[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 146 (Thursday, November 15, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6376-H6377]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                POVERTY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LEE of California. As the founder of the Congressional Out of 
Poverty Caucus, I rise today to continue talking about the ongoing 
crisis of poverty in our country.
  Yesterday, unfortunately, with the supplemental poverty report, we 
learned that poverty continues to impact nearly 50 million Americans, 
including 16 million children all across our country and in every 
congressional district. My home State of California tops the list, 
followed by our Nation's capital--the District of Columbia--Arizona, 
Florida, and Georgia.
  On this election day, low-income Americans, the working poor, middle-
income Americans--every American--spoke loudly and clearly. They voted 
for strengthening the middle class and for putting people back to work, 
and they voted for Congress to get back to doing the work of the 
American people: to strengthen our economy for all Americans and to 
create economic opportunities that will lift millions of families out 
of poverty and into the middle class. Most importantly, the American 
people voted to reject job-killing cuts and a tax on Medicare, 
Medicaid, and Social Security.
  What they don't want is for our country to be rushed into urgent 
budget decisions by the false threat of a so-called ``fiscal cliff.'' 
Mr. Speaker, I don't buy it, and the American people don't believe it 
either.
  This economic and political gridlock is just another political cliff 
created by the hostage-taking obstructionism of the Tea Party-
controlled Congress. The real cliff that anyone is facing today is a 
human cliff, and far too many American families are standing on the 
edge as I speak. If we don't strengthen our economy for all Americans, 
millions will be cut off from the only lifeline keeping them from 
falling off that human cliff and into poverty--unemployment 
compensation. Far too many people will be cut off from vital programs 
like employment insurance, the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income 
Tax Credit if this Congress fails to act.
  It is long past time to come together, to work to find a balanced 
approach and, as Chairman Cleaver just said, to get past the partisan 
obstructionism that has kept us from moving our economy and our country 
forward. We have got to stop this. Just 10 years ago, in the year 2000, 
our Nation had a balanced budget, projected surpluses, and a robust 
economy. The passage of a serious tax cut rapidly ended those surpluses 
and began to, quite frankly, explode the debt. The Bush-era tax cuts 
have already cost over $2.2 trillion in Federal revenue since they were 
enacted, and we cannot afford to allow them to be made permanent. Let's 
not forget, Mr. Speaker, that this Congress has already voted to cut 
$1.5 trillion in discretionary spending enacted through the 2011 Budget 
Control Act.
  Low-income Americans are already hurting from multiple rounds of cuts 
to programs and benefits that they rely on. Our middle class and our 
working poor have already done their part, and we cannot continue to 
attempt to balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable 
Americans--our poor, our seniors, our children, and our disabled.
  So I hope all Members of Congress will follow the President's lead 
and support his call for ending the Bush tax cuts above $250,000, 
ending the billions in subsidies for Big Oil, and closing the countless 
loopholes that allow huge corporations and the super rich to avoid 
paying what they owe. In addition, we can find billions in additional 
savings by making smart and targeted cuts to our defense budgets. Our 
military leaders have already outlined cuts that will not put at risk 
our brave men and women in harm's way or weaken the national security 
of our Nation. We know that there are billions in waste, fraud, and 
abuse in the defense budgets that can be saved if we can just account 
for the hundreds of billions in spending by ensuring the Pentagon can 
pass an audit.

                              {time}  1050

  Mr. Speaker, we face many challenges, but we must not allow our 
political crisis to create an economic crisis for millions of Americans 
who are struggling. Now is not the time to turn our backs on struggling 
families just to preserve tax giveaways to millionaires and 
billionaires. We must come together to wage a war on poverty and end 
the war on the poor.
  Finally, as 350 economists have said, we need jobs first. With 
recovery, deficit reduction will come by its own accord thanks to 
increased revenues in an improving economy. They went on to say that 
public outlay for jobs and recovery come first, growth is restored, and 
revenues follow. Budget cuts only lead to a deeper slump.

   Census: Fuller Poverty Picture Finds 49.7M Are Poor, Factoring in 
                       Medical and Work Expenses

                (By Associated Press, November 14, 2012)

