Berger Antipovertypolicyinnovations 2018

Anti-Poverty Policy Innovations
Author(s): LAWRENCE M. BERGER, MARIA CANCIAN and KATHERINE MAGNUSON

Source: RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences , FEBRUARY 2018,
Vol. 4, No. 3, Anti-Poverty Policy Initiatives for the United States (FEBRUARY 2018), pp.
1-19
Published by: Russell Sage Foundation
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7758/rsf.2018.4.3.01
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0
Unported License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.
Russell Sage Foundation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to RSF:
The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences
This content downloaded from

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Anti-poverty Policy
Innovations: New Proposals for
Addressing Poverty in the
United States
L aw r ence M. Berger, M a r i a Ca nci a n, a n d
K at her in e M agn uson
The 2016 presidential election has brought to the potential to transform anti-poverty policy.
the fore proposals to fundamentally restructure Assuming the goal to be reducing poverty
the U.S. anti-poverty safety net. Even though among the U.S. population, we asked what new
much of the current debate centers on shrink- ideas should be seriously considered. The au-
ing or eliminating federal programs, we believe thors responded with carefully crafted propos-
it is necessary and useful to explore alternatives als that tackle poverty from a variety of perspec-
that represent new approaches and significant tives. Some of these proposals are more of a
innovations to existing policy and programs. departure from existing policies than others,
This double issue of RSF: The Russell Sage Foun- some borrow from other countries or revive old
dation Journal of the Social Sciences builds on ideas, some are narrow in focus and others
and extends the scholarly conversation on the much broader, but all seek to move anti-poverty
state of current U.S. anti-poverty policy by high- efforts into new territory.
lighting a collection of related innovative and
specific policy proposals for the United States. B ac kg r o u n d
Well before the election, the authors of the ar- Just over fifty years ago, the War on Poverty
ticles in this volume were explicitly tasked with marked a significant expansion of the scope
proposing substantially new policies solidly and scale of anti-poverty programs, as well as
grounded in social science evidence that have a considerable change in their financing and
Lawrence M. Berger is Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor in the School of Social Work and director of
the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Maria Cancian is professor of
public affairs and social work and former director of the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of
Wisconsin–Madison. Katherine Magnuson is Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor and doctoral program
chair at the University of Wisconsin–Madison School of Social Work.
© 2018 Russell Sage Foundation. Berger, Lawrence M., Maria Cancian, and Katherine Magnuson. 2018. “Anti-
poverty Policy Innovations: New Proposals for Addressing Poverty in the United States.” RSF: The Russell Sage
Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 1–19. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.01. We are grateful for intel-
lectual contributions by Judith Bartfeld, Marcia Carlson, J. Michael Collins, Eric Grodsky, Robert Haveman, Julia
Isaacs, Thomas Kaplan, Sarah Halpern-Meekin, Michael Massoglia, Daniel Meyer, John Karl Scholz, Timothy
Smeeding, James Walker, and Barbara Wolfe, from which this work greatly benefited. Please direct correspon-
dence to: Lawrence Berger at lmberger@wisc.edu, 3420 Social Sciences Building, 1180 Observatory Dr., Madi-
son, WI 53706; Maria Cancian at maria.cancian@wisc.edu, 3436 Social Sciences Building, 1180 Observatory
Dr., Madison, WI 53706; and Katherine Magnuson at kmagnuson@wisc.edu, 3432 Social Sciences Building,
1180 Observatory Dr., Madison, WI 53706.
Open Access Policy: RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences is an open access journal.
This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported Li-
cense.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
2 a n t i-pov ert y policy in i t i at i v es for t he u n i t ed stat es
administration. The federal government re- the Clinton administration in the 1990s. The
quired, and fully or substantially funded, new Republican-controlled Congress and recent
entitlement programs—including Food Stamps cabinet appointees advocate dismantling the
and Medicaid—and a broad range of related Affordable Care Act and are considering restric-
programs and services such as Head Start, Le- tions or block grants to replace the Supplemen-
gal Services, and Job Corps. From the 1960s un- tal Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or
til the mid-1990s, most changes to anti-poverty Food Stamps), and Medicaid.
