首页> 外文OA文献 >Poverty Rates The Receipt of Safety Net Program Benefits: The Original Poverty Measure vs. The Supplemental Poverty Measure, by Family Structure
【2h】

Poverty Rates The Receipt of Safety Net Program Benefits: The Original Poverty Measure vs. The Supplemental Poverty Measure, by Family Structure

机译:贫困率和安全网计划收益的收益:按家庭结构划分的原始贫困衡量标准与补充性贫困衡量标准

摘要

Executive SummaryPolicy QuestionThis project addresses two policy questions. The first policy question seeks to address how poverty rates vary by family structure using the original poverty measure vs. the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The second policy question investigates how the receipt of four safety net program benefits (SNAP, WIC, TANF, and the EITC) affect the poverty rate using the SPM, by family structure. BackgroundThe original poverty measure was developed in 1963 (Fisher 1992). The poverty measure is an incredibly important measure, as it determines who is poor in the United States and is often used as a threshold to determine eligibility for government benefit programs. Aside from adjustments for inflation, the poverty measure has changed little since its inception (Fisher 1992). The original poverty measure has many limits and recently a new measure was created to more accurately measure poverty (Smith 2009). The new measure is called the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), and includes several enhancements to the original poverty measure. The SPM includes adjustments for geographic location, in-kind benefits such as SNAP and WIC, transportation, healthcare, childcare costs, and modern family configuration including resource sharing among unmarried partners (commonly known as cohabiting couples) (Short 2013). I investigated the anti-poverty effects of four social safety net programs SNAP, WIC, TANF, and the EITC. I looked at these programs in particular because they serve my population of interest, families with children. Data & MethodologyI used data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a nationally representative survey of the non-institutionalized American population. The CPS collects detailed information on household income and structure, and is one of the preeminent sources of information on American well-being. My primary variable of interest was family structure; I classified families with children into four categories, married, cohabiting, never-married, and divorced. For more information about variable definitions and the CPS and ASEC, please see pages 20-22 of this paper. To determine the relative anti-poverty effects of SNAP, WIC, TANF, and the ETIC, I calculated the relative change in poverty status for each of the four family structures if that benefit was excluded. For more information about the modeling approach please see pages 22-23 of this paper. I then ran weighted means in STATA subtracting one federal safety net program out from the estimation of total resources and observed the change in the poverty rate. I ran all of these calculations by family structure. FindingsRegarding the difference in poverty levels between the original and Supplemental Poverty level (policy question #1), I found that the relative ranking of family structures by poverty status was consistent. Married families had the lowest poverty rates, followed by cohabiting families, followed by one-parent households. A within-family comparison of the poverty and