       Washington--The ranks of America's poor edged up last year 
     to a high of 49.7 million, based on a new census measure that 
     takes into account medical costs and work-related expenses.
       The numbers released Wednesday by the Census Bureau are 
     part of a newly developed supplemental poverty measure. 
     Devised a year ago, this measure provides a fuller picture of 
     poverty that the government believes can be used to assess 
     safety-net programs by factoring in living expenses and 
     taxpayer-provided benefits that the official formula leaves 
     out.
       Based on the revised formula, the number of poor people 
     exceeded the 49 million, or 16 percent of the population, who 
     were living below the poverty line in 2010. That came as more 
     people in the slowly improving economy picked up low-wage 
     jobs last year but still struggled to pay living expenses. 
     The revised poverty rate of 16.1 percent also is higher than 
     the record 46.2 million, or 15 percent, that the government's 
     official estimate reported in September.
       Due to medical expenses, higher living costs and limited 
     immigrant access to government programs, people 65 or older, 
     Hispanics and urbanites were more likely to be struggling 
     economically under the alternative formula. Also spiking 
     higher in 2011 was poverty among full-time and part-time 
     workers.
       As a result, the portrait of poverty broken down by state 
     notably changes. California tops the list, hurt by high 
     housing costs, large numbers of immigrants as well as less 
     generous tax credits and food stamp programs to buoy low-
     income families. It is followed by the District of Columbia, 
     Arizona, Florida and Georgia.
       In the official census tally, it was rural states that were 
     more likely to be near the top of the list, led by 
     Mississippi, New Mexico, Arizona and Louisiana.
       ``We're seeing a very slow recovery, with increases in 
     poverty among workers due to more new jobs which are low-
     wage,'' said Timothy Smeeding, a University of Wisconsin-
     Madison economist who specializes in poverty. ``As a whole, 
     the safety net is holding many people up, while California is 
     struggling more because it's relatively harder there to 
     qualify for food stamps and other benefits.''
       Broken down by group, poverty was disproportionately 
     affecting people 65 and older--about 15.1 percent, or nearly 
     double the 8.7 percent rate calculated under the official 
     formula. That's because they have higher medical expenses, 
     such as Medicare premiums, deductibles and drug costs, that 
     aren't factored into the official rate.
       While poverty rates for older Americans as a whole are 
     higher, the new measure does show improvement in their income 
     levels--about 15.1 percent were poor last year, down from 
     15.8 percent in 2010. Smeeding attributes that to a wave of 
     more affluent, still-working baby boomers in dual-income 
     households who are beginning to turn 65 and, as a result, are 
     slowly raising overall income levels for seniors.
       Working-age adults ages 18-64 saw an increase in poverty 
     from 13.7 percent based on the official calculation to 15.5 
     percent, due mostly to commuting and child care costs.
       In contrast, the new measure showed declines in poverty for 
     children, from 22.3 percent under the official formula to 
     18.1 percent. Still, they remained the age group most likely 
     to be economically struggling by any measure.
       ``These new numbers only reinforce what AARP and AARP 
     Foundation hear from real people every day: older Americans 
     are struggling to make ends meet,'' said Deb Whitman, 
     executive vice president of AARP, an advocacy group. 
     ``Policymakers need to understand that not every senior is 
     well off and the critically important role Social Security or 
     Medicare plays as providing a safety net to keep even more 
     older Americans out of poverty. As Washington debates what 
     should happen during the lame duck, we cannot afford to 
     undermine the current safety net that allows many to live 
     with dignity.''

[[Page H6377]]

       Hispanics and Asians also saw much higher rates of poverty, 
     28 percent and 16.9 percent, respectively, compared with 
     rates of 25.4 percent and 12.3 percent under the official 
     formula. Their poverty levels rose after the government took 
     into account safety-net programs such as food stamps and 
     housing, which have lower participation among immigrants and 
     non-English speakers.
       In contrast, African-Americans saw a modest decrease in 
     poverty, from 27.8 percent under the official rate to 25.7 
     percent based on the revised numbers. Among non-Hispanic 
     whites, poverty rose from 9.9 percent to 11 percent.
       Economists long have criticized the official poverty rate 
     as inadequate. Based on a half-century-old government 
     formula, the official rate continues to assume the average 
     family spends one-third of its income on food. Those costs 
     have actually shrunk to a much smaller share, more like one-
     seventh.
       The official formula also fails to account for other 
     expenses such as out-of-pocket medical care, child care and 
     commuting, and it does not consider noncash government aid, 
     such as food stamps and tax credits, when calculating income.
       In reaction to some of the criticism, the government in 
     2010 asked the Census Bureau to develop a new measure, based 
     partly on recommendations made by the National Academy of 
     Sciences. It released national numbers based on that formula 
     for the first time last year. This year's release features a 
     50-state breakdown on poverty, prompted in part by local 
     officials such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg who 
     have argued that the official measure does not take into 
     account urban costs of living and that larger cities may get 
     less federal money as a result.
       The goal is to help lawmakers to better gauge the 
     effectiveness of anti-poverty programs, although it does not 
     replace the Census Bureau's official poverty formula.
       Among the findings:
       --If it weren't for Social Security payments, the poverty 
     rate would rise to 54.1 percent for people 65 and older and 
     24.4 percent for all age groups.
       --Without refundable tax credits such as the earned income 
     tax credit, child poverty would rise from 18.1 percent to 
     24.4 percent.
       --Without food stamps, the overall poverty rate would 
     increase from 16.1 percent to 17.6 percent.
       ``These figures are timely given the looming expiration of 
     two key measures that account for part of these programs' 
     large antipoverty impact: federal emergency unemployment 
     insurance and improvements in refundable tax credits'' such 
     as the Earned Income Tax Credit, said Arloc Sherman, a senior 
     researcher at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a 
     liberal-leaning think-tank. ``Letting these measures expire 
     at year's end could push large numbers of families into 
     poverty.''

                          ____________________