U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

45–037 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 110–810 

LEAVE NO FAMILY BEHIND: HOW CAN WE 

REDUCE THE RISING NUMBER OF AMERICAN 

FAMILIES LIVING IN POVERTY? 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2008 

Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee 

( 

(II) 

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

[Created pursuant to Sec. 5(a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress] 

SENATE 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JOHN SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Vice Chair 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

ELIJAH CUMMINGS, Maryland 

LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas 

JIM SAXTON, New Jersey, Ranking Minority 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MICHAEL LASKAWY, Executive Director 

CHRISTOPHER J. FRENZE, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MEMBERS

Hon. Shelton Whitehouse, a U.S. Senator from Rhode Island, invited to attend hearing ......................................................................................................... 1 

Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney, Vice Chair, a U.S. Representative from New York .. 2 

WITNESSES

Statement of Hon. David N. Cicilline, Mayor, city of Providence, Providence, 

RI ........................................................................................................................... 4

Statement of Dr. Rebecca M. Blank, Robert S. Kerr Senior Fellow, Brookings 

Institution, Washington, DC ............................................................................... 6 

Statement of Angela Glover Blackwell, founder and CEO, PolicyLink Center 

for American Progress, co-chair, Task Force on Poverty, Oakland, California ..................................................................................................................... 9 

Statement of John W. Edwards, Jr., chairman, Community Action Partnership, Inc., Washing, DC; executive director, Northeast Florida Community 

Action Agency, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida ......................................................... 11 

Statement of Robert E. Rector, senior research fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC ........................................................................................... 13 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Prepared statement Carolyn B. Maloney, Vice Chair .......................................... 34 

Prepared statement of Senator Charles E. Schumer, Chairman ......................... 36 

Prepared statement of Hon. David N. Cicilline, Mayor, city of Providence, 

Providence, Rhode Island .................................................................................... 39 

Prepared statement of Dr. Rebecca M. Blank, Robert S. Kerr Senior Fellow, 

Brookings Institution, Washington, DC ............................................................. 41 

Prepared statement of Angela Glover Blackwell, founder and CEO, PolicyLink 

Center for American Progress, co-chair, Task Force on Poverty, Oakland, 

California .............................................................................................................. 50 

Prepared statement of John W. Edwards, Jr., chairman, Community Action 

Partnership, Inc., Washing, DC; executive director, Northeast Florida Community Action Agency, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida ............................................ 58 

Prepared statement of Robert E. Rector, senior research fellow, The Heritage 

Foundation, Washington, DC .............................................................................. 65 

(1) 

LEAVE NO FAMILY BEHIND: HOW CAN WE REDUCE THE RISING NUMBER OF AMERICAN 

FAMILIES LIVING IN POVERTY? 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2008 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, 

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–562 of the Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, the Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney, presiding. 

Representatives present. Maloney and Hinchey. 

Staff present: Christina Baumgardner, Heather Boushey, Nan 

Gibson, Gretta Goodwin, Colleen Healy, Aaron Kabaker, Tyler 

Kurtz, Dan Miller, Justin Ungson, and Jeff Wrase. 

Vice Chair Maloney. The Committee will come to order. Chairman Schumer is unable to attend today’s hearing on poverty, and 

has asked me to chair, and I want to thank all of our witnesses 

for being here to testify. 

I have heard from Senator Reed. He is going to try to get here. 

He is involved in the entire financial situation, as is Senator 

Whitehouse. I’m so thrilled that he is here for a special welcome 

to the Mayor from the great State of Rhode Island. 

Before I go to my opening statements, I’m going to recognize Senator Whitehouse and thank him for being here, and let him welcome Mayor Cicilline, and have his opening comments. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELTON WHITEHOUSE, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND 

Senator Whitehouse. Well, first, let me thank you, Congresswoman Maloney, for your courtesy in allowing me to come and intrude on this Committee. I’m not a Member of the Committee, and 

it’s a great courtesy on the part of you and Chairman Schumer, to 

allow me to do this. 

I appreciate it very, very much, and I’m delighted that you have 

invited Mayor Cicilline from Rhode Island’s capital city, Providence, to be a part of this very important panel that you have 

called together today. 

We are seeing now—and one of the reasons everyone is so busy 

today is that we are seeing now the consequence, the harsh consequence of many years of truly awful economic policy by the Bush 

administration. 

We have caused this day to come, or I should more clearly say, 

they have caused this day to come, and along the way, there were 

2 

many warning signs about what the Bush policies were doing to 

our economy. 

There is nowhere, I think, in this country where those warning 

signs were felt more painfully, were felt earlier, were heard more 

clearly, than in America’s cities and by America’s mayors, where 

the pain from those policies has been evident for a long, long period 

of time. 

So the role of mayors now, in working toward a new sense of economic fairness in this country, I think is vital, and I’m delighted 

that David is here as a mayor. I’m particularly proud of him because of the wonderful job that he’s done in Providence. 

Providence has a bit of an interesting and challenging history. I 

spent 3 years beginning and overseeing a criminal investigation 

into public corruption of a predecessor of David’s. I spent many 

years trying to work with the Providence Police Department, which 

had wonderful people, but which was a deeply, deeply challenged 

institution, based on its leadership, and he has in many different 

respects brought a new day to Providence, and in particular, on 

these economic issues, where he has reached out to the community 

and developed a variety of strategies and institutions through 

which he is trying to overcome the difficulties that the national 

economy has forced on our cities, and keep Providence as a place 

just recently recognized yesterday as one of the hundred best 

places in American for young people to live. 

And so I’m very delighted that he’s here, and I again, appreciate 

your courtesy in allowing me to welcome such a prominent and respected Rhode Islander to your Committee. 

Vice Chair Maloney. I thank you so much, Senator Whitehouse. You honor us with your presence. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY, VICE 

CHAIR, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK 

I, particularly, want to thank Senator Kennedy for requesting today’s important hearing on poverty in America. Senator Kennedy 

has devoted his career to being a strong and vocal champion for the 

poor. 

Our hearts go out to him and his family, and we wish him well 

with his recovery. 

I also want to thank each and every witness for being here and 

for all of their hard work in combating poverty. Today, our Nation’s 

leaders are focused on the unfolding financial crisis. 

Yesterday, in testimony before this Committee, Federal Reserve 

Chairman Bernanke said that the United States is, quote, ‘‘facing 

grave threats,’’ end quote, to financial stability, and warned that 

the credit crisis has started to damage household and business 

spending. 

We need to act swiftly to pass the legislation that will bring stability to our financial system, but also shield Main Street from paying too high a price for the mistakes made on Wall Street. 

The financial crisis may seem far removed from the problem of 

poverty. The bottom 80 percent of households only own 9.4 percent 

of all stocks, including stocks in retirement funds. 

3 

But the financial troubles on Wall Street have already been 

working their way down to Main Street. Unemployment is rising, 

and real wages are now as low as they were in September of 2001. 

As Chairman Bernanke said yesterday, and I quote, ‘‘Economic 

activity appears to have decelerated broadly.’’ He went on to say 

that if we do not address the financial crisis, more jobs will be lost. 

Poverty tends to rise and fall with the strength of the economy. 

During the economic expansion of the Clinton era, when unemployment hovered around 4 percent, poverty fell to 11.3 percent, its 

lowest level in decades. 

However, the weak recovery of the 2000s under the current Administration did not lead to further reduction in poverty, and it 

now stands more than a full percentage point above its 2000 level. 

Today in the United States, 1 out of every 8 people—over 37 million—is living in poverty. That so many of our citizens toil in poverty is a testament to how far we need to go to ensure that all of 

us enjoy the fruits of our economic growth. 

The majority of people living in poverty are among the working 

poor. Poverty in America is the result of millions of jobs that do 

not pay enough to ensure families can make ends meet. 

Over a quarter of U.S. jobs pay very low wages and do not provide health insurance or a retirement plan, according to the Center 

for Economic and Policy Research. 

Other nations have made great strides against poverty by establishing clear policy agendas. For example, the United Kingdom has 

embarked on an ambitious plan to cut poverty in half in 10 years, 

and we should look to them as a model. 

As they have demonstrated, reducing poverty, requires a variety 

of policy steps, from raising the minimum wage and expanding the 

earned income tax credit, to guaranteeing child care assistance. 

Parenthood should not put you on a pathway toward poverty. 

We must ensure that everyone, including low-wage workers, can 

find the right balance and not have to choose between their children and a paycheck. 

In recognition of this as part of their anti-poverty agenda, the 

UK policymakers passed legislation that always allows workers to 

request a flexible schedule. Senator Kennedy and I have introduced 

similar legislation, the Working Families Flexibility Act, and I hope 

we can work together to get it passed in the next Congress. 

To fight poverty, we must understand who is poor. Most analysts 

agree that the U.S. poverty measure is outdated and inappropriate 

for measuring true need. 

Our measure does not take account of how taxes, non-cash benefits, and work-related and medical expenses affect well being. 

Further, the U.S. poverty measure does not account for how the 

cost of basic goods and services have changed since the 1960s, or 

how costs differ by geography. 

Our panelists today will provide recommendations for addressing 

the measurement issue. 

I look forward to today’s testimonies, to help us understand how 

we can take action to reduce poverty in America. 

I first would like to recognize and introduce Mayor David 

Cicilline. Mayor Cicilline served four terms as a State Representative from Providence’s East Side where he earned a reputation as 

4 

a fierce champion of political reform and gun safety and his dedication to ethics in government. 

In 2002, David Cicilline announced his candidacy for Mayor of 

his hometown of Providence, Rhode Island. Mayor Cicilline swept 

a four-way primary election and went on to win the general. 

He graduated from Brown University and earned his J.D. from 

the Georgetown University Law Center. I welcome Mayor Cicilline, 

and you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Maloney appears in 

the Submissions for the Record on page 34.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID N. CICILLINE, MAYOR, CITY OF 

PROVIDENCE; PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND 

Mayor Cicilline. Thank you, Vice Chair Maloney. It’s a great 

honor to be here as a representative of mayors and other elected 

officials from across the country who are working to address the serious economic issues that are the subject of this hearing. 

For many generations, during those moments when America has 

faced difficult economic times, some view our cities as our greatest 

burden. In the national imagination, cities were frequently viewed 

as the ball and chain of the national economy, dragging America 

down. 

Words like ‘‘devastated,’’ ‘‘blighted,’’ and ‘‘ruined,’’ were so often 

associated with the word, ‘‘urban,’’ that they effectively became 

synonymous. 

But something remarkable began happening a decade or so ago. 

American cities began a striking comeback, benefiting from effective Federal policies in the 1990s, as well as the transition to a 

knowledge-based economy, and cities are again the center of culture, innovation, and most of all, economic growth. 

