It has been 40 years since President Johnson’s administration declared war on poverty in the United States, yet progress remains sluggish. In the mid-1970s, insecurity in the living status of non-elderly individuals arose due to extensive inflation, soaring unemployment rates, and decreasing real wages (Danziger 2005). The United States has fallen victim to globalization as specific trends of inequality and social segmentation confront it. From the 1950s up until the early 1970s, poverty and income inequity experienced a significant decline before reaching their weakest point. Today’s poor are younger than previous generations and are part of the working group rather than being unemployed. These new outlines of inequality and poverty – children and working individuals – contradict growth but coincide with falling unemployment rates since halfway through the 1990s, an outcome once believed improbable (Hytrek et al. 2008).
The United States has shifted its national priority away from combating poverty. This is reflected in certain changes to the welfare policy, which now focuses on increasing the work efforts of the poor instead of their income. Political efforts to address the gap between those who have and those who do not have enough have weakened. As a result, the present generation seems less interested in supporting welfare policies unless they bring jobs to marginalized communities (Danziger 2005).
This brief aims to assess the United States government’s antipoverty efforts and their impact on the community. It also suggests innovative ways to reinvigorate these initiatives as necessary. It is important to note that without poverty alleviation policies, the poor will never fully benefit from the economic growth of the overall economy (Danziger 2005).
Efforts to Alleviate Poverty
For forty years, the US government has been in a constant battle against poverty. In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson set up his own War on Poverty with the aim of eradicating income poverty. While his foremost economic advisers assumed this goal would be completed by 1980, it became apparent that this was not the case after the onset of the 1970s. As of 2003, the official poverty rate remained at about 12.5 percent of the entire US population – a figure that had remained relatively unchanged for three decades (Danziger 2005).
Initially, the agents of war fervently pursued their cause, as reflected in the programs and policies implemented from 1965 to 1975. These anti-poverty endeavors had a significant impact. One policy that became most valuable for families with children was the Earned Income Tax Credit, which emerged in the mid-1990s (Danziger 2005). However, as time passed and generations changed, precedence on similar efforts eventually vanished. This trend intensified when the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) was passed; thereafter welfare lost its seat among America’s most contentious concerns. Despite numerous critics of the reform, it was declared a success by both Republican and Democrat elites. Furthermore, a population of indigent women with children but lacking cash has emerged and constantly increased; many have exhausted cash provisions from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (Hildebrandt et al., 2009).
Similarly, Americans have developed false impressions towards reducing welfare as a mere trifle. For instance, when welfare is discussed with White Americans, they would probably regard it as something that only benefits black Americans. The foremost reason for this phenomenon was media coverage – newsmakers implicated welfare as a tremendously black and appalling social program (Dyck et al., 2008).
Poverty is not a Priority
There are three reasons why welfare, specifically poverty reduction, can be in a dismal state for a country that can do better. It all boils down to prioritization. Unfortunately, the government seems to have deprioritized poverty. The eradication of poverty has gone from being at the forefront of public concern to being an afterthought.
Currently, only the elderly have a robust social safety net that shields them from the volatile business climate and secular economic trends that have led to declining real wages for many workers and increased poverty levels for households with children. US anti-poverty programs for seniors are no longer as effective as they were 25 years ago and are much less helpful than those in other modern economies.
Since 1980, major anti-poverty initiatives have received relatively little political and public attention in the US (Danziger 2005).
Danielson (2008) reported in his study that upon the re-entry of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) in 2006, government officials under the Bush administration declared a dramatic success in welfare reform. However, studies have not thoroughly reviewed to what degree certain welfare policies contribute to a decline in the caseload.
Regardless of the U.S.’ pursuit of providing equal opportunities, poverty is not a top priority for the government since it is not considered a public main concern. Compared to other modern nations, the social safety net in the U.S. is less effective. Social safety nets are means to eliminate the consequences of poverty and other risks for vulnerable families (World Bank Group, 2008).
It appears that the incidence of poverty in the United States is higher compared to other industrialized countries. This is because Americans focus on increasing the poor’s work, which often does not reduce income poverty. Opinion polls show that Americans believe in improving their quality of life through self-reliance and hard work. Therefore, most Americans are unsympathetic to government redistribution of wealth.
Other polls asked if Americans agree with the government’s responsibility to close income gaps and provide guaranteed income for everyone. Results show that Australia had 43% who agreed and 51% who strongly agreed; Sweden had 53% who agreed and 46% who strongly agreed; UK had 66% who agreed and 68% who strongly agreed; West Germany had 66% who agreed and 58% who strongly agreed. In contrast, only 38% of Americans agree while only35 % strongly agree (Ladd et al.,1998).
