The fact is that we can’t say precisely how the new measure will turn out. Based on the most recently available Census estimates (from October 2009), the reference poverty threshold for a measure similar to the one the Administration is now proposing would have been somewhere between $23,500 and $27,744 (for a family of four in 2007). So likely higher than the $21,027 official threshold that year, but still some roughly $20,000 or more below the average nationwide amount that family budget standards suggest is needed to make ends meet at a basic level (as well as the minimum amount that most Americans say in surveys is needed to make ends meet at a basic level). Because Census has proposed some changes to the measure used to make these estimates, the final numbers may change somewhat from these estimates, but most observers who have been following this issue would agree that we won’t end up with thresholds that are substantially higher than the high end of the current estimates.

Also while the thresholds under an NAS approach will likely be higher by at least a few thousand dollars, the approach would also count benefits like the EITC and food stamps that aren’t currently counted, so one could argue that the higher threshold needs to be discounted a bit for comparison purposes, especially with groups like single parents who may receive several thousand dollars a year in those benefits. While the new approach would subtract amounts parents spend on child care, it wouldn’t make any adjustment for parents who need quality child care, but can’t actually afford it; the same is likely to be the case for health care, although Census suggests it’s open to looking at an adjustment for people who are uninsured and simply can’t afford to get the care they need.

Finally, there’s an specific important issue for Alabama. The figures for the poverty thresholds above are national ones made before applying certain geographic cost adjustments Census is proposing. If made, these adjustments will almost certainly lower Alabama’s poverty threshold below the national reference threshold, and could lower it below the current federal poverty threshold. According to a recent estimate by the Center on Law and Social Policy, Alabama’s poverty threshold and rate would actually fall under this new approach once the adjustment is applied. The state’s poverty rate, for example, would fall from 15.2% to 12.5%, and Alabama would have a poverty rate lower than the national average.

This simply doesn’t jibe with other data we have about the extent of deprivation in Alabama compared to the rest of the nation. Alabama’s food insecurity rates, for example, are higher than the national average not lower. It’s important to stress that these estimates will likely change, but we simply can’t say right now, at least based on the information we have so far, that the measure will provide a more realistic measure of poverty in Alabama, even when compared to the current very flawed measure.

A related issue of concern is that the Administration is not currently proposing to provide a real measure of what it takes to “make ends meet” at a basic level. Such a statistic, which would be about twice the current poverty line or more, is vital to provide essential context for the new supplemental poverty measure being proposed by the Administration.

Shawn Fremstad
Inclusive and Sustainable Economy Initiative
Center on Economic and Policy Research
Washington, DC

Hightower uses humor but I’m thinking about putting a boot to the behind of Georgia’s http://www.johnlinder.com/ should I ever cross his path. I’m guessing Uncle Sam helped put him through dental school but then HE built his lending empire. He and his ilk use basic right wing producerism and market populism built now around even worse economic circumstances.

They have little if any shame but I’ll be fighting for the poor until my days are done. Rascals like this Bauer buffoon haven’t gotten away with anything yet.

I’M GLAD TO SEE THAT SOMEONE REALIZES THAT THERE IS NO COMMUNITY INPUT! THIS IS FOR ONE PARTICULAR PERSON IN HALE COUNTY TO BENEFIT! READ MORE ABOUT THIS PLACE AND YOU WILL SEE WHO GETS PRAISED ALMOST ALWAYS, THEN YOU WILL KNOW WHOSE BENEFITING THE MOST.
ITS NOT THE PEOPLE WHO RECEIVES THESE HOMES SURELY.

We can not let special interests keep our educational system in shambles. between the teachers Union, and pandering to the the anti gambling interests for votes, we can produce little more then college football.

Give ecucation a chance, start with charter schools. And if its the poor who gamble, at least let thier kids get the benifits by having a state Lottery. And for gods sakes, start with a state ambling commission!