Additionally, cities house our great scientific research centers 

that will give birth to the innovations that will power America with 

new forms of energy. 

Also, contrary to most people’s ideas about urban America, cities 

are the greenest places we can live, based on existing consumption 

patterns. 

Cities are the solution, but as a Nation, we are not tending our 

metropolitan garden. In recent news, the evolution of cities has 

continued in spite of national policy, not because of it. 

As a result, we are severely restraining or metropolitan transformation, at a time when we need to accelerate it. We need a Federal partnership again. 

Foremost among those constraints—without a doubt—is poverty. 

Poverty is to a family and to a community, what inflation is to an 

economy. Its consequences spill over into everything else and have 

a lasting and devastating impact. 

But what makes it worse is that there are effective measures we 

know we can take to prevent poverty from persisting. Not surprisingly, the headway we made on poverty in the 1990s, coincided 

with this metropolitan comeback, but in recent years, that headway 

has been reversed. 

In my view, one of the reason for this is the sharp decline in 

funding first focused on by the Children’s Advocacy Group, on 

whose advisory board I sit, who, in a recently released report reVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:30 Jun 29, 2009 Jkt 048099 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\45037.TXT PREBLE PsN: DPROCT
5 

vealed that the share of non-defense spending on kids has declined 

by a full 10 percent in just 5 years. 

But I know you’re presented with statistics and requests for 

funding all the time. I just want to share with you my perspective, 

as the Mayor, of the work that we’re doing, and that’s currently 

working to reduce poverty in our community. 

Many people view poverty as a complex and interrelated set of 

problems. I view it very simply: Poverty is a lack of opportunity, 

so to me, the fight is not so much a war on poverty, as it is a war 

for opportunity. 

The long-term answer does not lie in merely relieving the 

stresses and pain of poverty; the long-term answer lies in rebuilding upward mobility in America. 

The wary for opportunity means rebuilding the economic ladder. 

When there is upward mobility, there is hope. Families will work 

harder to make sure their children are educated, stay out of trouble, and develop a strong work ethic, but when there is not, it creates an environment for many of the social ills that can ruin lives 

and drive up the cost of social programs. 

Unfortunately, all across the country, the economic ladder has 

been badly weakened in recent years. It used to be that the American dream was available to anyone who was willing to work hard 

enough, but in today’s economy, too many families are doing everything right and still getting left behind. 

At my second inauguration in 2006, I identified restoring economic prosperity as one of the highest priorities for my city. I 

signed an Executive order creating a task force made up of our 

foremost experts on workforce development, poverty, and early 

childhood development and family supports. 

I asked them to offer me their best recommendations for what we 

can do at the city level, as a government and as a community, to 

reestablish upward mobility for our working poor and to help rebuild the middle class in our city. 

Similar efforts were undertaken by Mayor Villaraigosa in Los 

Angeles, and Mayor Bloomberg in New York City. In Providence, 

this task force developed a set of action steps called Pathways to 

Opportunity, to move people into the workforce, keep them in the 

workforce, and open up more opportunity to get ahead, once they’re 

in. 

With that report in hand, I formed a partnership with the N. E. 

Casey Foundation, to open an office that is charged with overseeing 

the implementation of these recommendations in coordination with 

the city and the agencies that helped to develop them. It also 

serves as a community-based site for residents to connect to new 

opportunities. 

We launched a number of ambitious projects as part of this new 

initiative. We have young people from across the city, who are integral parts of a major construction project in our schools, that involves cutting-edge green technology and learning how to build 

lead-to-lead standards. 

We have partnered with our hospitals that are facing a serious 

nursing shortage to get young people access to the skills they need 

to begin a good career in the healthcare field. 

6 

Taking the lead from the Brookings Institute work on the high 

cost of being poor, we’re working with local banks and an organization called Bank on Providence. It’s developing financial instruments specifically designed for low-wage families and individuals 

who have no prior banking relationship. 

I’m also working with the State Legislature to regulate the ability of predatory lenders and check-cashers to extract usurious rates 

and charges from their customers, most of whom haven’t had access to mainstream banking. 

We’re aggressively engaging with ex-offenders to reintegrate 

them back into the community, and many, many other efforts. I see 

my time is up, but I’ll just end by saying, Madam Vice Chair, that 

if I had more time, I’d talk about the wonderful after-school programs that we’re creating in the community, the policing model in 

Providence, and all the things that impact on poverty. 

But I want to conclude with a general comment. Our cities represent tremendous opportunities for the 21st century economy. We 

can unleash that potential by making opportunity for every American, a national priority again. 

After all, the other name for a robust economic ladder and upward mobility is the American dream. That’s what made our economy the envy of the world and it’s the only way we can preserve 

its position in our global economy. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Hon. David N. Cicilline, w/attachment, appears in the Submissions for the Record on page 39.] 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. Your time is up, but your entire statement will be in the record, along with your very interesting report that you have submitted. 

I agree with you, the cities are the center of thought and activity. 

I come from a city, and a lot of great things are happening in 

yours, so we appreciate your being here today. 

Mayor Cicilline. Thank you so much. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Professor Rebecca M. Blank is the Henry 

Carter Adams Collegiate professor of public policy at the University 

of Michigan. 

She is also professor of economics and the co-director of the National Poverty Center at the Ford School. 

She is currently on leave as the Robert V. Kerr Visiting Fellow 

at the Brookings Institution. She is the author of ‘‘Working and 

Poor: How Economics and Policy Changes Are Affecting Low-Wage 

Workers; Measuring Racial Discrimination.’’ 

Professor Blank graduated in Economics from the University of 

Minnesota, and received a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. We thank you for being here, for your 

books, for your research, and for your testimony today. 

Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF DR. REBECCA M. BLANK, ROBERT S. KERR 

SENIOR FELLOW, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION, WASHINGTON, DC 

Dr. Blank. Thank you, Congresswoman Maloney. I appreciate 

being invited here. I should say that the bio you have is a little old. 

I’m actually permanently at the Brookings Institution right now, so 

I’ve moved to Washington, DC. 

Vice Chair Maloney. OK. 

7 

Dr. Blank. The Census Bureau recently released the official 

numbers on income and poverty for 2007, and I want to underscore 

a few key facts from that release. 

First, poverty did not fall to any appreciable extent throughout 

the economic expansion of the 2000s. If you look in past decades, 

when unemployment rises, poverty goes up; when it falls, poverty 

goes down. 

When unemployment fell after 2003, poverty essentially stayed 

flat. This sluggishness on the part of the poverty rate, reflects general sluggish growth in income by all people in the bottom half of 

the income distribution. Both those in the middle, as well as at the 

bottom of the distribution had lower incomes in 2007 than they did 

in 2000. 

Of course, if the 2007 data doesn’t look as good as we had hoped, 

2008—I promise you—will look substantially worse, given the rapidly rising unemployment and the recent economic news that’s been 

dominating all of the newspapers. Poverty is going to be a major 

issue in the agenda of the next Administration. 

I’ve been asked to spend most of my time this morning focusing, 

however, not on these numbers, but on the measurement of poverty 

itself. 

There’s widespread agreement that our poverty measure is badly 

flawed and needs to be updated. A bill to improve and to produce 

a modern poverty measure, was just introduced in the House by 

Congressman McDermott, and Senator Dodd is working on companion legislation in the Senate. 

Our current poverty measure was defined in 1963 by the Social 

Security Administration. It contains two components: A line, a poverty line, and a resource definition, against which you compare 

families’ resources to see if they’re above or below that line. Let me 

talk about each, in turn. 

The current poverty line is easy; it’s three times a subsistence 

food budget. The subsistence food budget was defined by the USDA 

in 1961 based on 1955 household consumption survey data. 

The multiplier of three came about because the average family 

in 1955 spent one-third of their income on food. If you spend a 

third of your income on food, take three times the food budget and 

you have a poverty line. 

With only minor changes, our current poverty line is this number, c alculated in 1963, based on 1955 data and updated by the 

Consumer Price Index. There is no other economic statistic in use 

today that relies on 1955 data and on such outmoded methodologies. 

The resource measure in the poverty line was, very simply, a 

family’s cash income. While that might have made sense in the 

early 1960s, it is also badly outdated. It is no longer an adequate 

description of the sort of resources that families have available. 

If a disabled individual starts to receive Medicaid, this doesn’t 

show up in their poverty count. If a family receives food stamps, 

it doesn’t affect the poverty count. If a worker receives an EITC refund check, it doesn’t affect the poverty count. 

Why does this matter? Our measured poverty rate, is simply insensitive to most of the dollars and most of the policies that we 

have expanded in the last three decades. In a fundamental way, 

8 

our poverty measure has undercounted policy gains and made it 

easy to claim that public spending on the poor has had little effect. 

Now, this doesn’t mean that our official measure is completely 

meaningless. In a year like 2007, with no policy or tax changes, it 

does measure what the economic effects were on the low-income 

population. 

But we can and should do better in an official economic statistic. 

In the mid-1990s, the National Academy of Sciences was asked 

by Congress, to make a recommendation for improving the measure 

of poverty, and they came out with a rather major volume that describes how to improve this statistic. 

The panel recommended calculating a poverty line based on a set 

of expenditures—food, shelter, clothing, utilities, plus a little bit 

more. 

They recommended a resource definition that started with cash 

income, but took account of taxes, added in in-kind benefits, and 

subtracted off unavoidable payments on medical expenses or on 

work expenses. 

All of these changes have been much discussed in the years since 

then, and in fact, a good number of states and localities have been 

expressing interest in this new line, as well. This last summer, for 

instance, New York City developed a city-specific poverty measure, 

based on the National Academy approach. 

It’s time to break through the political logjam that has prevented 

the development and the utilization of an updated poverty measurement. The new legislation in front of the House and the Senate, 

will do this, directing the Census Bureau to develop a modern poverty measure, using the National Academy recommendations. 

Of course, improving the measure of poverty will not reduce poverty. We also need to combine that with policies such as—and you 

mentioned these earlier—expanding the EITC to workers who do 

not have children in their household; increasing assistance to help 

working mothers, in particular, to pay for childcare. 

In addition, we need to assure the presence of an effective safety 

net, helping, in particular disconnected women—women neither 

working nor on welfare—to be able to stabilize their incomes. 

We also need to make sure that unemployment insurance serves 

those who are without a job. Right now, it serves less than 40 percent of them. 

Our official statistics indicate that poverty in this country rose 

last year. It’s going to rise further and faster in the year ahead. 

We need the legislation that will help us measure this problem 

and know what its boundaries are and who is most affected by it. 

We also, of course beyond good measurement, need good policy as 

well, supporting those who are working and giving assistance to 

those for whom jobs are not immediately available. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Rebecca Blank appears in the 

Submissions for the Record on page 41.] 