the SPM, however, indicated that most families had lower levels of poverty. For example, the poverty rate of White never married mothers under the old poverty measure was 33.3 percent, but the poverty rate of white never married mothers using the Supplemental Poverty Measure is 27.5 percent.In terms of the poverty impact of the four social programs (policy question #2), three general conclusions emerged. First, two-parent families (married and cohabiting families) are associated with smaller increases in poverty rates when benefits are excluded, relative to single-parent (never-married and divorced) families. Second, historically disadvantaged populations, such as families headed by people of color or with low levels of educational attainment, are associated with the largest increases in poverty rates when benefits are excluded. Third, across programs the EITC has the largest anti-poverty effect. For more information about findings for the second policy question please see pages 38-47 of this paper. Policy Relevance The findings from this project show that the impact of safety net program benefit receipt varies by family structure, and by program. As the American economy continues to recover from the Great Recession, the correct funding levels for social safety net programs continues to be a subject of constant debate. Cutting or expanding funding for social safety net programs will have different effects on different types of family structures. Those family structures that have higher utilization rates of safety net programs will be most affected. Overall, families headed by a never-married mother are the most vulnerable to increases in the poverty rate when safety net program benefits are cut, and married mothers are the least vulnerable. The program with the strongest anti-poverty effect for all family structures is the EITC.
机译:执行摘要政策问题该项目解决了两个政策问题。第一个政策问题旨在使用原始贫困衡量标准与补充贫困衡量标准(SPM)来解决贫困率如何随家庭结构而变化。第二个政策问题是按家庭结构调查四个安全网计划收益(SNAP,WIC,TANF和EITC)的接收如何使用SPM影响贫困率。背景技术最初的贫困衡量标准于1963年制定(Fisher 1992)。贫困衡量标准是一项非常重要的衡量标准,因为它确定了美国的穷人,并且经常被用作确定是否符合政府福利计划资格的门槛。除了通货膨胀的调整外,贫困衡量标准自实施以来几乎没有变化(Fisher 1992)。最初的贫困衡量标准有很多局限性,最近又创建了新的衡量标准,以更准确地衡量贫困(Smith 2009)。这项新措施称为补充贫困措施(SPM),其中包括对原始贫困措施的一些增强。 SPM包括地理位置的调整,实物福利(例如SNAP和WIC),交通,医疗保健,育儿费用以及现代家庭配置,包括未婚伴侣(通常称为同居夫妇)之间的资源共享(Short 2013)。我调查了四个社会安全网计划SNAP,WIC,TANF和EITC的反贫困影响。我之所以特别关注这些计划,是因为它们为我感兴趣的有孩子的家庭服务。数据和方法我使用了当前人口调查(CPS)的数据,该数据是对非制度化美国人口的全国代表性调查。 CPS收集有关家庭收入和结构的详细信息,并且是有关美国福祉的重要信息来源之一。我感兴趣的主要变量是家庭结构。我将有孩子的家庭分为四个类别:已婚,同居,未婚和离婚。有关变量定义以及CPS和ASEC的更多信息,请参见本文第20-22页。为了确定SNAP,WIC,TANF和ETIC的相对扶贫效果,我计算了四个家庭结构中每个贫困结构的贫困状况的相对变化(如果排除了这种收益)。有关建模方法的更多信息,请参见本文第22-23页。然后,我在STATA中使用加权均值从总资源估算中减去一个联邦安全网计划,并观察了贫困率的变化。我按照家庭结构来进行所有这些计算。关于原始贫困水平和补充贫困水平之间的差异(政策问题1),我发现按贫困状况划分的家庭结构相对排名是一致的。已婚家庭的贫困率最低,其次是同居家庭,其次是单亲家庭。然而,家庭内部对贫困与SPM的比较表明,大多数家庭的贫困水平较低。例如,按照旧的贫困衡量标准,白人从未结婚母亲的贫困率是33.3%,但是使用补充贫困措施的白人从未结婚母亲的贫困率是27.5%。关于四个社会计划对贫困的影响(政策问题2),得出了三个一般性结论。首先,相对于单亲(未婚和离婚)家庭,当排除福利时,双亲家庭(已婚和同居家庭)的贫困率上升幅度较小。第二,历史上处于不利地位的人口,例如以有色人种为首的家庭或受教育程度较低的家庭,如果不考虑利益,则与贫困率的最大增加有关。第三,在所有计划中,EITC的反贫困影响最大。有关第二个政策问题的调查结果的更多信息,请参见本文第38-47页。政策相关性该项目的结果表明,安全网计划收益的影响因家庭结构和计划而异。随着美国经济继续从大衰退中恢复过来,社会安全网计划的正确资金水平仍然是不断争论的话题。削减或扩大社会安全网计划的资金将对不同类型的家庭结构产生不同的影响。那些安全网计划使用率较高的家庭结构将受到最大影响。总体而言,如果削减安全网计划的福利,则以未婚母亲为首的家庭最容易受到贫困率上升的影响,而已婚母亲则最不容易受到影响。对所有家庭结构而言,最有效的反贫困方案是EITC。

著录项

  • 作者

    Bandy Monica;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en_US
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号