programs were arguably incremental, although It is not only federal policy that shapes pov-
there were notable exceptions including the es- erty policy. State- and local-level support for
tablishment and major expansions of the government anti-poverty programs and market-
Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the de- oriented interventions varies considerably. The
velopment of the child support enforcement variation across states in the character of many
system. Passed in 1996, the Personal Responsi- major programs is significant—from the expan-
bility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act sion of Medicaid eligibility (Rose 2015; Courte-
(PRWORA), along with accompanying expan- manche et al. 2017; Buettgens, Holahan, and
sions in the EITC and childcare subsidies (ad- Recht 2015), to the availability of a state EITC
ministered through the Child Care Develop- (Williams 2017; Cooper, Lutz, and Palumbo
ment Block Grant, CCDBG), represented a 2015), to variation in the scope and generosity
significant redirection for anti-poverty policy. of cash benefits under TANF (Schott, Pavetti,
Perhaps most notably, it eliminated the entitle- and Floyd 2015; Floyd 2017). Major increases in
ment to cash assistance provided by Aid to the minimum wage (Autor, Manning, and
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and Smith 2016; Neumark 2015), as well as paid sick
replaced it with Temporary Assistance for leave (Isaacs, Healy, and Peters 2017; Ahn 2016),
Needy Families (TANF), a time-delimited ben- and fair scheduling (National Women’s Law
efit contingent on meeting work requirements. Center 2017) continue to garner support in
It also decoupled Food Stamps and Medicaid many states and localities. In addition, some
from cash welfare. states have invested more heavily in supporting
Advocates suggested that the 1996 welfare low-income students who attend postsecond-
reform, by eliminating the entitlement to cash ary education or training (Barr and Turner 2013;
assistance and freeing states to substantially U.S. Department of Education 2016; McLendon
restructure their welfare program, would lead and Perna 2014), as well as providing support
to fifty active laboratories of innovation—states for the youngest learners through universal or
experimenting with different approaches to targeted prekindergarten programs (Bartik and
helping low-income families, and the best mod- Hershbein 2017; Friedman-Krauss, Barnett, and
els being disseminated and adopted. Although Nores 2016).
clearly variation in state program characteris- The fractious nature of national and state
tics is greater under TANF than AFDC, the most politics—reflecting stark differences in world
striking result of the change in rules and fund- views between the politicians in our major po-
ing may be the shrinking proportion of poor litical parties—makes even modest policy
families who participate in TANF and the de- changes that require legislative approval chal-
clining share of program funds spent on cash lenging. Nonetheless, given the clear need for
assistance and employment services, despite better policy options, we believe that it is worth-
stubbornly persistent levels of poverty among while—and, indeed, necessary—to propose,
vulnerable populations as assessed by the of- develop, and refine innovative anti-poverty pol-
ficial poverty measure, which includes only pre- icies. The early months of the Trump adminis-
tax cash income. As we write this introduction tration illustrate the challenges of major social
in the first months of the Trump administra- policy innovation, even when one party con-
tion, attention has turned away from expansive trols the White House and both houses of Con-
proposals for new government programs to- gress. On the other hand, signals are clear that
ward greater reliance on market-oriented ap- states will be given more latitude, along with
proaches to poverty, an approach embraced by the risks and potential for innovation that im-
r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
a n t i- p o v e r t y p o l i c y i n n o va t i o n s 3
plies. For example, President Trump has or- past seventy-five years has failed to lift millions
dered that all agencies consider “whether of citizens out of poverty.
some or all of the functions of an agency . . . Measuring poverty with economic resources
are appropriate for the federal government or is complicated because it requires defining
would be better left to state or local govern- both which types of resources should be
ments or to the private sector” (White House counted and the minimum threshold below
2017), and the administration has signaled en- which individuals and families should be
thusiasm for state waivers, for example, related deemed to have insufficient resources. For pov-
to Medicaid. erty scholars, the term poverty in the United
The current political uncertainty makes it States has a very specific meaning. In the 1960s,
difficult to judge the scope and most likely con- the U.S. federal government developed a
text for potential change. We argue that this is method for generating a dollar amount of pre-
an appropriate juncture to again consider in- tax cash income that, if not exceeded, could be
novations in anti-poverty policy that push be- used to designate an individual or family as
yond marginal changes to existing programs to poor. The resulting poverty thresholds, which
consider new and different approaches to the differ according to family size, are used for
major challenges that persist despite fifty years tracking trends in poverty rates. They also in-
of focused anti-poverty policy. This is what the form the poverty guidelines issued each year
articles in this volume aim to do. Not even a by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
double issue can hope to touch on all the crit- Services, which are used for determining social
ical components of a comprehensive anti- program eligibility. The poverty thresholds
poverty strategy, and many issues—including have been updated annually using the Con-
issues related to immigration, incarceration, sumer Price Index (CPI) to track inflation. In
and health care, for example—are not system- 2016, the official poverty guideline was just over
atically addressed here. A range of innovative $24,000 for a family of two parents and two chil-
policies addressing income support, employ- dren, and just under $12,000 for an individual
ment, housing, and education and training, adult living alone (U.S. Department of Health
among other topics, are included, however. Be- and Human Services 2016).