Vice Chair Maloney. Well, I want to thank you for your hard 

work. I will certainly be a co-sponsor of Congressman McDermott’s 

bill, and agree wholeheartedly that without good data, we don’t 

have good policies, and if we can improve our way of measuring it, 

it would be tremendously important. Thank you for your testimony. 

Dr. Blank. Thank you. 

9 

Vice Chair Maloney. Ms. Blackwell is the founder and chief executive officer of Policy Link, a national research and action institute advancing economic and social equity. 

In 1987, she founded the Urban Strategies Council in Oakland, 

California, and received recognition for pioneering a community 

building approach to social change, through in-depth understanding of local conditions, community-driven systems reform, and 

an insistence on accountability. 

Ms. Blackwell earned a Bachelor’s Degree from Howard University, and a Law Degree from the University of California at Berkeley. She co-chairs a Center for America Progress Task Force on 

Poverty, called Hope, Opportunity, and Mobility for Everyone; 

Home, the National Initiative to End Poverty. 

We thank you for your hard work and leadership in this area, 

and please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF ANGELA GLOVER BLACKWELL, FOUNDER AND 

CEO, POLICY LINK, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS; COCHAIR, TASK FORCE ON POVERTY, OAKLAND, CA 

Ms. Blackwell. Thank you and good morning. I do chair the 

Center for American Progress Task Force on Poverty, along with 

Peter Edelman of the Georgetown University Law School. 

And in addition to the 37 million people living below the poverty 

level that you mentioned, an additional nearly 50 million, live 

below 200 percent of the poverty level, making 90 million people 

living below 200 percent of the poverty level one health crisis, one 

family emergency away from poverty’s door. 

It really doesn’t have to be this way. The Center for American 

Progress Task Force, recommends that the United States set a national goal of cutting poverty in half in the next 10 years. 

To accomplish this goal, the Task Force proposes 12 recommendations grouped under four principles: Promote decent 

work—people should work and jobs should pay enough to ensure 

that employees and their families, avoid poverty; provide opportunity for all—children should grow up in conditions that maximize 

their opportunities for success, and adults should have opportunities throughout their lives to connect to work and become better 

educated; ensure economic stability—Americans should not fall into 

poverty when they cannot work or when work is unavailable; and 

help people build wealth—all Americans should have the opportunity to build assets that allow them to weather periods of flux 

and volatility. 

These four principles and the following recommendations will cut 

poverty in half only if they work in tandem. 

Through the strategies outlined below, America can cultivate a 

new cycle of prosperity. To promote decent work, the Center for 

American Progress Task Force recommends that we raise and 

index the minimum wage to half the average hourly wage; expand 

the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit; promote 

unionization by enacting the Employee Free Choice Act; and guarantee childcare assistance to low-income families; and promote 

early education. 

Compared to other countries, in this country the poverty rate 

does not represent low work effort. People who work, really should 

10 

be able to maximize that work to get out of poverty, and by doing 

just three of these things—increase the minimum wage, expand the 

earned income tax credit and child credit, and provide childcare assistance—we could cut poverty by 26 percent, instantly, according 

to modeling done by the Urban Institute. 

To provide opportunity for all, the Task Force recommends that 

we create 2 million housing opportunity vouchers that will allow 

low-income families to live in communities rich with opportunity. 

We need to connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth to 

work and school, simplify the Pell Grants so that higher education 

is more accessible to all, and help former prisoners find stable employment and reintegrate into communities. 

To ensure economic security, the Task Force recommends that 

we ensure equity for low-wage workers in the unemployment insurance system and that we modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a coordinated system to help workers and their 

families. 

And to help poor families build wealth, the Task Force recommends that we reduce the high cost of being poor and increase 

access to financial services, and expand and simplify the saver’s 

credit to encourage savings for education, home ownership, and retirement. 

In addition, the Nation’s infrastructure is crumbling, and as we 

think about doing that, we need to think not only about how to invest in infrastructure, but how to build the workforce capacity so 

that low-income people can get those jobs. 

Many low-income people are being left behind because the communities they live in are being left behind, without broadband, 

without public transportation. 

And we need never forget that many people who are poor are 

poor because of poor health, and while we work to try to increase 

access to healthcare coverage, we need to know that the places 

where people live are often making them sick. People who are in 

low-income communities have little access to fresh fruits and vegetables because of the absence of grocery stores, little access to exercise because there aren’t safe streets or places to exercise. These 

need to be part of our investments. 

Poverty is multidimensional. Its causes and its effects are myriad 

and its solutions are multidimensional, and when done well, the 

benefits can be multidimensional, as well. 

For example, investing in the construction of a hospital in a lowincome community, when the project is tied to job training and 

local hiring, delivers immediate construction jobs, eventual health 

services, and long-term community benefits. 

Creating tax credits and incentives for affordable housing in 

mixed-income communities can bring families in closer contact with 

jobs, put children in contact with good schools. 

Poverty results in adverse economic effects for the entire Nation, 

and alleviating poverty can improve all of our lives. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Angela Glover Blackwell appears in 

the Submissions for the Record on page 50.] 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you so very, very much, for many 

ideas and directions that we can work in in public policy. 

11 

John W. Edwards, Jr., is chair of the board of trustees for the 

Community Action Partnership. The Partnership’s mission is to be 

a national forum for policy on poverty and to strengthen, promote, 

represent, and serve its network of member agencies, to assure 

that the issues of the poor, are effectively heard and addressed. 

He is executive director of the Northeast Florida Community Action Agency, which assists low-income persons with specific services involving their day-to-day existence, including, but not limited 

to: LIHEAP, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program; 

temporary food assistance; and home weatherization. 

We thank you and recognize you for 5 minutes. Thank you, Mr. 

Edwards. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN W. EDWARDS, JR., CHAIRMAN, COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP, INC. WASHINGTON D.C.; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST FLORIDA COMMUNITY ACTION 

AGENCY, JACKSONVILLE, FL 

Mr. Edwards. Good morning and thank you for being here. As 

you mentioned, I represent the 1,000 Community Action Agencies 

nationwide, and you have adequately covered, basically, our mission. 

I won’t repeat what Dr. Blank and Ms. Blackwell and others 

have said, and you as well, Mrs. Maloney, related to the statistics 

and whatnot, but I would like to make some comments with regard 

to the changing nature of poverty in America, who we are seeing 

throughout this country at the local ground level of the 1,000 Community Action Agencies nationwide. 

In addition, I would like to also talk with you specifically about 

some of the demographics of the people that we’re seeing in America today, and that will give you, I believe, some idea in terms of 

the nature of the people who are coming to Community Action 

Agencies around this country. 

Then finally, I have a few recommendations for you to consider 

as you look at policy and laws governing how we help more people 

to get out of poverty in America. 

What we do know, is that the face of poverty is changing every 

day. We have seen that through the number of people who are coming to Community Action Agencies nationwide. 

We are seeing more people who are coming to us who are traditional families. That means a working husband, a working wife, 

and children. 

That’s nontraditional to us, because historically, we’ve not seen 

that level of family unit coming to our doors to avail themselves of 

our services. 

What we do know, is that more middle class families are asking 

for public assistance today, than ever before, and that’s reflective 

of the state of the economy, loss of jobs, outsourcing of jobs to other 

countries, and the like. 

I just came from a 3-day meeting of community action professionals that we had in Philadelphia over the last 3 days. There 

were 17 States represented there: Washington, Oregon, California, 

Montana, Wisconsin, Missouri, Kentucky, South Carolina, Florida, 

Indiana, Virginia, New Hampshire, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Nevada, 

Illinois, and Alabama. 

12 

So I took this little research, if you will, by asking them a question based on their experiences, most of which are executive directors and other practitioners in Community Action Agencies nationwide. What they reflected is that they’re seeing now, 80 percent of 

their population are nontraditional people who avail themselves to 

Community Action Agencies. 

And I think that’s remarkable, in terms of seeing a different person who lives in poverty today. These are nontraditional, why? Because they don’t come to us, they haven’t come to us in the past. 

The other thing is that because of the state of the economy, related to layoffs in the finance industry and the like, which also indicates that there is a tremendous draw on resources throughout 

Community Action Agencies in this country. 

In addition to that, there is a recent trend toward more people 

asking for basic assistance of food, shelter, cooling, heating costs, 

transportation, childcare, and the like. 

And clearly, I agree with Dr. Blank in terms of what she indicated about the poverty level and how that was all configured, you 

know, over 40 years ago, so I won’t repeat that because I concur 

with what she said, and of course, my testimony is there. 

What I do want to do is spend a couple of minutes giving you 

an idea of 22 months of demographics of people that we have seen 

in Northeast Florida. We’re based on Jacksonville, but we have offices in the six counties surrounding Duval County or the city of 

Jacksonville. 

In the last 22 months, we’ve seen 24,466 people, and of those 

people that we’ve seen, 15,000 are females, 9,400 are males. We’re 

also seeing a situation where most of the people that we’re seeing 

are working-age people, in other words, they’re between the ages 

of 18 and 54, and of the 24,000 people, about 16,000 of those are 

in those age categories, which are people who should be working. 

Educationally, most of the people we see have either a high 

school diploma or less, so of the 10,000 people from which we collected data, around 8,500 of them have high school education or 

less. 

In addition to that, we also see that most people don’t have income based on employment, and clearly in our country, that’s one 

of the best ways that we’re going to be able to do that. Most people 

rent their homes and the like. 

Obviously, the Federal formula just needs to be changed, based 

on what Dr. Blank said and other statistical information that’s reflected in my report. 

And then finally, I want to indicate this report, ‘‘Rooting Out 

Poverty,’’ that the Community Action Network has developed, and 

two themes: Building an economy that works for everyone, and invest in the future. 

And so when we look at these kinds of things, we would really 

like to emphasize that the LIHEAP program, the Low-Income 

Home Energy Assistance Program, needs to be expanded. Certainly, the earned income tax credit needs to be expanded, full appropriations for the Community Services Block Grant and the like 

would be wonderful to help many of the Americans get out of poverty today. Thank you. 

13 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Edwards appears in the Submissions for the Record on page 58.] 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you so much. You entire testimony 

and your report, will be part of the record. We really thank you for 

bringing information, really, from the front lines of the war on poverty, and the work that you’ve been doing is greatly appreciated. 

Robert Rector is a Heritage Foundation senior research fellow. 

Prior to joining the Heritage Foundation, he worked as a legislative 

assistant in the Virginia House of Delegates, and as a Management 

Analyst at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. He is the author of ‘‘America’s Failed $5.4 Trillion War on Poverty: An Examination of U.S. Welfare Programs,’’ and co-editor of 

‘‘Steering the Elephant: How Washington Works.’’ 