There were also problematic and inconvenient policies implemented by the government. Some required welfare recipients to work in low-wage labor markets, which meant they had to frequently visit the welfare office during business hours. Such policies are not sustainable in the long run (Martin, 2008).
What Can Be Done?
The big question now is what the United States and its people can do to alleviate poverty. Past encounters with anti-poverty policies can be of great help in formulating future anti-poverty programs, as well as mobilizing the nation to prioritize the battle against poverty.
To begin with, there is a need to strengthen and harmonize the political will in the implementation of anti-poverty programs. Past experiences in the US during the 1960s and in the UK during the 1990s prove that strong political initiatives and concentrated efforts are necessary to address pressing poverty issues and champion major anti-poverty movements.
This study suggests that adept individuals and groups should initiate an awareness campaign on welfare policy reform. The stakeholders involved should be informed politicians, academics, NGOs, and mass media who have the power to influence and educate the community. This is in response to the growing indifference of today’s generation towards the underprivileged.
Over the long run, US policies have been successful in alleviating poverty among the elderly. Similarly, the UK’s comprehensive set of programs aimed at reducing child poverty has been victorious. In both cases, there has been a substantial increase in government spending.
During Prime Minister Tony Blair’s reign in the UK (1999), there was a noteworthy increase in cash welfare benefits. Compared to 1997, these increases noted an 85 percent rise by 2003. Similarly, a remarkable increase of 25 percent was achieved for universal child benefits during this period.
Rise in earnings was achieved when Working Families Tax Credit was introduced which is similar to Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) framework. Credits are more generous relative to average salary and returned to a greater proportion of families including employed adults without children. Additionally, a minimum wage some notches higher than the average US wage was introduced (Danziger 2005).
This paper is based on the premise that improving tax collection can enable a country to allocate more funds towards welfare programs. Some literature suggests that the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) can be an effective tool in combating poverty, particularly for African-American women (Olugbenga, 2008). This addresses the challenge of generating funds for such programs. For example, earning supplements like the Working Families Tax Credit or EITC are applicable in countries where most of the workforce pays income and payroll taxes since these entries help determine the credit amount for poor families. However, many developing economies may not find such programs practical (Danziger, 2005).
Stable and sustainable economic growth is the primary requisite for succeeding in antipoverty efforts in any country; otherwise, any initiative will be at great risk of failing. Furthermore, the highly competitive globalized economy and constant technological advances necessitate critical effort to capacitate the labor workforce with appropriate skills and human capital. All countries, including the US, are faced with the pressure of holding down wage costs due to globalization and technological breakthroughs leading to labor-saving machinery. Therefore, an increase in productivity suggests the closest means to increase real wages. Later on, this will require more access to education so that the labor force will have a higher educational background (Danziger 2005).
This study suggests that schools should be empowered to integrate Total Quality Management in order to enhance the quality of education delivery. Sustainable economic growth requires an adept workforce capable of meeting the demands of a constantly changing environment. This is an effort that cannot be achieved overnight, but it will eventually pay off.
References
- Ajilore, O. (2008). The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit on Poverty: Analyzing the Dimensions by Race and Immigration. Review of Black Political Economy, 35(4), 117.
- Danielson, C. (2008). Did Welfare Reform Cause the Caseload Decline? The Social Service Review, 82(4), 731.
- Danziger, S., Danziger, S. (2005).The U.S. Social Safety Net and Poverty: Lessons Learned and Promising Approaches. University of Michigan.
- Hildebrandt, E., Stevens, P. (2009). Impoverished Women With Children and No Welfare Benefits: The Urgency of Researching Failures of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program. American Journal of Public Health, 99(5), 793-801.
- Hytrek, G., Zentgraf, K. M. (2008). America Transformed: Globalization, Inequality, and Power. Oxford University Press, xvi, 238.
- Ladd, E., Bowman K. (1998). Attitudes Toward Economic Inequality. American Enterprise Institute. Washington, D.C.
- Martin, K. C. (2008). Blame Welfare, Ignore Poverty and Inequality. Journal of Social History, 41(3), 765-767.
- Social Safety Nets (2008).
- The World Bank Group. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/WBI/WBIPROGRAMS/SPLP/0,,contentMDK:20260748~menuPK:461663~pagePK:64156158~piPK:64152884~theSitePK:461654,00.html