fore turning to the specific policy proposals, Concern that the official poverty measure
we provide context by reviewing current and (OPM) was outdated—because it fails to ac-
expected poverty-related trends, evidence on count for contemporary family expenses and
the causes and consequences of poverty, and in-kind public benefits and tax transfers, which
evidence on existing anti-poverty policies. have increasingly become the primary means
of combatting poverty, and because it does not
D e f i n i n g P ov e r t y take into account geographic differences in the
The word poverty brings to mind many differ- cost of living—led the Census Bureau to create
ing images, and has been used to describe a a supplemental poverty measure (SPM). The
variety of contexts of scarcity. In public con SPM differs in several ways from the OPM, in-
versations, poverty typically refers to a lack of cluding the measure of resources, the measure
economic resources; sometimes, however, it is of need, the household members whose re-
defined more broadly as social exclusion (par- sources and needs are considered, and adjust-
ticularly in the European context). For some, it ments for geographic differences (Renwick and
evokes images of poor children and families Fox 2016). Perhaps most importantly for this
from economically developing countries, who discussion, the SPM considers post-tax income,
struggle to meet their most basic needs. Yet, and includes noncash benefits. Thus, unlike
even in a nation as wealthy as the United States, the official measure, the SPM accounts for in-
the word characterizes the living conditions of come from the EITC and the Child Tax Credit,
a substantial share of the population. The over- as well as the value of SNAP and Special Supple-
all economic conditions in the United States mental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants,
have cycled between growth and recession, but and Children (WIC) benefits, in addition to di-
even the extensive economic expansion of the rect cash assistance (such as TANF and Social

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
Security). Especially for low-income families rent experiences of oppression and

with children, who increasingly receive assis- discrimination, African Americans and Hispan-
tance from tax credits and SNAP rather than ics face considerably higher rates of poverty
from TANF, the SPM provides a better indicator than non-Hispanic whites (26.2 percent and
of poverty and the effectiveness of current pol- 23.1 percent, respectively, compared with 10.1
icy—as well as of the potential effects of the percent). Moreover, children have significantly
proposals in this volume that center on tax higher rates of poverty (21.1 percent) than
credits and in-kind benefits. In addition, the adults (13.5 percent) or the elderly (age sixty-five
SPM accounts for work-related expenses, out- or older; 10.0 percent). Poverty also differs by
of-pocket medical expenses, and child support nativity (14.2 percent for native born, 18.5 per-
paid to other households. It also takes into ac- cent for foreign born), family structure (28.2
count the incomes of spouses and cohabiting percent for single female-headed households
partners, and considers all resident children compared with 6.2 percent for households
regardless of their relationships to the house- headed by a married couple), and educational
hold head or heads. It therefore provides a more attainment (28.9 percent for those without a
complete accounting of household resources high school degree compared with 5.0 percent
than the OPM. Moreover, it uses poverty thresh- for those with at least a bachelor’s degree)
olds that are updated to reflect the current cost (Proctor, Semega, and Kollar 2016). Finally, of-
of a basic set of necessities, with different ficial poverty rates differ by location. Poverty
thresholds for different living arrangements, for is higher in the South and West compared to
renters versus owners, and for different cost of the rest of the United States, and in urban and
living levels across geographic areas (Garner rural areas, compared to suburban areas.