Rector holds a Bachelor’s Degree from the College of William and 

Mary, and a Master’s Degree in political science from Johns Hopkins University. Thank you for being here today, for your books, 

and for the testimony. All of your statement will be put in the 

record, and we recognize you for 5 minutes. 

I want to also mention that my colleague, Congressman Hinchey 

has joined us, so we’re pleased he’s here. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. RECTOR, SENIOR RESEARCH 

FELLOW, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. Rector. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here 

to testify today. I have seven basic points that I would like to make 

today. 

The first point is that the welfare state in the United States is 

simply enormous. Last year, this year in fiscal 2008, Federal, 

State, and local governments spend $679 billion on means-tested 

welfare assistance to poor and low-income people. 

Total means-tested welfare spending this year considerably exceeded the entire budget of the Defense Department, including all 

expenditures in the war on Iraq. Since the beginning of the War 

on Poverty, the United States has spent over $14 trillion on meanstested assistance to the poor. Over the next 10 years, if current expenditure levels continue, we will spend $9 trillion on assistance to 

the poor, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and targeted 

social services. 

As a result of that $9 trillion, we can expect—as we found in the 

past—that the capacity of low-income people to support themselves 

will actually go down. 

Point number two: Most so-called poor people in the United 

States are not poor in any normally understood sense of the word. 

For most Americans, the word ‘‘poverty’’ suggests destitution, an 

inability to provide food, basic shelter, or clothing. But if that’s 

what you mean by ‘‘poverty,’’ virtually none of the 37 million people 

defined as poor by the Census Bureau, in fact, meet those criteria. 

My favorite statistic from the Government’s own data on the poor 

is that two-thirds of them have cable and satellite television. According to the Government’s own data, the typical American defined as poor by the Government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, stove, clothes washer, dryer, microwave. This individual 

has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, has a VCR and a 

DVD player, and a stereo. 

14 

By his own report, he’s able to obtain medical care for his family 

whenever needed, his home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not and has not been 

hungry, and he has had sufficient funds to meet all his family’s essential needs. 

While this individual’s lifestyle is certainly not opulent, it is extremely far from the popular images of dire poverty promoted by 

activists. 

Point number three: The United States does not have a higher 

poverty level than countries in Europe. Statistics that purport to 

show that, use a skewed standard in which poverty is more difficult to escape from in the United States because the hurdle is 

higher here than in other countries. 

If you use a uniform standard, the income of the bottom of the 

U.S. population is roughly similar to that of most European countries. 

Point number four: Poverty levels in the United States remain 

high because the United States is currently aggressively importing 

poverty from abroad through both legal and illegal immigration. 

For example, when we hear about poor children in the United 

States, no one realizes that 1 out of 8 of the poor children in the 

United States, as measured by the Census, is actually the child of 

an illegal immigrant. 

Over the last 25 years, through both legal and illegal immigration, we have imported 12 million high school dropouts into the 

United States. 

These individuals cause a massive increase in welfare expenditures. Currently, 1 out of 4 poor people in the United States is an 

immigrant who we have brought here from abroad. It is impossible 

for us to reduce poverty if we are aggressively importing it as rapidly as we can from other nations. 

Point five: The major cause of child poverty in the United States 

is the high level of out-of-wedlock childbearing. In the last measured year, 38 percent of American children were born out of wedlock. If the mothers of those children were actually married to the 

fathers of the child—the actual father of the child—70 percent of 

them would immediately be raised out of poverty, but we will do 

nothing whatsoever to correct this problem because promoting marriage is politically incorrect in our country. 

Point six: The second major cause of child poverty is very low 

levels of parental work. In any given year—it does not vary much 

from one year to another—when you look at poor families with children, on average they have only about 600 or 700 hours, maybe 

800 hours of work in that family per year. That’s about 16 hours 

a week. 

These families are poor because no one is working very much. If 

you raise that family to the point where labor in the family was 

the equivalent of one worker working full-time, full-year, 75 percent of those families would be immediately raised out of poverty 

without any additional expenditure from the taxpayer. 

Point Seven: In order to reduce poverty, we need to address the 

root causes of poverty, not merely the symptoms. That means we 

must address low-skilled immigration, the collapse of marriage, 

and the very low work effort of low-income families. 

15 

Our goal should no be to reduce poverty, but to promote prosperous self-sufficiency, to promote a society in which individuals 

can support themselves above the poverty line, without endless and 

ever-expanding handouts from the taxpayers. Thank you very 

much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rector appears in the Submissions for the Record on page 65.] 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you very much, and I thank all the 

panelists for their important testimony and for being here today. 

Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke warned us that 

if Congress does not approve of the Treasury’s $700 billion backstop, then unemployment will increase and the economy will enter 

a potentially protracted recession. 

I would like to ask any of you to comment and articulate how the 

troubles on Wall Street are affecting poor and near-poor families, 

and I open it up to whomever would like to comment. 

Dr. Blank. 

Dr. Blank. I’ll make a comment on that. So our economy runs 

on trust. We believe that those little pieces of green paper in our 

pockets mean something. 

What has been happening in the last number of months has been 

a real breakdown in trust in the financial institutions of this country for a variety of reasons. 

We can talk about who’s to blame or not to blame for any of that, 

but at the end of the day, the effect of this is going to ripple 

through the rest of the economy in all sorts of ways. Consumers, 

as a result of this, are going to be much more cautious about 

spending in the next several months, and that’s going to reduce 

consumer spending. 

Businesses are going to be much more cautious because either 

they can’t get credit, or they’re simply not going to go about investing in the very near term. The effect of all of this is to slow down 

the economy and lead to rising unemployment. 

Trying to take actions to stop the problems within the financial 

sector are absolutely mandatory for preventing an extended and 

long-term recession in the rest of the economy. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. 

Mayor Cicilline, would you like to comment on that? 

Mayor Cicilline. We are seeing in cities all across this country, 

and certainly in Providence is no exception, the consequences of the 

downturn in the economy already. We have record high unemployment in the State of Rhode Island with an increasing number of 

people availing themselves of community action centers, and of assistance in housing. There are difficulties in people finding and retaining employment and great anxiety about their future. 

So that we are seeing, as a result of reductions in investments 

in education and in child care and in Community Development 

Block Grants, and all the things that support strong communities, 

strong neighborhoods, and strong families, the consequences frankly of the past number of years. 

My concern of course is that the markets be stabilized of course, 

but it is very important that the challenges that American families 

are facing in cities all across this country also be addressed, parVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:30 Jun 29, 2009 Jkt 048099 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\45037.TXT PREBLE PsN: DPROCT
16 

ticularly in the area of housing, health care, and educational opportunity. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Mr. Rector, and then Ms. Blackwell. 

Mr. Rector. The figure of $700 billion in the bailout is of course 

very large, but I would remind this Committee that next year, according to the projections of OMB, total means-tested welfare 

spending in a single year alone will exceed $700 billion. Over the next 10 years we are going to spend close to $9 trillion 

on welfare. And most of this spending consists of obligations on the 

part of the taxpayer with little or no obligation on the part of the 

welfare recipient. 

And so just as when we look at the Wall Street bailout, I think 

we need to look—not have unilateral obligations on the taxpayer. 

One of the major failures of the welfare state is that it is primarily a unilateral taxpayer obligation with little or no requirement on the part of the recipient and the poor to take steps to improve their own well being. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Ms. Blackwell. 

Ms. Blackwell. Agreeing with the comments of the Mayor and 

Dr. Blank, I just want to add that we need to make sure that in 

the bailout that we are paying attention to those who are impacted 

by the foreclosure crisis. 

At the base of all of this is Americans working very hard trying 

to play by the rules and achieve the American dream having the 

rug completely pulled out from under them, and that is essential 

in terms of making sure that they do not continue to suffer. 

But also, when we think about this issue of what we are doing 

in Washington, it is moving from Wall Street to Main Street all the 

way to people living on the street. People who are poor, and homeless, and dependent on food banks, and soup kitchens, and homeless shelters are going to feel this as well, because we have shifted 

so much of the responsibility for the people who are most vulnerable to private donors, to foundations, and to corporate giving. 

As we see the impact on those people, we need to make sure that 

the safety net is strong, and that those people who are most vulnerable in society are not just thrown out with no support at all. 

Vice Chair Maloney. That is very important, and Democrats 

are paying attention to that, and many of my bipartisan friends 

also. We also passed a very important bill in the Financial Services 

Committee, the Hope Housing Bill, that has many initiatives in 

there to work with localities, to work with individuals, to help people stay in their homes. 

The economy is experiencing a crisis in its financial and credit 

markets, and the labor market is experiencing a downturn. To address some of these problems Congress is considering a second 

stimulus package. 

Do you think that an economic stimulus package would help reduce poverty? If so, how? And how would you target such a package? Mayor Cicilline and I will go to other people who would like 

comment, and then my colleague has some questions. 

Mayor Cicilline. Yes, Vice Chairman. I think a second stimulus 

package would certainly assist, and I would strongly urge the Congress to consider including in that a real investment in rebuilding 

America’s cities and its infrastructure. 

17 

There are cities all across this country that are dealing with very 

old infrastructure. We at the U.S. Conference of Mayors, along with 

the American Society of Civil Engineers, do a report card on the 

state of America’s infrastructure each year, and in every category— 

bridges, roads, water systems—the grades are F, and D- and D+. 

This is an opportunity to rebuild our cities, rebuild the infrastructure to support an economy of the 21st century so we can 

move goods and services, and at the same time create good jobs 

that cannot be shipped overseas, that are in our cities, in our communities to help rebuild the economic life of families who live in 

our cities. 

So I hope as part of the stimulus package there will be a serious 

investment in infrastructure. 

Dr. Blank. Can I add on to that, for more immediate short-term 

needs with the problem of rising unemployment, I think there are 

two things that it is really important to have in that stimulus 

package, and I know they are in certain drafts of it right now. 

One is a short-term increase in Food Stamp benefits, which is an 

excellent way to get a lot of dollars to the families that are being 

most impacted by rising unemployment and by a failing economy. 

Secondly, to increase the appropriations to LIHEAP, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, given the high fuel prices 

right now, particularly in the Northeast and northern parts of the 

country. Over this coming winter that is going to be absolutely 

mandatory and needs to be part of the package. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Any other statement? 

Mr. Edwards. 

Mr. Edwards. Yes. Thank you very much. In addition to what 

is being said, of course what we are seeing is that we would like 

to see more people use the money in the stimulus package to help 

with investing in assets, long-term assets, home ownership, maybe 

even starting small businesses, saving for post-secondary education, those kinds of things over the long haul that would help 

people to really assist themselves to come out of poverty. 

Vice Chair Maloney. And Mr. Rector. 

