Archive

ShareThis Page
Trump administration disputes U.N.’s claims that 18.5M Americans are in ‘extreme poverty’ | TribLIVE.com
News

Trump administration disputes U.N.’s claims that 18.5M Americans are in ‘extreme poverty’

WashingtonPovertyRally63126jpg5f66d
Jose Luis Magana | AP
Demonstrators march outside the U.S. Capitol during the Poor People's Campaign rally at the National Mall in Washington on Saturday, June 23, 2018.
AFP16H7ZY
AFP/Getty Images
A banner is seen with the U.S. Capitol in the background during the Poor People's Campaign, a rally speaking out against social injustice and poverty, on the National Mall in Washington, on June 23, 2018.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration says the United Nations is overestimating the number of Americans in “extreme poverty” by about 18.25 million people, reflecting a stark disagreement about the extent of poverty in the nation and the resources needed to fight it.

In May, Philip Alston, special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights for the U.N., published a report saying 40 million Americans live in poverty and 18.5 million Americans live in extreme poverty.

But in a rebuke to that report last week, U.S. officials told the United Nations Human Rights Council that there only appear to be approximately 250,000 Americans in extreme poverty, calling Alston’s numbers “exaggerated.”

The rift highlights a long-running debate among academics over the most accurate way to describe poverty in America, one with enormous implications for U.S. policy-making and the nation’s social safety net. It also sheds light on the ongoing feud between Trump and U.N. officials over Alston’s report on American poverty, with U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley last week calling the report “politically motivated” and arguing it “is patently ridiculous for the U.N. to examine poverty in America.”

But who is right about the number of Americans in extreme poverty?

It depends on how you define it.

The U.N.’s numbers come from the official Census definition that has been kept for decades by the U.S. government, defining extreme poverty as having an income lower than half the official poverty rate, Alston said in an interview. (For 2016, that was about $12,000 a year for a family of four.) By this criteria, the poverty rate in America has only slightly ticked downward since the mid-1960s.

The U.N. is using the Census figure that is “the gauge most people rely on when measuring extreme poverty,” said Mark Rank, a poverty expert at Washington University in St. Louis.

But some on the right have long rejected this measure in part since it only counts income, or how much money each American receives. Instead, American officials in Geneva cited survey data produced by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, that also measures purchasing power.

Citing a recent survey of American households, Heritage found that only 0.08 percent of American households (or about to 250,000) are in “deep poverty,” defined by Heritage as living on less than $4 a day. This statistic does account for government social spending programs that help the poor — like Medicaid, food stamps, and housing assistance — while the figure cited by the U.N. does not.

“No one likes the official poverty measure because it doesn’t count the enormous assistance we provide low-income Americans,” said Robert Doar, a conservative scholar at the American Enterprise Institute think-tank. “It makes you think they have very little — that they have nothing — when in fact that’s not true.”

Several poverty experts acknowledged flaws with the official Census count, but described the Heritage statistic cited by the United States as much too low. Some questioned why $4 a day was an appropriate measure of extreme poverty, since that only translates into about $1,500 of spending for an entire year on food, health care, rent, and everything else needed to survive.

The Heritage number cited by the U.S. also does not reflect that many families must go into debt to sustain spending, and that government benefits like Medicaid and food stamps cannot be used to meet some unexpected expenses. Another criticism of Heritage’s data is that it is based on a survey of consumers that appears to produce different results than other poverty data, according to poverty experts.

“It’s a total joke,” said Rank, the Washington University professor. “To say that there are 250,000 people in deep poverty in the U.S. is just ridiculous.”

Other estimates have come in lower than the official U.S. Census report but still significantly higher than the Trump team’s estimates.

In response to concerns about the official poverty rate, the Census in 2009 created a “supplemental” poverty rate that does account for government benefits like food stamps. That number shows about 15.7 million Americans are in “deep poverty” in 2016, according to Gregory Acs, a poverty expert at the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan think-tank.

Another convention for measuring poverty overall is to look at those with less than half the median national disposable income. By that measure, about 18 percent of Americans are in poverty – higher than that virtually all other developed nations, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

A separate study from Princeton economist Angus Deaton, also cited in the U.N. report, found that about 5.3 million Americans live on less than $4 a day, including government transfers.

“No one is claiming that there are 18.5 million people below $4 a day,” Deaton said in an email. “It is hard to do this accurately, but I do think that using the [survey data] as Heritage does is certain to understate the problem.”

The U.S. response to the U.N. argued poverty in America has fallen by 77 percent “based on some measures of consumption” since 1980. Poverty experts say that is hard to square with the data.

“You can spend all day arguing about how many people are living on $2 a day vs. $4 a day,” said Kristin S. Seefeldt, of the School of Social Work at the University of Michigan. “But if you spend any amount of time in poor communities in the U.S., it’s obvious there’s still a lot of deprivation and 250,000 is a ridiculously low number.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.