9, 2010 06:44 PM

great research on topic and nice posted thanks for sharing it with us.

Posted by: SEO India | August 26, 2010 10:34 AM