Mr. Rector. I think it is important before we propose new 

spending that we actually have an accurate assessment of what is 

currently being spent. 

I am very shocked that most of the people on this panel seem to 

be coming here before you and suggesting that welfare spending 

has somehow declined in recent years. Welfare spending on the 

poor is at a record level. It has never been higher. Per capita welfare spending is at a record level. It has never been higher, after 

adjustment for inflation. 

I really think that most of this testimony is abusing and maligning the taxpayers of the United States, and I think before we propose new waves of spending we ought to at least get an accurate 

accounting, and get some kind of credit to the taxpayers for what 

they are currently spending, which as I said exceeds the entire 

budget of the Defense Department, including the War in Iraq. 

Dr. Blank. May I say something about those numbers? 

Vice Chair Maloney. Dr. Blank. 

Dr. Blank. The spending on means-tested programs has gone up 

in recent years. A great deal of that increase has all gone into 

18 

health insurance costs, and rising prices in the health insurance industry I think are not the main issue that Mr. Rector here is talking about. There’s a whole set of reasons for that that have little 

to do with what we are doing for means-tested programs, but it is 

driving means-tested programs up. 

If you look at health insurance spending, a disproportionate 

share of those rising prices are coming from payments to institutionalized individuals, either disabled or elderly. That is not the 

image of the poor that Mr. Rector is presenting to you, but that is 

where the vast majority of the increases in dollars are going. And 

I think we need to know that. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. I would like to now recognize 

Congressman Hinchey from New York State who has been an active and important Member of Congress and of this Committee especially. 

Mr. Hinchey. 

Representative Hinchey. Madam Chairwoman, thank you very 

much. I very much appreciate being here. 

I want to just open up by apologizing for not being here earlier 

so I could have listened to the testimony that was being presented. 

I was at a caucus meeting for the Democratic Party which was focused on this bailout suggestion which has come from the Secretary 

of the Treasury, $700 billion to bail out the financial circumstances 

that our economy is confronting. That $700 billion request I think is just another example of how 

so much attention in the economic circumstances of our country 

has been based upon the top levels, the upper levels, and that 

would include things like the tax cuts, for example. 

I would disagree with Mr. Rector that not enough attention is 

being focused on the working people of our country and the results 

of that failure of attention has on the general population. 

For example, we have seen that just in this year—which is not 

nearly over yet—we have already lost more than 600,000 jobs 

across America. And as the population goes up and the loss of jobs 

continues to go up, that has a very profound effect on all of the people across America. 

So the economic circumstances that we are dealing with is very, 

very serious. We have seen an increase in the number of people in 

poverty. We have seen a decline in the middle class. We have seen 

a decline in the standard of living of most of the people across our 

country. We have seen a greater concentration of wealth in the 

hands of fewer people than we have seen at any time in our history 

since 1929. All of these things are causing a very serious set of circumstances that have to be dealt with. I think obviously the lifting 

of people out of poverty is the main part of that. 

So I would just ask this question, if you wouldn’t mind responding to it: We are considering a stimulus package now. Obviously a 

stimulus package is necessary because of the downturn in the economy and the way that that downturn is impacting on working people all across the Nation. 

So I wonder if you might have some suggestions about what 

might be contained in this stimulus package, what we might do to 

effectively upgrade the economic circumstances particularly of 

working Americans. 

19 

Mr. Mayor, if you would like to start, I would appreciate it. 

Mayor Cicilline. Sure. In addition to the investments in infrastructure, one of the things that has been a very successful way to 

both stimulate our economy, but also to rebuild cities and to help 

those who are in most need of assistance, has been the Community 

Development Block Grant Program. 

Every city that has communities that are in need that meet those 

guidelines has ready to go programs, and systems in place that can 

quickly move those resources into the neighborhoods and into the 

cities and into the communities. 

They have already identified those that are eligible for the program that are in desperate need: poor, elderly, disabled, communities that need that kind of assistance. It is a system which has 

worked. It is a system that is modest. It has been reduced every 

year for the last 4 or 5 years at a time when we should have been 

increasing it. 

I would say, these are not handouts. These are making investments in families, and neighborhoods, and cities in this country 

that produce huge returns. So increasing that investment by, as 

the U.S. Conference of Mayors has recommended, doubling the 

Community Development Block Grant Program so we can really 

make investments to the people who most need it in the communities. Rebuilding our infrastructure. Reestablishing partnerships 

with the Federal Government in the COPS Program that keep our 

communities safe. Job training programs that help to bring young 

people into the work force. Supporting after school programs, and 

increasing funding there. 

Those are things that will not only stimulate our economy but 

strengthen our neighborhoods, and strengthen our families who 

will then contribute to strengthening our economy. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Mr. Edwards. 

Mr. Edwards. Yes. Thank you very much. 

In addition to that, anything that rewards work. I think that in 

our economy what we really want to be able to do is to help people 

to be gainfully employed. Somehow we need to figure out a way to 

ensure that when people do work that they have good wages, good 

benefits, so that they themselves can get out of poverty. 

So such things as expanding the Child Tax Credit would be certainly something that we would recommend. Certainly increasing 

the Earned Income Tax Credit. And really fully funding the Community Services Block Grant is a program that really helps people 

to get out of poverty in America. 

Representative Hinchey. Mr. Rector. 

Vice Chair Maloney. And then Ms. Blackwell. 

Mr. Rector. One of the recommendations of things that should 

be included in the stimulus package is an expansion of the Food 

Stamp program. I would strongly oppose that because welfare and 

assistance in the United States should not be a one-way handout. 

It should be based on giving assistance, but requiring constructive 

behavior on the part of the recipients. 

The current Food Stamp program is a fossil which does not reward work. It rewards idleness. It discourages labor. And it penalizes marriage. It does everything exactly the opposite of what you 

would want to do. 

20 

I would say that if you wanted to consider reforming or expanding the Food Stamp program, one of the principal things that you 

would do in it is require able-bodied non-elderly adults who receive 

benefits to either work or prepare for work or undertake organized 

job search, or something like that, in exchange for the aid that they 

get. 

We did that, at least temporarily, as part of welfare reform in 

the 1990s and we had a dramatic reduction in poverty as a result 

of that policy. 

Unfortunately, there is a very strong political momentum against 

that type of work obligation, and as a result we have made no additional progress. I have proposed for 10 years that the sorts of reforms that we did in the Aid to Families With Dependent Children 

Program to induce and promote work should also be done in Public 

Housing and Food Stamps, but so far Congress has taken no steps 

whatsoever to improve those programs. 

Representative Hinchey. Well I think it is clear that work has 

to be encouraged, and I think there are an awful lot of people out 

there who want jobs. 

Let me just give you an example. 84,000 jobs were lost in August; 61,000 of those were manufacturing jobs. We are losing the 

best jobs that we have with the highest salaries. Now more than 

9.4 million Americans are unemployed, and almost 2 million of 

those Americans who are unemployed have been unemployed for 

more than 27 weeks. So they are not eligible for the Unemployment 

Benefits. 

You have an unemployment rate right now that has gone up to 

6.1 percent, but when you include in that unemployment rate people whose unemployment has run out—in other words, they have 

been unemployed for 27 weeks or more—and you include people 

who are working maybe 1 or 2 days a week, but are really desperately trying to find a real job, then the unemployment rate goes 

up above 10 percent. 

So that is some of the situation that we are confronting. I would 

agree that we need to encourage people to work, and we need to 

help find jobs for them, but it is increasingly difficult to find jobs 

in an economy that has been organized in a way to downgrade 

those jobs. 

So, Ms. Blackwell. 

Ms. Blackwell. Thank you. I certainly agree that we need to increase Food Stamps, we need to focus on green jobs, and we need 

to make sure that people can get to work and that people who go 

to work can support their families. 

I want to underscore the comments made by the Mayor, though, 

about the need to invest in the Nation’s infrastructure. Poverty policy needs to get embedded in all of our spending so that we are always thinking about whenever we are spending dollars how do we 

do that in a way that we reduce poverty? 

And so an investment in infrastructure, particularly when we are 

looking at the fact that most Americans live in our metropolitan 

areas, is an investment that actually reaches the people. It allows 

those communities that are being left behind because they are trying to build a 21st century economy on a 100-year-old infrastrucVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:30 Jun 29, 2009 Jkt 048099 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\45037.TXT PREBLE PsN: DPROCT
21 

ture to begin to have the environment that allows them to be competitive. 

We need to focus on the jobs, and not just say we want to make 

sure jobs go to low-income people, but invest in our community colleges to help them prepare the work force for the 21st century infrastructure investments. 

And when we are thinking about economic stimulus, we need to 

think about the fact that so many communities do not have the 

kind of economic activity that allows them to be viable and to be 

healthy. 

For example, we have food deserts all over this country where 

people who live in low-income communities—particularly African 

American communities—have no access to fresh fruits and vegetables. 

What that means is they have no access to grocery stores. The 

jobs are missing. The economic activity is missing. And the essentials for healthy living are also missing. So when we are doing the 

stimulus package we need to pull all of those things together. 

Thank you. 

Representative Hinchey. Thank you. Dr. Blank, do you have 

anything to add to that? 

Dr. Blank. The only thing that I would say is strictly in response to your comments about rising unemployment. I would underscore the need not just in terms of the stimulus package but in 

the longer run to really reform our whole Unemployment Insurance 

system. 

Less than 40 percent of the unemployed are able to receive Unemployment Insurance. Many of the lowest income workers are 

never eligible for it when they lose their jobs. And the whole point 

of the system is to provide a safety net when jobs are not available 

to those who want to work and who have been working. 

Mayor Cicilline. May I just add one thing? I just want to 

strongly underscore Dr. Blank’s recommendation for inclusion of 

LIHEAP in the stimulus package. Senator Reid, my Senator, has 

been one of the Nation’s leaders on that program, and it will be 

particularly urgent for cities. And cities are where the rubber 

meets the road, when we have families who do not have heat and 

can no longer afford to heat their homes. The things that follow 

from that are the people’s properties are foreclosed. The people 

start huddling in abandoned houses, fires get started, and all the 

kind of really dangerous consequences that follow. 

So I would really urge the Congress to include an increase in 

LIHEAP in the stimulus package as well. 

Representative Hinchey. Thank you. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Blank, in your testimony you talked about having a modern 

poverty measurement, but you wanted this responsibility in the 

Census Bureau instead of OMB. Could you elaborate why you 

would prefer it in the Census Bureau over OMB? 

Dr. Blank. So our current poverty measure is the only official 

economic statistic that is regularly reported on and used as widely 

as it is that resides not in one of our statistical agencies but inside 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

22 

It was basically ordered in the late 1960s by OMB that this definition that I discussed would be produced and reported on regularly by Census. 