2010; see also Fox et al., “Waging Wars,” 2015; Most individuals and families who experi-
Wimer et al. 2016). Given these advantages, this ence poverty do so for a short time. Data from
double issue’s final article by Christopher 2009 to 2012 suggest that more than 30 percent
Wimer, Sophie Collyer, and Sara Kimberlin of the population experienced a spell of poverty
(2018), which estimates the effects of many of lasting two or more months during this period
the proposals on poverty, relies principally on (Proctor, Semega, and Kollar 2016). However,
the SPM. However, here and in other articles, many poverty spells are short lived; less than 3
we also reference the OPM, given its continued percent of the population experienced poverty
prominence and importance for policy. in all forty-eight months of this period. Of
course, persistence of poverty differs across so-
P ov e r t y T r e n d s ciodemographic groups too. For example,
The official poverty rate fell precipitously dur- whereas only about 10 percent of all children
ing the 1960s. Since the 1960s, it has fluctuated experience persistent poverty throughout
between about 11 percent and 15 percent, in- childhood (for half or more years from birth to
creasing during economic downturns, and de- age eighteen), 37 percent of African American
creasing during times of economic expansion. children do (Ratcliffe and McKernan 2013).
In 2015, about 43.1 million individuals (13.5 per- Finally, some scholars and policymakers ar-
cent) lived in poverty, as measured by the OPM gue for more attention on those at the very bot-
(Proctor, Semega, and Kollar 2016); this was a tom of the U.S. income distribution—the highly
decline from the peak of the Great Recession disadvantaged. This group received attention
in 2010 (15.1 percent). The supplemental pov- following welfare reform in the 1990s, with a
erty rate indicated that 45.7 million people were focus on welfare-leaving families who did not
poor in 2015, a rate slightly higher than the of- find stable work and had limited public sup-
ficial measure (14.3 percent), reflecting, among ports available to them. Since then, the highly
other things, that SPM thresholds are generally disadvantaged groups of interest have broad-
higher than the official poverty thresholds. ened to include individuals and families in
Average poverty rates, however, mask con- “deep poverty” (below 50 percent of the poverty
siderable variation in poverty across popula- line), as well as those experiencing “disconnec-
tions of interest. Reflecting historical and cur- tion” from employment, schooling, and public

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
assistance, low food security, other forms of high-wage jobs for men with low levels of edu-
severe material hardship (such as housing in- cation (Autor 2010) and, more recently, the
stability, eviction), and the $2-a-day poor (Edin housing crisis during the Great Recession di-
and Shaefer 2015). These populations may face minished the construction industry as a source
economic hardship that is acute, compounded of new jobs (Glaeser 2010). Globalization, skill-
across dimensions, and persistent over the life biased technical change, and changes in union
course or even generations (Desmond 2015; influence have also reduced employment and
Seefeldt 2016). Estimates of the size and growth wage-growth opportunities for less-educated
of this population differ depending on the mea- workers. Job growth for workers without a col-
sures used (DeNavas-Walt and Proctor 2015; lege education is now concentrated in the low-
Sherman and Trisi 2015; Short 2015). However, wage personal service sector (Damme 2011).
the bulk of research suggests a growth in deep These changes have resulted in stagnant earn-
poverty in the past twenty years as measured ings for less-educated workers and limited their
by the official federal poverty measure (Fox et ability to earn their way out of poverty.
al., “Trends in Deep Poverty,” 2015; Shaefer and Between 1990 and 2005, poverty was charac-
Edin 2013; Shaefer, Edin, and Talbert 2015; but, terized more by low wages than by joblessness,
for a substantially different conclusion, see also but the picture has changed since 2007 (Smeed-
Winship 2016). Although additional research is ing 2006). Although low wages are still an im-
required to refine estimates of the size of the portant factor, unemployment and unstable
highly disadvantaged population, it is clear that work are primary causes of non-elderly poverty
a significant number of Americans are living today (Levy and Kochan 2012). In 1998, about
on very little cash income. 67 percent of the U.S. population sixteen years
of age or older was participating in the labor
Cau s e s a n d C o n s eq u e n c e s o f force; this rate declined significantly during the
P ov e r t y Great Recession, and has not increased much
Two key institutions that shape economic for- since, rates remaining no higher than 63 per-
tunes—the labor market and the family—have cent since 2014. Furthermore, nearly 19 percent
dramatically changed over the last half-century of adults between the ages of twenty-five and
in ways that leave large segments of the popu- fifty-four were not participating in the labor
lation increasingly vulnerable to poverty and force in 2016, again reflecting an incomplete
its effects. The low-wage labor market has been recovery to levels prior to the Great Recession
characterized by stagnation with little growth (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2017).
