Washington Post 27th August 2004
By Ceci Connolly and Griff Witte
The number of Americans living in poverty or lacking
health insurance rose for the third straight year in 2003,
the Census Bureau announced yesterday, reflecting a job
market that failed to match otherwise strong economic
growth.
Overall, the median household income remained stagnant at
$43,318, while the national poverty rate rose to 12.5
percent -- 35.9 million people -- last year, from 12.1
percent in 2002. Hit hardest were women, who for the first
time since 1999 saw their earnings decline, and children. By
the end of 2003, 12.9 million children lived in poverty.
As expected, the number of people without health
insurance grew last year, to 45 million -- an increase to
15.6 percent from 15.2 percent. White adults, primarily in
the South, accounted for most of the increase. The
proportion of people receiving health insurance through an
employer fell to 60.4 percent, the lowest level in a decade,
from 61.3 percent.
The census report provided hard numbers to anecdotal
evidence that the recent recovery has missed certain regions
and segments of the population. An additional 1.3 million
Americans fell below the poverty line in 2003, as incomes
dipped for the poorest 20 percent of the population. An
additional 1.4 million became newly uninsured.
"This recovery has failed to reach those in the bottom
half," said Jared Bernstein, a senior economist with the
Economic Policy Institute.
As President Bush prepared to head to New York for the
Republican National Convention, yesterday's data gave
Democrats an opening for picking at his perceived weakness
on traditional bread-and-butter issues.
"While George Bush tries to convince America's families
that we're turning the corner, slogans and empty rhetoric
can't hide the real story," said Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.),
the Democratic presidential nominee. "Under George Bush's
watch, America's families are falling further behind."
Bush, campaigning in New Mexico, had no comment. Commerce
Secretary Donald L. Evans said the census data looked
"backward in time at an economy that was substantially
weaker" than it is today. He predicted that the numbers will
improve as Bush "continues to press extremely hard to create
the right conditions and business climate" for job growth
and broader health coverage.
Yet the census report stood in sharp contrast to an
economy and a stock market that grew briskly in 2003,
especially in the second half of the year. "The impact of a
persistent jobless recovery is all over these results,"
Bernstein said.
With fewer people working and fewer small businesses
offering health coverage, the uninsured figure is likely to
remain high until the unemployment rate drops to about 4
percent, said Paul Fronstin, a senior research associate at
the Employee Benefit Research Institute.
"It's not just about how many people have jobs, but it's
about the kind of jobs they have," he said. "Even though
people are employed, they are less likely to have access to
coverage."
In this region, more people were without health coverage
in 2003 than in 2002. In Virginia, the uninsured rate rose
to 13.3 percent from 12.2 percent; in both Maryland and the
District, it rose to 13.6 percent from 12.8 percent.
The national poverty rate declined from 1993 to 2000,
when it reached a low of 11.3 percent. In the next three
years, 4.3 million more people fell below the poverty line,
and the median household income dropped by more than $1,500
in inflation-adjusted terms.
Locally, poverty rates rose in Virginia to 10 percent
from 8.9 percent, and in Maryland to 8 percent from 7.3
percent, according to the Census Bureau's two-year
averaging. In the District, it declined 0.7 percent, but, at
16.9 percent, it remained higher than the national average.
The poverty line is not a single, consistent number; it
varies with time and family size. In 2003, the average
poverty line for an individual was $9,393. For a family of
four, it was $18,810. Despite the recent increase in poverty
rates, the rates remained lower than the average for both
the 1980s and the 1990s.
Economic issues -- including the availability and
affordability of health insurance -- remain top concerns
among voters. In several recent Washington Post and Gallup
surveys, voters gave the president no better than a 51
percent approval rating on his handling of the economy, and
in a head-to-head matchup with Kerry on economic matters,
Bush trailed 41 percent to his challenger's 52 percent.
Yesterday's report showed that several swing states saw
an increase in the poverty rate, the percentage of uninsured
or both -- including Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
"It's definitely not the news that the president was
hoping for," said Rea S. Hederman Jr., senior policy analyst
at the Heritage Foundation.
Children made up an especially large segment of the newly
impoverished, accounting for more than half of the overall
increase as 733,000 more youngsters slipped below the
poverty line. Similarly, the number of families in poverty
headed by a single mother jumped 1.5 percent, to 3.9
million.
Sheldon H. Danziger, co-director of the National Poverty
Center at the University of Michigan, said the rise in
poverty represents fallout from the 1996 Welfare Reform Act.
Because the new policy shifted government benefits to reward
those who work, single mothers who were employed received
additional assistance when jobs were plentiful but are
struggling now that the economy has 1.2 million fewer jobs.
"They did fine when the economy was booming, and even in
the early part of the recession," he said. "But now there's
been an increase in the number of women who have no work and
no welfare."
Hederman disagreed with Danziger, noting that the child
poverty rate, although up for the year at 17.6 percent, is
still well below the 20.5 percent it hit in 1996.
"You've seen a lot of people who left poverty and who
haven't returned back to it even after the economic
downturn," he said.
Single mothers were not helped by the fact that the
earnings of women overall suffered, declining by 0.6
percent. Women made 76 cents for every dollar earned by men
in 2003, compared with 77 cents in 2002. Others who felt the
sting included Hispanics, whose median income dropped 2.6
percent last year.
Viewing the increase in poverty by race, Asian Americans
were hit hardest, but census officials said the rise
appeared to be a statistical anomaly resulting from a small
sample size.
Since 2000, the number of uninsured Americans has grown
by 5.2 million people, or 13 percent.
"The latest data indicate that loss of insurance is of
particular concern for middle-income and low-wage workers,"
said Karen Davis, president of the nonpartisan Commonwealth
Fund, a private foundation that studies health and social
policy trends.
More Americans were enrolled in government health
programs such as Medicaid and Medicare than at any time in
the past two decades. Last year, 26.6 percent of the
population was covered by government health insurance, the
highest percentage since 1995.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program appeared to
be the leading reason the number of youngsters without
coverage did not rise, even though millions more fell into
poverty.
At the libertarian Cato Institute, Michael Cannon, the
director of health studies, attributed the rise in uninsured
to government regulation. Health and Human Services
Secretary Tommy G. Thompson said it was the Senate's fault,
even though Republicans control both houses of Congress.
"The big failure is not what is happening in the
administration. We are doing everything we can," he said in
a conference call. "Individuals in the United States Senate
have failed to adopt the president's proposals dealing with
health care."
Proposals to cap malpractice awards, to provide tax
credits for individuals purchasing insurance and to create
small-business insurance purchasing pools "show a president
that is leading and a Congress that is not," he said.
The Census Bureau normally releases its income, poverty
and health insurance figures in September. It moved the
release date up a month to make it coincide with the release
of a separate set of data. Democrats have charged that the
timing is suspicious, given that many people take vacations
in August and could miss the bad news.
Senior polling analyst Christopher Mustie contributed to
this report.
....back to:
....alternative news
American Pictures
....gives Moore
thanks
....gives pizza
.....gives the plane truth
....gives
liberation
.....gives you the
blues
......gives Bush a human face
.....gives billionaires for Bush a free rap
....gives you the
world vote on Bush-Kerry
|