The problem is that OMB sits within the Executive Office of the 

President. So any changes in the statistic have to go through the 

entire byzantine process of political approval inside the White 

House, and it is simply not to the benefit of any President to make 

changes to statistics in ways that either raise or lower those numbers, because they will be accused of playing politics, however good 

their motives. It makes no sense to have the White House in control of your statistics. There is a reason why almost no major industrialized nation puts its statistical agencies under its immediate 

executive. 

Vice Chair Maloney. But the Census Bureau does have a poverty measurement in the Census Bureau now. I believe it’s called 

the SIPP Program. How is that different from what you are trying 

to do? Because they do measure. They release their own numbers 

on poverty, don’t they? 

Dr. Blank. One thing the Census has done a very good job on— 

recognizing the problems with the current poverty measure—is 

that they have produced quite a variety of alternative measures. I 

think they report on somewhere around 26—it may be 24, it may 

be 28—but they regularly give you other poverty numbers. 

These are in web pages that you have to go looking for. It is not 

the same as a released piece of data that receives attention, and 

one discusses its implications and is used broadly throughout the 

Nation. 

So that the need is to basically take the National Academy recommendations and to produce a poverty number that is released at 

the same time as that OMB number. I have no problems with continuing our historical number. It’s one we have looked at for a long 

time. But to have an alternative measure here along the lines that 

this new House legislation proposes I think would vastly improve 

our understanding of who is poor. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Mr. Rector. 

Mr. Rector. I would just like to go on record to strongly oppose 

this new type of poverty measure. I regard it as highly deceptive. 

It is in fact a moveable measure. It is kind of like running a race 

but when you get close to the goal line at the end of the race we 

quietly, in the middle of the night, move the goal line further on 

and you have to continue to run further. 

Also, one problem about this type of relative poverty measure, is 

you cannot solve poverty by economic growth under such a measure 

because poverty is measured more or less as a relative share compared to the median family income. 

So if everybody’s incomes go up proportionately, there is no 

change in poverty. The only way that you can really reduce poverty 

under this proposed system is by radical income leveling, by taxing 

the middle and redistributing. And again it’s kind of like playing 

football game when you get down to the five yard line, then you 

go out and quietly move the goal post back further. I think it is 

a way of basically defrauding the taxpayers of the United States. 

Vice Chair Maloney. I would like to ask Dr. Blank. Any change 

in the official poverty measurement suggests that there may be a 

23 

change in the number of American households defined as poor. The 

Commission of Economic Opportunity in New York City has utilized this alternative definition that you’ve discussed, and can you 

comment on what they have learned from that change, and what 

conditions would we need to consider before implementing such a 

change in the national level? 

Dr. Blank. Yes. New York City released these alternative numbers for their city only this last summer. One of the things that 

New York did, which the National Academy recommends happening on a nationwide basis, is that they actually define a threshold that is reflective of the prices in their particular local area. 

Right now we have a threshold that is identical whether you are 

in New York City or Providence, or whether you are in rural Mississippi. 

So the poverty numbers in New York go up, but they go up almost entirely because of the cost of living adjustment. If you look 

at their numbers before they do their cost of living adjustment 

from New York, they are quite similar to those that come out of 

the official national statistic. 

From what I know of New York City, it is utterly appropriate for 

them to have higher poverty counts because they face much higher 

housing expenses in particular for living in the city. 

What you find with this new measure is that it does redistribute 

poverty in slightly different ways. You find a greater degree of elderly poverty because many elderly people are paying more out-ofpocket expenditures. 

You find a little less poverty among some of your single parents 

in part because you are allocating housing benefits, and Food 

Stamps, and other things to them. So there is a change. But it is 

exactly those differences that you want to measure, you want to 

look at, they say something about the resources that families have 

available. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. 

Mr. Hinchey. 

Representative Hinchey. It seems to me, and I am sure that 

this was mentioned in the context of some of your testimony, that 

there are a number of ways in which we can deal with this issue, 

and some of them are very constructive. 

I would say that among those constructive means of doing it 

would be to make sure that education is available to every American. That means education at the earliest stage, prekindergarten 

education, all the way up through community colleges at least. So 

that anyone who was interested in education could have that interest stimulated at a very early age, and then addressed and encouraged throughout those very important parts of their life as they 

grow up. 

As we grow up, a lot of the things that we believe in and determine and focus on and develop in forms of ambition, all of those 

things are developed during that period of time. So it seems to me 

that education would be one of the most important things we could 

focus our attention on, improving our educational system. 

Ms. Blackwell. One of the things that I did comment on before 

you came in the room was the need to really increase investments 

in early education. We have established again and again that inVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:30 Jun 29, 2009 Jkt 048099 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\45037.TXT PREBLE PsN: DPROCT
24 

vestments in early education that prepare children to begin school 

ready to learn pay off not only in terms of school improvements, 

but they pay off in terms of lifelong improvements. So we need to 

increase there. 

I also mentioned the need to simplify and expand the Pell Grants 

so that more people can have access to support to pursue higher 

education, and how important it is to make sure that we invest in 

young people who are out of school, and out of work to give them 

that second chance to be able to get either back in school, get into 

work, or figure out how to combine both so that they can get back 

on a path to prosperity. 

Representative Hinchey. Mr. Edwards. 

Mr. Edwards. Thank you. Early education is critically important to helping people to get out of poverty. Certainly funding programs like Head Start would certainly be very important. 

And then tie that to parents working. It is good to have the children, the young children involved in educational kinds of activities 

during the day, but it has to be coupled with the parents involved 

in some type of job training, or educational endeavor that will help 

them to get better paying jobs in the local economy. 

Representative Hinchey. Mr. Rector. 

Mr. Rector. I would disagree that Head Start is an effective 

antipoverty tool. I think it has a marginal or nonexistent effect on 

poverty. Education itself is beneficial. But if you were to look at the 

causes of child poverty, as we have talked about already today, low 

levels of education are an important factor. But lack of marriage 

is also an incredibly important fact. And lack of work is an incredibly important factor. 

Now we will spend about a hundred thousand dollars or more 

educating each poor child through the primary and secondary system in the United States. We spend close to $250 billion a year 

subsidizing single parents. 

I would ask, how much money do we spend trying to restore marriage in low-income communities? And the answer is we spend 

about $1 on promoting marriage for every $2,000 we spend subsidizing and increasing single parenthood. 

How much money are we spending trying to establish work requirements that have been shown effective to increase the amount 

of work performed by low-income parents? The answer is, virtually 

nothing. 

So we already put in an enormous amount of money on education, and education is important. We also put in a lot of money 

on job training, which is not particularly effective at all. But the 

other two elements of this strategy, marriage and work, are severely neglected by our current public policy. 

Representative Hinchey. Yes, Mr. Mayor. 

Mayor Cicilline. Congressman, I just want to agree with you 

strongly that I believe the single most powerful tool we have to reduce poverty and create opportunity for children and families is 

education. That is both from early childhood education, pre-K and 

Head Start programs, high quality educational opportunities 

through junior college and college, and also alternative educational 

opportunities like Youth Build, and Year Up, and other programs 

that provide young people with access to trades and vocations. 

25 

Those are very—in my city at least—those are incredibly successful programs that are giving young people access to good paying 

jobs to support a family. Obviously, high-quality public education 

and a system of public education is key to that. And so continuing 

to make good investments to create that kind of opportunity I think 

is our single best way to reduce poverty in this country. 

Representative Hinchey. Dr. Blank, anything additional? No? 

Dr. Blank. Only to agree on the comments about education. 

Representative Hinchey. One of the other things that of 

course we need to deal with is the salaries that people are paid, 

the minor amount of income, upgrading the level of income that 

people have. 

I think that that is something that has not been focused on. The 

low income situation in America today is one of the worst that we 

have had in decades, quite a few decades at least. 

So I am wondering about that situation. And also the fact that 

we are not yet engaged in equity pay in terms of the fact that 

women, for example, get on average about $.77 as opposed to $1 

that is paid to men doing the same kind of job. So that kind of equity in education would deal much more effectively with the situation which was mentioned earlier where you have families where 

the family is controlled and led only by the mother and the father 

is not there. So raising up that level of pay obviously would be 

something very significant. And increasing the minimum wage 

which I think is something that must be done. 

What would you say about that? 

Dr. Blank. Could I respond to the low-wage issue? The problem 

of falling wages among lower and less educated workers has been 

a very real problem in this economy, as you point out, and particularly for less-skilled men. 

There has been a real decline in labor force participation among 

less-skilled men, and particularly among less skilled men of color, 

which is of course a serious problem if you want people working, 

tied into the mainstream economy, able to support themselves and 

their families. 

That decline in wages has been very directly linked to the decline 

in labor force participation. Not surprisingly, if you don’t get paid 

as well, you don’t work as much. It is just not worth it to you. 

That is one of the reasons why I think a number of people—and 

again Congresswoman Maloney mentioned this earlier—are very, 

very concerned about expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit so 

that it provides more support to workers, even those who do not 

have children in their immediately family. It is a policy that would 

encourage greater labor force participation at the same time that 

it subsidizes those low wages that you have just mentioned. 

Ms. Blackwell. We also need to remember all of the people who 

are not in communities because of prison. One of the recommendations from the Center for American Progress Task Force is to really 

invest in re-entry programs for people who have served their time 

and are returning to the community. 

Since 1950 we have seen a 900 percent increase in the number 

of incarcerated black men, and the legacy of absence that this creates in communities in terms of people who are not there is something that very much needs to be addressed. And we need to make 

26 

sure that people can get a second chance, can come back, can get 

jobs, and can become contributing members of the society. 

And so those kinds of programs, programs like YouthBuild, combined with continuing to raise the minimum wage—the raise that 

happened was a very good thing, good progress—we need to continue to raise the minimum wage and to index it to be half the average hourly wage, increase the Earned Income Tax Credit and 

make it more available, promote unionization so that people who 

have jobs can know that they have good jobs, and guarantee child 

care so that we will not pull so much resources out of salaries for 

people to pay child care. But absolutely we need to focus on the equity in terms of earnings issue. 

Vice Chair Maloney. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

I would like to ask Ms. Blackwell and Mr. Edwards specifically 

this on the jobless claims rate. The Department of Labor reported 

that the jobless claims are at the highest level in 7 years. And now 

the claims for unemployment benefits are at 493,000 for the week 

ending September 20; 400,000 per week is typically seen as recession-level claims. 

So I specifically would like to ask—and I recognize myself for 

this questioning period for 5 minutes—millions of Americans that 

are poor and working families have one wage worker, yet despite 

having a worker in the family these families are just not getting 

by. 

This highlights the importance of strong work support as a poverty reduction strategy. What do you believe are the most important steps that we can take to support low-income workers in obtaining and maintaining employment? 