in wages and few opportunities for advance- As is the case for poverty more generally,
ment (Osterman 2014). At the same time, young labor market experiences are crucial determi-
adults with low levels of education have in- nants of falling into or avoiding deep poverty
creasingly transitioned into parenthood in the (Fox et al., “Trends in Deep Poverty,” 2015; Shae-
context of unmarried romantic partnerships fer, Edin, and Talbert 2015). Notably, unstable
that often dissolve shortly after their child’s employment, combined with low hours and
birth. We discuss these important and related wages, rather than a total disconnection from
changes and what it means for the next gen- employment, appears to be driving deep pov-
eration of children born into vulnerable eco- erty for many families (Shaefer, Edin, and Tal-
nomic conditions. bert 2015). Irregular or unpredictable hours,
For many, falling into or avoiding poverty split shifts, and contingent labor arrangements
largely turns on success in the labor market leave many low-wage workers with variable and
(Fox et al., “Trends in Deep Poverty,” 2015; Shae- inadequate incomes (Lambert, Fugiel, and
fer, Edin, and Talbert 2015). Employment chal- Henly 2014). The increase in precarious em-
lenges faced by less-educated workers are both ployment is characterized by decreased job ten-
structural and cyclical (Autor 2010; Farber 2011). ure and increases in long-term unemployment,
Changes in the structure of the economy have nonstandard work hours, and contingent em-
diminished the importance of the manufactur- ployment in which workers are temporary or
ing sector, traditionally a source of relatively work on limited contracts (Lambert 2008; Kal-

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
leberg 2009). Low-skill workers have been es- comes—related to the structure of employment
pecially affected by these trends, resulting in opportunities as well as to workers’ skills—are
high levels of job insecurity (Kalleberg 2009; key to understanding the labor market. First,
Lambert, Fugiel, and Henly 2014) and income whereas higher returns to education are ex-
instability (Morduch and Schneider 2017). pected to spur less-educated workers to greater
Challenges to sustained employment, in- human capital investments, growth in educa-
cluding physical and mental illness and disabil- tional attainment has been meager (Goldin and
ity, addiction, and lack of transportation, are Katz 2008). As a result, too few young people,
widespread in deep poor populations (Fox et al., particularly males, are acquiring the degrees
“Trends in Deep Poverty,” 2015; Turner, Dan- and skills required to succeed in the labor mar-
ziger, and Seefeldt 2006). Whereas the majority ket. Demographic shifts in immigration pat-
of families in deep poverty are headed by a sin- terns also affect the skill level of the workforce.
gle parent, a substantial proportion of the deep Over the past forty years, legal immigrants have
poor (now nearly 40 percent) are unemployed increasingly arrived from countries with lower
working-age adults without dependent children levels of human capital and higher rates of pov-
(Fox et al., “Trends in Deep Poverty,” 2015). Less- erty, such as Mexico, Central America, and Asia
educated men, particularly those of color and (Raphael and Smolensky 2009). Moreover, the
who have criminal justice histories, are dispro- population of undocumented immigrants, who
portionately likely to experience deep poverty have especially low levels of skills, has grown
as a result of low levels of labor force participa- by more than 300 percent since 1990, though
tion and high unemployment (Cuddy, Venator, growth declined sharply after 2001 (Warren and
and Reeves 2015; Holzer, Raphael, and Stoll Warren 2013).
