PADM530ex1: | Law

Research Requirement:

Alexander.docx 1 8 Good afternoon everyone, When faced with the question of whether various welfare programs have worked to reduce poverty, the general answer is yes. However, as noted by a report by the CATO Institute, these programs mainly helped socioeconomically stable groups more so than other groups facing other social problems (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). In reality, there are a wide variety of different programs that come together and work under the social welfare umbrella. Such programs include non-profits, governmental agencies, and volunteer groups. Although each has impacted poverty in its own way, it is only through working together that progress has been made towards moving the poverty line (Hansan, 2017). The road toward improving poverty has been progressive and has changed over the decades, just as the intended end goal of welfare has changed as well. As noted by Hansan, welfare is defined as “help provided to a person in need; activities and resources to enhance or promote the well-being of individuals, families, and the larger society…” (Hansan, 2017). Essentially, welfare is providing help to members with the goal of increasing their quality of life and with the eventual goal of becoming self-sufficient. A perfect example of this is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is a federal program that provides funds for low- and no-income people to purchase food and maintain adequate nutrition (Texas Health and Human Services, 2023). This program aims to assist families with purchasing food until they reach a point where they can buy the food without help. This principle can be viewed as ethical because the intention is to keep individuals healthy by providing funding in order to supplement their diet with the required nutrition. According to the United States Census, the national poverty rate was 11.5 percent, which equated to 37.9 million people living in poverty in 2022 (US Census, 2024). Both the number of people in poverty and the poverty rate have been lowering since 2008; however, as noted in Figure 1, the number of people in poverty has been steadily increasing since 1970 (US Census, 2024). Although the poverty rate is trending downwards, population increases can explain the rise in number of people living in poverty. Social security is the top program that needs attention when examining the various welfare programs. Although the program was started with good intentions, it was never intended to be the sole means of financial support after retirement. As mentioned in the 2023 annual report by the Social Security Board of Trustees, the trust fund, out of which Social Security is paid, is on track to be depleted by 2034 (OASDI, 2023). This does not mean that social security will stop being sent out. Instead, it will be limited to only the funds that are drawn in from paying citizens each year. Some changes that could be made to preserve this program include pulling funding from other programs, reducing the amount of Social Security funding paid out, and or increasing the percentage current members pay towards Social Security. Hansan, J.E. (2017). What is social welfare history? Social Welfare History Project. Retrieved from https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/recollections/social-welfare-history/ SNAP Food Benefits | Texas Health and Human Services. (2023). https://www.hhs.texas.gov/services/food/snap-food-benefits The 2023 OASDI Trustees report. (2023). https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/2023/ Tanner, M., & Hughes, C. (2014, October 20). War on Poverty Turns 50: Are We Winning Yet? CATO Institute. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/war-poverty-turns-50-are-we-winning-yet# US Census Bureau. (2024, January 4). National Poverty in America Awareness Month: January 2024. Census.gov. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/stories/poverty-awareness-month.html Keith2.docx 1 8 Good evening Professor and fellow students, For this week’s discussion topic of discussion, the topic of welfare and how it relates to poverty in the United States. The questions below should help to highlight some of the issues with poverty and welfare in the United States since 1964. Have the programs worked to reduce poverty? · This is simply not a yes or no answer based on the author of this week’s article. For example, the poverty level in 1965 is not the same as in today’s market. Based on 2014 dollars, federal spending on welfare programs has increased 640%, but if you add in overall spending to include state and local government programs, this number is up near 981 billion dollars or 613% increase; however, this number does not consider the population increase in the United States since 1965 and the continued development of technology. One of the metrics that was used to measure if someone was in poverty was based on if someone had a phone, computer, or vehicle at the house. This is not a fair comparison when it comes to computers since most computers were not widely available to households until the mid-1970s. But with the continued development of computers, instead of $10,000 dollars for a home computer, it is now in the hundreds of dollars. Additionally, a third of households didn’t have a telephone in their house, where today people have phones in their pockets and this metric needs to be re-evaluated for the standard of what poverty is. But if you look at food standards in most households they are above the “standard” when it comes to food standards based. Furthermore, the rate in which households had functioning plumbing, electricity, and heating has dropped from 17.5% to just 2%. To summarize, the programs in place to fight poverty are spending more money and