I would like to start with Ms. Blackwell and Mr. Edwards. 

Ms. Blackwell. Low-income workers, much of what we have already talked about responds to that, but we really do need to recognize that so many people who are low-income are working. 

When people lose their jobs they ought to have access to Unemployment Insurance, and we need to expand the Unemployment Insurance so that more people have access to it. 

People who are working should get the benefit of the Earned Income tax credit. People who are jobless need to have more access 

to Earned Income tax credits. And families who have multiple children need to have it extended on that side. To repeat, that when 

people go to work they need to have a minimum wage that actually 

is closer to being a living wage, and there needs to be support for 

people to be able to have the child care that they need and not 

have to continue to live in poverty. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Mr. Edwards. 

Mr. Edwards. Yes, thank you very much. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Then Mr. Rector. 

Mr. Edwards. Thank you very much. Let me start with what 

Ms. Blackwell just mentioned. 

The living wage is critically important to this. I know that that 

may be a taboo word at this level in our Government, but clearly 

the living wage, or a living wage is critically important to helping 

people to get out of poverty. 

You know, what we are experiencing today is really a downturn 

in the economy. Anything that happens on Wall Street, clearly 

27 

there’s a trickle-down effect that really hurts the people at the bottom rung of the ladder. So we really need to invest more time and 

energy and money into job training and help people to get into jobs 

that really pay decent wages. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. 

Mr. Rector, and then Dr. Blank, and then my time is expired. 

Mr. Rector. Low wages are not a significant cause of poverty in 

the United States. Anyone who examines the Census Bureau for 

even a few moments can clearly recognize that. 

Again I would emphasize the fact that any year when you look 

at poor families with children, on average, a very small number of 

those families have full-time, full-year workers. 

On average, poor families with children are working about 800 

hours a year, or about 16 hours a week. Now let’s say you added 

$2 an hour to their hourly wage rate, that is only going to bring 

the family’s income up about $1,600. It has a minimal effect on 

poverty because the problem is not that their wages are too low— 

not that I wouldn’t like their wages to be higher, I mean to be honest—but the principal problem is not that their wages are too low, 

but that there are very few hours of work being performed. 

And that is consistent every year you look at this data. It is not 

a result of the current depression or anything. That happens in 

good times, too. 

So if you are serious about this, instead of reworking trite slogans, the real issue is how do you increase the hours of work? Because just raising wages is almost totally irrelevant to the real 

problem. OK? 

Secondly, most people who get minimum wage are not poor. 

They’re teenagers, or young adults in middle class families. It’s an 

extraordinarily poorly targeted policy to say that you want to raise 

the minimum wage in order to deal with poverty. OK? 

It just costs the tax—the consumer a lot of money and you are 

benefiting a whole bunch of teenagers like my son who really don’t 

need a wage increase. OK? It’s not the group that you’re trying to 

benefit. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. Dr. Blank, and then my time 

has expired. 

Dr. Blank. Just a quick comment on low wages. Low wages and 

labor force participation are very closely linked. When wages go up, 

labor force participation goes up. So that you have a multiplier effect from this, which is one reason why I think—I certainly care 

about things like the EITC expansion, and the levels of minimum 

wage, but I want to say that not only when we think about assistance to the poor and getting them into jobs and employment, we 

should be very clear that at the end of the day it is not the employment programs and the wage subsidies that matter the most; what 

matters the most is that there are jobs out there for them to move 

into. 

Therefore, having a macroeconomy that is not in recession, where 

jobs are expanding and where low-wage workers who are looking 

for work can easily find it is by far the most important anti-poverty 

program. That takes us right back of course to the macroeconomy 

and to the current discussions of what is happening on Wall Street 

and how it affects Main Street. 

28 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. 

The Chair recognizes Congressman Hinchey for 5 minutes. 

Representative Hinchey. Well I very much appreciate what 

you said, and I think it is absolutely true. The situation with wage 

equity is very, very important. The availability of jobs is essential 

to the economy and to the circumstances of people. And the level 

of the minimum wage is also very important. 

It is very important to all those people who are working at the 

minimum. And I think it is a lot more than just a few children. 

The fact of the matter is that when you increase the minimum 

wage you increase effectively the wage of almost everybody else. 

When you jack up the minimum wage to where it ought to be—and 

the minimum wage has not been increased now in a very long time 

in any significant way; it is far below where it ought to be—the 

minimum wage today should be somewhere in the neighborhood of 

$10. That is where it really should be. 

And if you increase the minimum wage even a little bit above 

where it is, you are going to increase the wages of other people who 

are now above the minimum wage and have a very positive effect 

on the economy. And you have a very positive effect on the economy because most of the economy—more than two-thirds of it—is 

driven by the Gross Domestic Product. And the Gross Domestic 

Product is driven by working people, blue and white-collar working 

people. 

So I think what we are talking about here is very important, and 

it is something that really needs an awful lot of attention. 

There is another element, too, that I think needs a lot of attention, and that is health care. The situation with health care I think 

is causing a lot of problems for low- and now increasingly middleincome people. Because more and more people are finding themselves without health insurance. And they are also seeing that 

when they do have health insurance that the cost of that health insurance is going up very dramatically. 

So I would be interested, if anyone would like to comment on the 

initiative that really needs to be taken to promote a national health 

insurance program in order to drive down the cost of health care 

and to make health care available for all Americans, particularly 

early health care when people begin to feel that they need some 

health care attention, but are not eligible to get it, and they are 

not eligible to get it if they do not have any health insurance until 

they are really seriously ill and they have to go into the emergency 

room of a hospital and then make it more expensive for everyone. 

So if there is anything that you would like to say about health 

care and what we need to do with health insurance, I would be interested in hearing it. 

Ms. Blackwell. Actually I will leave it for others to talk about 

what we need to do about health insurance, but I do want to state 

that we need to make sure that every American has access to 

health care when they need it, and we need to have a system of 

universal access to health insurance and health care services. 

I want to use my time, though, to talk about the fact that so 

much of poor health in this country is not tied to health care, but 

it is tied to environmental factors, and behavior. What we really 

need to focus on is that 70 or 80 percent of health that is not about 

29 

access to health care at all; it has to do with people living in communities with air pollution. It has to do with people not having access to fresh fruits and vegetables. In too many communities in this 

country it is impossible for anybody to go out in their neighborhood 

and buy a tomato—buy a tomato! So we need to invest in making 

sure that people have access to fresh fruits and vegetables. Parks 

and safe streets where they can exercise. And communities where 

the air is safe to breathe. 

If we would pay more attention to making sure that every community is a healthy community, we would have less strain on our 

health care system. But absolutely every American ought to have 

access to health care. 

Representative Hinchey. Mr. Edwards. 

Mr. Edwards. Yes. Just to give you just an indication of what 

we are doing in northeast Florida, of the 24,466 people that we saw 

in a 22-year period—this is coming from our management information system—21,115 of those individuals had no health insurance; 

3,342 had health insurance. So obviously health insurance is real, 

real critical. 

People are going to get health care somewhere, somehow, and 

they are going to abuse, perhaps the emergency room situation because they do not have health care, and they have to go to either 

the emergency room, or to public health facilities in order to access 

health care. 

A universal health care system is critical. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Could the gentleman sum up? Your time 

is about to expire. 

Mr. Edwards. I did. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Oh, you did? OK. 

Mr. Edwards. That was a period. 

Vice Chair Maloney. OK, Mr. Rector, very quickly. 

Mr. Rector. One thing I think it is important to recognize is 

that when you are looking at low-income uninsured people, about 

a third of them in the census report are illegal aliens. I hope no 

one is suggesting that we need to provide Medicaid coverage or 

something to illegal aliens. That is a growing problem. 

The other thing I would say is that there is a considerable waste 

in Medicaid that could be harnessed, which is that in the Medicaid 

program if an individual currently has employer coverage they can 

drop that coverage and obtain Medicaid. That is a very significant 

problem that’s called ‘‘crowd out’’ and it costs the taxpayers billions 

and billions of dollars a year. 

If you had reasonable rules about dropping the coverage that you 

have in order to get on Medicaid, you could save a lot of money and 

redirect those savings to provide expanded care for other people. It 

is basically a total waste the way the system works now. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you. The Chair recognizes herself 

for 5 minutes. 

Economic growth suggests that poverty not only affects individuals, but also creates larger challenges for economic growth. There 

has been a great deal of literature written about this, and can you 

discuss the effect of poverty on economic growth? Anyone? Who 

would like to discuss this? The effect of poverty on economic 

growth. 

30 

Mayor Cicilline, you probably have a lot of experience in that. 

Mayor Cicilline. There is no question that the ability to create 

good-paying jobs and move people out of poverty by having a highquality system of public education, by ensuring that people are 

growing up in health communities as Ms. Blackwell was mentioning, and having access to quality health care are all things that 

are essential to strong communities and to strong cities. 

So that as we try to grow jobs in our communities, and as we 

try to create economic opportunities in our communities, the issue 

of poverty is at the center of all of that work—ensuring that people 

have access to good jobs, have access to good health care, have access to quality education, live in a neighborhood that is safe from 

violence, that has good public spaces for exercise, but all of that are 

the things that lead to a positive image of a city, and a positive 

image of a place to work and bring capital and make investments 

to create economic opportunity. 

So they all relate to each other. And the effects of poverty obviously affect most personally and directly on the child and the family that lives in poverty. But it has a corrosive effect on the whole 

community. Anyone who is a member of a community who lives in 

a place where there are people who remain poor continue to feel 

the effect of that. 

So we have a joint responsibility as residents of a community to 

eradicate poverty, and economic development is a key way of doing 

that. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Mr. Rector, and then Dr. Blank. 

Mr. Rector. I would say that poverty has no effect on economic 

growth other than on the incomes of the poor people. Obviously if 

you can get their incomes up they are better off, but if you mean 

does poverty reduce the standard of living of the average American, 

the answer is no. 

What does reduce the standard of living of the average American 

is welfare spending. Having spent $14 trillion on the war on poverty with very little effect, not only imposes a direct cost on the 

taxpayers who had to pay for that spending, but if even a portion 

of that money had been invested in capital or in new technology 

or in entrepreneurial activity, the overall economy and the standard of living of the average American would be considerably higher. 

As we look forward to spending the next $9 trillion on welfare 

over the next decade, the same rule applies. Now I am not suggesting that we ought not to spend that $9 trillion. I do think we 

have obligations to the poor. But I also think we have an obligation 

to spend that money wisely in a way that is not just one round of 

one-way handouts after another. We need to reform welfare so that 

it requires and demands and encourages constructive behavior on 

the part of the poor, and which begins to end the self-inflicted behaviors which are the major cause of poverty, particularly the 38 

percent out-of-wedlock childbearing rate, and the very, very low 

levels of work among poor adults. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Dr. Blank. 