2006; Jacobs 2015; Council of Economic Advis- Finally, incarceration is a key poverty-
ers 2014) and limited access to income supports. relevant issue. Nearly 1.6 million individuals
Whereas the economy is likely to continue were in a prison facility at the end of 2012, the
to recover from the recession, and unemploy- majority of whom were black males younger
ment will decrease as a result, the fundamental than forty (Carson and Golinelli 2013). The sub-
polarization between high- and low-skill jobs stantial variation in imprisonment rates by race
is not expected to end (Autor 2010; Manyika et and gender has been well established. For ex-
al. 2011). The wages received by those entering ample, in 2012, incarceration rates for black and
the formal labor market with modest levels of white adult males were 2.84 percent and
human capital are low. Although men continue 0.46 percent, respectively, compared to 0.12 per-
to have higher earnings than women, less- cent and 0.05 percent for black and white adult
educated men have seen much sharper declines females (Carson and Golinelli 2013). Indeed,
in compensation than women (Blank 2009a; incarceration—and criminal justice involve-
Bureau of Labor Statistics 2015). In addition, ment more generally—is particularly common
no evidence indicates that earnings growth for black males. Evidence suggests that about
alone will be enough to raise incomes above half of all black men will be arrested by age
poverty for those with low human capital. Even twenty-three (Brame et al. 2012; Brame et al.
with the exceptionally strong economy and 2014) and that 68 percent of black men without
rapid job creation in the 1990s, real wage growth a high school degree will experience incarcera-
among families leaving welfare was estimated tion between the ages of twenty and thirty-four,
to range between 2.0 percent and 4.5 percent which is true for about 28 percent of white men
per year (Card, Michalopoulos, and Robins without a high school degree and 21 percent of
2001; Pavetti and Acs 2001). The challenge now black men with a high school degree (Pettit
is to support sustained labor market participa- 2012). High rates of incarceration raise impor-
tion, increase opportunities for workers to im- tant unresolved questions about the implica-
prove skills, encourage earnings growth among tions for labor market opportunities, both for
all low-skilled workers, and effectively assist those with incarceration histories and those in
low-wage workers who remain poor. affected communities (Holzer, Raphael, and
Several determinants of labor market out- Stoll 2004). Evidence suggests that having a

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
criminal background creates substantial barri- and services that meet the needs of these com-
ers to employment when individuals return to plex families (Carlson and Meyer 2014).
their communities. Criminal history has been Addressing the increasing divergence in the
identified as the biggest barrier to employment, fortunes and life trajectories of advantaged and
even more so than failing to complete high disadvantaged groups (defined by socioeco-
school (Peterangelo and Henken 2016). Yet, re- nomic factors such as education, income, race,
cidivism is strongly related to whether former and wealth) is a fundamental challenge. Sara
inmates get jobs quickly and maintain steady McLanahan describes the resulting “diverging
work (Council of Economic Advisers 2016). destinies” as especially consequential for indi-
Against this backdrop of a difficult labor vidual well-being and economic mobility (2004;
market for low-skilled adults, major demo- see also McLanahan and Jacobsen 2015).
graphic transitions related to family formation Higher-income individuals have advantages in
have also occurred. First, young adults are now nearly every relevant institution—the family,
more likely to partner with individuals of com- neighborhoods, schools, and the labor market
parable education, contributing to greater (where they encounter primarily other higher-
household income inequality by increasing the income individuals)—whereas low-income in-
pairing of higher (and lower) earners (Schwartz dividuals face compounding disadvantages in
2013). Second, whereas marriage rates have sta- all of these domains. Economic resources and
bilized for more educated adults, they have de- parental investments are increasing for advan-
clined among the less educated. Of particular taged children and youths, whereas their dis-
consequence, unmarried births among disad- advantaged counterparts experience compara-
vantaged families are now common, represent- tively fewer investments.
ing 57 percent of births to women with less Parents’ economic disadvantage plays a for-
than a high school degree, but only 9 percent mative role in shaping children’s opportunities
of births to women with at least a bachelor’s for success and acquisition of skills. The degree
degree (Shattuck and Kreider 2013). Moreover, of intergenerational transmission of poverty
nearly three-quarters of unmarried births are and inequality varies across studies, but the
unplanned (Sawhill 2014). correlation between parent and child income
The so-called drift into parenthood by low- is typically estimated to be about 0.5 (Corak
income young adults (Sawhill 2014) is particu- 2006; Jäntti 2009; for recent estimates suggest-
larly problematic because their romantic and ing higher persistence, see Mitnik et al. 2015).
parental relationships are often short lived. The Such persistence in economic positions across
majority of cohabiting parents break up within generations, coupled with strong theory about
a few years of their child’s birth. Many low- why poor children fare worse than their more
income children are then raised with limited advantaged peers and accumulating empirical
involvement with and financial support from evidence about how poverty affects families
their fathers. Whereas child support contribu- and children’s daily experiences, implies that
tions from noncustodial parents (NCPs) have poverty may be determinative in children’s life
the potential to reduce poverty, a large propor- chances.