not getting the return on investment that is expected with these programs, which means they are failing. What is the end goal of welfare—to give people money to help them live day-to-day or to help them become self-sufficient? How ethical is this end goal? Explain. · The end goal of welfare is to help low-income families & people become self-sufficient and give them the assistance they need to get back on their feet. This goal unfortunately is not realistic or ethical, since not every person and place in the United States is the same. If you were to give a single person in Central Nebraska $18K per year when compared to this same person in Los Angles, the person in Nebraska would be able to stretch their money much further than in California. Additionally, the people requesting the assistance at not all the same either and come from many different and unique life situations that have led them to the point in needing assistance. A family that was living in New Orleans before Katrina went through and destroyed literally everything they had, and their job now has nothing to start with. They may be living with friends, family, or on the streets with little to no hope of how to get back on their feet. Another example would be a veteran getting back from Iraq with several PTSD roaming the streets with money in their pockets needing help. That is why the welfare system is not ethical or a one-size-fits-all solution to poverty in the United States. Where does the US stand in terms of poverty and welfare? · The US stands at a critical crossroads when it comes to poverty and welfare. The system put in place in the 1960s and 1970s are not the same issues that face people and families today. Additionally, an increase of over 630% in welfare money was provided and yet the poverty rate has only decreased by .01% with all this spending. Programs in place today need to be reviewed and replaced if needed or revised to meet new standards as well as new guidelines of what poverty is in today’s market. What federal social service programs need revision? Why? · All social programs need to be reviewed and revised based on today’s expectations of what “poverty” is. The poverty in 2023 is not the same poverty that it was in 1960s or 1970s, especially with the development of technology and utility services. From what the author stated “Good intentions are not enough. We should not continue to throw money at failed program in the name of compassion.” References: Tanner, M., & Hughes, C. (2014, October 20). War on Poverty Turns 50: Are We Winning Yet? CATO Institute. Retrieved January 10, 2024, from https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/war-poverty-turns-50-are-we-winning-yet Megan.docx 1 8 In 1964 the United States declared what was coined then as a “War on Poverty” (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). The purpose of this initiative was to generate programs that would try to cure and prevent poverty in the United States (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). What is poverty? Essentially, poverty is when a person or family is without enough money to meet the basic needs, including food, clothing, medical, and shelter for the geographic area of which they live (Husted & Hansen, 2001). According to a recent Time article, the current poverty rate in the United States is 12.4% of Americans as of 2022 with the “poverty level at $13,590 for individuals and $23,030 for a family of three” (Ney, 2023). Since 1964, the United States has implemented 100 separate anti-poverty programs and 34 additional welfare programs; spending more than $1.1 trillion a year among both the federal and state levels (Tanner, 2022). These programs range from assistance with housing, food, tax credit, medical, education and job training, and childcare. As previously mentioned there are currently 134 programs to aid individuals and families below the poverty line, however a number of these programs overlap with contradictory eligibility requirements (Tanner, 2022). A number of research studies have been conducted to validated whether or not these programs have led to a decrease in poverty or helped to meet the other goal of the programs- to end poverty. A number of the programs have been found to not be supportive to these goals and have been found to be duplicative (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). It has been highly recommended for the government to review the unsuccessful and duplicative programs and shut them down (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). Some commonly known successful programs are the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP; which I spoke about in a previous posting), Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). The EITC is considered to be a successful program as it deters poverty by providing financial support directly to low-income working individuals and families. By offering the tax credit that increases as income rises, the EITC incentives employment and helps lift people out of poverty (Tanner & Hughes, 2014). The EITC eligibility is an earned income below $63,398 for 2023 to qualify. SNAP eligibility is based upon State and currently the 2023 Massachusetts SNAP eligibility requires an individual’s income to be below $29,160 and a family of three below $49,720; both amounts are well above the current poverty level (Benefits, 2023). Examining the poverty line of the United States is essential in understanding the economic challenges individuals and families face. While the poverty line serves as a benchmark for financial hardship and the benchmark to build eligibility requirements for anti-poverty and welfare assistance programs, it is also crucial to consider the unique circumstances of military families. Enlisted members’ financial status varies based upon rank, family status, and the current area the member resides due to cost of living. Despite receiving a steady income, many enlisted members fall within lower income brackets, facing unique challenges, including frequent relocations, spouse unemployment, and high local costs of living. Are military families adequately being assessed for their eligibility to these anti-poverty and welfare programs? The intent of this question is not whether or not military basic pay is enough, its to evaluate whether military families are living below the current poverty level and thus should qualify for these assistance programs. Currently, to measure the poverty rate the Consensus Bureau calculates income through cash-only income (e.g. paycheck) and excludes in-kind benefits like SNAP, WIC, and other assistance programs (Husted & Hansen, 2001; Tanner & Hughes, 2014). When determining whether or not an enlisted member is considered below the poverty, it becomes complex due to the benefits in addition to their basic pay (Husted & Hansen, 2001). A study conducted by Husted & Hansen (2001) showed based upon just basic pay alone, “E4 and below with two or mor children and pay grades E5 and below with four or more children would be classified as below the poverty level”. There study in 2001 reflected data from 1998 and estimated 4.5% of enlisted members would fall below the poverty line based upon just basic pay. It is reasonable to believe the same would apply to 2023 as basic pay is increased annually by the Government based upon private sector wages (Military Compensation, 2024). Although there is a percentage of military members that earn basic pay below the poverty level, they are not considered to be poor once the additional allowances and tax advantages are included (Husted & Hansen, 2001). There are several financial allowances that can be afforded to military members to include a Basic Allowance for Housing (based upon geographic area and rank), Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS), and Cost of Living Allowance (non taxable allowance to offset prices of non-housing goods and services). Not every member is entitled to the aforementioned as there are special considerations. For example, if the member lives in government housing, they are not entitled to Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH). If they live on an installation or a vessel, the member may receive a percentage or no BAS. For Cost of Living Allowance, the member must live in a designated area by the Department of Defense that has a high cost of living to receive the pay (e.g. San Francisco, overseas). As of 2022, the National Defense Authorization Act mandated the Basic Needs Allowance (BNA). The BNA was designed to increase a members income to 150% of the federal poverty guidelines for that year, their duty location, and household size (Jowers, 2022; Jowers, 2023). Several service members have been found to barley make ends meet for the area of which they live (e.g. Hawaii, Martha’s Vineyard) and should be considered eligible for the BNA as per the intent of the Act. However, currently the BNA eligibility requires inclusion of the BAH, which one could argue this to be considered not intended to be “cash in hand”, thus should not be factored into the income calculation. A recent article in Military Times found that when the BAH was factored in, only approximately 1,135 military members would be eligible, whereas when excluded, 23,911 members would be eligible (Jowers, 2023). If the allowances like BAH and BNA were not factored into the income of military members, a number of military members would be able to apply to these anti-poverty and welfare programs. The eligibility for programs like WIC and SNAP are typically based upon income, therefore if enlisted members meet the criteria, they should ethically have the option to enroll to address their specific needs. With this argument in mind, other programs would need to be looked at to validate whether or not it would be ethical for military members to receive assistance. For example, Medicare should not be authorized due to the extensive medical assistance for active duty and their family. -Megan References Benefits. (2023). Massachusetts Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Benefits. https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/1280. Husted, T. A., & Hansen, M. L. (2001). Standard Living of Enlisted Personnel. Center for Naval Analyses. https://www.cna.org/reports/2001/D0002907.A2.pdf. Jowers, K. (2022). Allowance for the most at-risk military famllies begins to take shape. Military Times. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2022/12/02/allowance-for-the-most-at-risk-military-families-begins-to-take-shape/. Jowers, K. (2023). Very few low-income troops eligible for Basic Needs Allowance so far. Military Times. https://www.militarytimes.com/pay-benefits/mil-money/2023/01/26/very-few-low-income-troops-eligible-for-basic-needs-allowance-so-far/. Military Compensation. (2024). Annual Pay Adjustment. Military Compensation. https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Basic-Pay/AnnualPayRaise/. Ney, J. (2023). The US poverty rate just had the largest one-year increase in history, but some regions still struggle far more. Time. https://time.com/6320076/american-poverty-levels-state-by-state/. Tanner, M. & Hughes, C. (2014). The War on Poverty Turns 50. Are We Winning Yet? CATO Institute. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa761_2.pdf. Tanner, M. (2022). Poverty and Welfare. CATO Institute. https://www.cato.org/cato-handbook-policymakers/cato-handbook-policymakers-9th-edition-2022/poverty-welfare#:~:text=Altogether%2C%20the%20federal%20government%20spends,year%20on%20134%20welfare%20programs.