The Truth About Poverty In America

In anticipation of the release of the latest Census Bureau report tomorrow, Robert Rector writes a devastating piece about the politically charged issue of "poverty" on National Review Online. Democrat Presidential candidate John Edwards has been trying to capitalize on his 'Two Americas' theme for years, and it just doesn't hold water. The truth inside this report will not help his cause, though he'll give it a good try.

In the past, Edwards has claimed that poverty in America is a "plague" which forces 37 million Americans to live in "terrible" circumstances. According to Edwards, an amazing "one in eight" Americans lack "enough money for the food, shelter, and clothing they need," caught in a daily "struggle with incredible poverty."

But, poverty doesn't mean quite what Edwards is implying.

Based on various government reports, these are some facts about the Census Bureau's "poor":
Home Ownership. 46% of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Air Conditioning. 80% of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36% of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Lack of Overcrowding. Only 6% of poor households are overcrowded; two thirds have more than two rooms per person. The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Car Ownership. Nearly three quarters of poor households own a car; 31% own two or more cars.
Color TV. 97% of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
VCRs/DVDs. 78% have a VCR or DVD player.
Cable/Satellite TV. 62% have cable or satellite TV reception.
Conveniences. 89% own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Nourishment. Most poor children today are, in fact, super-nourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and ten pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.

Without a doubt, there are obviously a number of people who experience legitimate poverty. But, Rector points out several ways that poverty in America can be reduced:

In both good and bad economic environments, the typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year — the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year — the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year — nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.

As noted above, father absence is another major cause of child poverty. Nearly two thirds of poor children reside in single-parent homes; each year, an additional 1.5 million children are born out of wedlock. If poor mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly three quarters of the nation’s impoverished youth would immediately be lifted out of poverty.

One problem here is that our welfare system is hostile to both employment and marriage. Programs such as food stamps, Medicare, and public housing reward idleness and penalize marriage. Illegal immigration also contributes:

One quarter of all poor persons in the U.S. are now first generation immigrants or the minor children of those immigrants. Roughly one in ten of the persons counted among the poor by Census is either an illegal immigrant or the minor child of an illegal. Immigrants tend to be poor because they have very low education levels. A quarter of legal immigrants and fifty to sixty percent of illegals are high-school dropouts. By contrast, only nine percent of non-immigrant Americans lack a high school degree.

Similarly, Rush Limbaugh, in the February 2007 edition of his newsletter (The Limbaugh Letter), presents a load of statistics showing how the "poor" reportedly earn $8,316 per year but spend $19,059. Does this mean they're in debt? No, it means they get a lot more in government aid than people like John Edwards care to admit.

While government assistance is certainly not a bad thing, there are definitely some changes that need to be made. Marriage and employment should be rewarded, not penalized. Illegal immigration should be stopped. Success should not be defined by how many people are on welfare rolls, but rather by the number of people who work themselves off of it.

This poverty issue is a prime example of liberalism versus conservatism. Is it better to give handouts and create dependents, or is it better to incent people to work and establish a stable family environment which allows them to provide for themselves?

Two Americas, indeed.

There's my two cents.