Dr. Blank. There is a substantial body of literature that is growing rapidly looking at the effects of poverty on children and on 

adults. It finds that not only that poverty has these effects, but the 

31 

longer that a family and children spend in poverty the greater the 

effects. 

So you find that longer periods in poverty produce greater health 

problems. It produces lower educational achievement. It produces 

greater likelihoods of being involved in crime. 

Now all of those things—low educational achievement, poor 

health, and high rates of crime—are basically impediments to productivity and to economic growth in this country. 

So I would not think that the only reason you want to reduce 

poverty is because it is going to make all the rest of us better off. 

I mean, there are a variety of reasons to reduce poverty because 

we have responsibilities to these individuals and the lives that they 

lead as fellow American citizens. But it is true that if we do reduce 

poverty, the rest of us will be better off, as well. 

Vice Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. My time has expired, but I would like to close by first thanking my colleague for 

being here today and participating, but all of you. Many of you 

travelled quite a distance to be here. Your testimony, your insight, 

your research will help all of us formulate hopefully new policies 

for the 21st century to help us combat poverty, which will help not 

only the individual but our overall economy, in my belief. 

I also want to close by remembering Senator Edward Kennedy 

and his lifelong commitment to ending poverty, to attacking poverty. I send him all my best wishes, as I am sure all of you do, for 

his speedy recovery. He did request this hearing, and my thoughts 

are with him. The entire transcript will be given to him to study 

during his period of recovery. 

And I want to end by just really thanking all of you for your life’s 

work, your research, and your dedication to helping individuals and 

helping our country. Thank you so much for being part of this 

hearing. 

The hearing is adjourned. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:31 a.m., Thursday, September 25, 2008, the 

hearing was adjourned.] 

(33) 

Submissions for the Record 

34 


45037.001
35 


45037.002
36 


45037.003
37 


45037.004
38 


45037.005
39 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID N. CICILLINE, MAYOR, PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

Thank you Chairman Schumer, Vice-Chair Maloney, and to all members of this 

esteemed committee. 

I am honored to be here as a representative of mayors and other elected city officials from all over the Nation who are working to address these issues. 

Mr. Chairman, for many generations, when America has faced difficult economic 

times, some have viewed our cities as our greatest burdens. 

In the national imagination, cities, and the people who lived in them, were described as the ball and chain of the national economy, dragging America down. 

Words like devastated, blighted, and ruined were so often associated with the word 

‘‘urban’’ that they effectively became synonymous. 

But something remarkable began happening a decade or so ago. American cities 

began a stirring comeback. Benefiting from effective Federal policy in the 1990s as 

well as the transition to a knowledge-based economy, cities are again the centers 

of culture, innovation, and, most of all, economic growth. 

A slew of recent research underscores the fact that in our shaky economy cities 

are not the problem. They are the solution. 

The reality is that the American economy is a metropolitan economy. In fact, the 

nation’s 100 largest metro areas, which make up only 12 percent of the Nation in 

land area account for 68 percent of all jobs and 75 percent of national GDP. 

Furthermore, as we expedite the transition of our economy into one that meets 

the demands of the information age and our need to become independent from foreign oil, the strategic importance of cities grows even more. 

Already, cities have 76 percent of the knowledge jobs and are poised to grow an 

even higher proportion. 

Additionally, cities house our great scientific research centers that will give birth 

to the innovations that will power America with new forms of energy. Also, contrary 

to most people’s ideas about urban America, cities are the greenest places we can 

live based on existing consumption patterns. 

Chairman Schumer, you may already know that those living in the New York 

metropolitan region have on average half the carbon footprint of the average American. The more Americans that continue to move to cities, the less dependent America will be on foreign sources of energy. 

Cities are the solution. But, as a nation, we are not tending our metropolitan garden. In recent years, the evolution of cities has continued in spite of national policy, 

not because of it. As a result, we are severely restraining our metropolitan transformation at a time when we need to accelerate it. 

Foremost among these restraints, without a doubt, is poverty. Poverty is to a family and a community what inflation is to an economy. Its consequences spill over 

into everything else and have a lasting and devastating impact. But, what makes 

it worse, is that there are measures we know we can take to prevent it from persisting. 

Not surprisingly, the headway we made on poverty in the 1990’s coincided with 

the metropolitan comeback. But in recent years that headway has been reversed. 

In my view, one of the reasons for this is the sharp decline in funding. First Focus, 

the children’s advocacy group on whose advisory board I sit, recently discovered that 

the share of non-defense spending on kids has declined by a full 10 percent in just 

5 years. And, as you know, the Community Development Block Grant—one of our 

country’s great domestic programs for cities—has also been significantly cut in recent years. Just to name two examples. 

But you are presented with lots of statistics every day and the call for funding 

is constant. So my job today is to report to you from a Mayor’s perspective about 

what can work and is currently working to lessen poverty in our communities. 

I know that many view poverty as a great complex of interrelated problems, but 

I view it very simply. Poverty is a lack of opportunity. So to me, the fight is not 

so much a war on poverty as it is a war for opportunity. 

The long-term answer does not lie in merely relieving the stresses and pain of 

poverty. The long-term answer lies in rebuilding upward mobility in America. The 

war for opportunity means rebuilding the economic ladder. When there is upward 

mobility there is hope. Families will work harder to make sure their children are 

educated, stay out of trouble and develop a strong work ethic. But when there is 

not, it creates the environment for many of the social ills that can ruin lives and 

drive up the costs of social programs. 

Unfortunately, all across the country, the economic ladder has been badly weakened in recent years. It used to be that the American Dream was available to anyone who was willing to work hard enough, but in today’s economy too many families 

are doing everything right and still getting left behind. 

40 

At my second inauguration in 2006, I identified this as one of the highest priorities for my city. I signed an executive order creating a task force made up of our 

foremost experts on workforce development, poverty, and early childhood development and family supports. 

I asked them to offer me their best recommendations for what we can do at the 

city level—as a government and as a community—to reestablish upward mobility for 

our working poor, and to help re-build the middle class in our city. 

They developed a set of action steps called Pathways to Opportunity to move people into the workforce, keep them in the workforce, and open up more opportunity 

to get ahead once they’re in. 

With the report in hand, I formed a partnership with the Annie E. Casey foundation, to open an office that is charged with overseeing the implementation of these 

recommendations in coordination with the city and the agencies that helped to develop them. It also serves as a community-based site for residents to connect to new 

opportunities. 

We have launched a number of ambitious projects as part of this initiative. 

We initiated a major long-term effort to rebuild many of our old and decaying 

school facilities and replace them with 21st-century learning environments. As part 

of this, we launched a large-scale apprenticeship program in the construction trades. 

We have young people from across the city who are integral parts of these major 

construction efforts that involve cutting edge green technology and learning how to 

build to LEED standard. 

We have partnered with our hospitals that are facing a serious nursing shortage 

to get young people access to the skills they need to begin a good career in the 

health care field. 

Taking the lead from Brookings’ work on ‘‘the high cost of being poor,’’ we are 

working with local banks in an organization called Bank on Providence. It is developing financial instruments specifically designed for low-wage families and individuals. I am also working with the state legislature to regulate the ability of predatory 

lenders and check cashers to extract usurious rates and charges from their customers—most of whom haven’t been able to access mainstream banking services. 

We are aggressively engaging with ex-offenders who come back to their communities to make absolutely sure they meet all of their re-entry obligations or else face 

consequences. But at the same time ensuring that the support necessary for their 

success is in place. 

These are a few examples of the kinds of meaningful, measurable, and effective 

strategies being undertaken by this office. It is all about creating more opportunities 

and removing any barriers to existing opportunities. 

Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the committee, if I had more time I 

would love to also describe to you the incredible effect that city-wide after school 

is having in Providence. I’d like to describe the success we’ve had with integrating 

our police force with the communities they serve. There is so much that has an effect on opportunity and poverty that we know will be effective. 

But instead I will quickly conclude with a general comment. Our cities represent 

tremendous opportunities for our 21st-century economy. We can unleash that potential by making opportunity for every American a national priority again. After all, 

the other name for a robust economic ladder and upward mobility is the American 

Dream. That is what made our economy the envy of the world, and it is the only 

way we can preserve its position in our global economy. 

Thank you. 

41 


45037.006
42 


45037.007
43 


45037.008
44 


45037.009
45 


45037.010
46 


45037.011
47 


45037.012
48 


45037.013
49 


45037.014
50 


45037.015
51 


45037.016
52 


45037.017
53 


45037.018
54 


45037.019
55 


45037.020
56 


45037.021
57 


45037.022
58 


45037.023
59 


45037.024
60 


45037.025
61 


45037.026
62 


45037.027
63 


45037.028
64 


45037.029
65 


45037.030
66 


45037.031
67 


45037.032
68 


45037.033
69 


45037.034
70 


45037.035
71 


45037.036
72 


45037.037
73 


45037.038
74 


45037.039
75 


45037.040
76 


45037.041
77 


45037.042
78 


45037.043
79 


45037.044
80 


45037.045
81 


Insert offset folio 46 here 45037.046
82 


Insert offset folio 47 here 45037.047
83 


Insert offset folio 48 here 45037.048
84 


Insert offset folio 49 here 45037.049
85 


Insert offset folio 50 here 45037.050
86 


Insert offset folio 51 here 45037.051
87 


Insert offset folio 52 here 45037.052
88 


Insert offset folio 53 here 45037.053
89 


Insert offset folio 54 here 45037.054
90 


Insert offset folio 55 here 45037.055
91 


Insert offset folio 56 here 45037.056
92 


Insert offset folio 57 here 45037.057
93 


Insert offset folio 58 here 45037.058
94 


Insert offset folio 59 here 45037.059
95 


Insert offset folio 60 here 45037.060
96 


Insert offset folio 61 here 45037.061
97 


Insert offset folio 62 here 45037.062
98 


Insert offset folio 63 here 45037.063
99 


Insert offset folio 64 here 45037.064
100 


Insert offset folio 65 here 45037.065
101 


Insert offset folio 66 here 45037.066
102 


Insert offset folio 67 here 45037.067
103 


Insert offset folio 68 here 45037.068
104 


Insert offset folio 69 here 45037.069
105 


Insert offset folio 70 here 45037.070
106 


Insert offset folio 71 here 45037.071
107 


Insert offset folio 72 here 45037.072
108 


Insert offset folio 73 here 45037.073
109 


Insert offset folio 74 here 45037.074
110 


Insert offset folio 75 here 45037.075
111 


Insert offset folio 76 here 45037.076
112 


Insert offset folio 77 here 45037.077
113 


Insert offset folio 78 here 45037.078
114 


Insert offset folio 79 here 45037.079
115 

Æ