tion of low-income custodial parents receive Theoretical models of how poverty affects
only partial or no support, often because NCPs children encompass both what money can buy
have low incomes themselves (Cancian, Meyer, and how poverty harms relationships. Eco-
and Han 2011; Smeeding, Garfinkel, and Mincy nomic models view families with greater eco-
2011). Over time, mothers and fathers repartner nomic resources as being better able to pur-
and have additional children, creating complex chase or produce important “inputs” into their
families that are likely to remain socially and children’s development, such as books and ed-
economically disadvantaged. Children in com- ucational materials at home, high-quality
plex families are then disproportionately likely childcare settings and schools, and safe neigh-
to experience ongoing family instability, low borhoods (Becker 1991). Economically disad-
income, and poverty; moreover, public benefit vantaged parents may also have less time to
programs are challenged in designing supports invest in children, owing to higher rates of sin-

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
gle parenthood, nonstandard work hours, and psychology suggests that poverty early in a
less flexible work schedules (Smolensky and child’s life may be particularly harmful (Miller
Gootman 2003). Psychologists and sociologists and Chen 2013). Not only does the astonish-
point to the quality of family relationships and ingly rapid development of young children’s
stress to explain poverty’s detrimental effects brains leave them sensitive (and vulnerable)
on children. These theoretical models posit to environmental conditions, but the family
that higher income may improve parents’ psy- context (as opposed to schools or peers) dom-
chological well-being and family processes, in inates their everyday lives.
particular the quality of parents’ interactions Increasingly, scholars have recognized the
with their children. A long line of research has importance of appropriate behavior, self-
found that low income is associated with more regulation, and mental health in determining
punitive and less nurturing, stimulating, and labor market and other important adult out-
responsive parenting. Finally, sources of every- comes, such as criminal activity (Cunha et al.
day stress that poor children encounter outside 2006). Many of the same environmental factors
of their family relationships, such as violent or and resource constraints that contribute to
polluted neighborhoods, may also have far- d ifferential educational attainment may
reaching negative consequences in their devel- also limit social and emotional development.
opment (Evans 2001, 2004). Low-income children demonstrate less self-
Research on the effects of poverty have fo- regulation, poorer mental health, and more
cused largely on children’s academic achieve- problem behaviors than their higher-income
ment and educational attainment, perhaps be- counterparts in childhood and throughout ad-
cause these are strong predictors of subsequent olescence (Magnuson and Votruba-Drzal 2009).
economic well-being. Income gaps and associ- These factors may contribute to criminal activ-
ated socioeconomic status-based gradients in ity and incarceration, further compounding
academic skills are present when children en- lower levels of education and job skills, thus
ter school and persist through adolescence limiting low-income children’s later labor mar-
(Magnuson, Waldfogel, and Washbrook 2012). ket prospects (Cunha et al. 2006).
Poor children complete a year less of schooling In short, a myriad of factors, including
than those who have family incomes between changes in labor market opportunities that dis-
one and two times the federal poverty line, and advantage less-skilled workers, demographic
two years less than those who have family in- trends that increase disparities in the family
comes more than twice the federal line (Dun- resources available to children of more- and
can, Ziol-Guest, and Kalil 2010). As described, less-advantaged parents, and changes in public
far too many young adults are entering the la- policy, have converged in ways that are creating
bor market without the skills needed to secure and exacerbating inequality in many aspects of
stable employment at wages high enough to contemporary American life. These factors
keep themselves and their family out of poverty. have widespread implications with respect to
Despite debate about whether and how both the current causes and consequences of
much of the estimated associations between poverty and for the intergenerational transmis-
poverty and achievement outcomes are causal, sion thereof. They suggest the need to review
several quasi-experimental studies point to current policies and consider new alternatives
substantively meaningful effects (Akee et al. that are responsive to the twin challenges of
2010; Dahl and Lochner 2012; Morris, Duncan, poverty and inequality. In the following section,
and Rodrigues 2011; Milligan and Stabile 2011; we review the effectiveness of current policies
see also Duncan, Magnuson, and Votruba- to provide context for the innovations devel-
Drzal 2015). Deep and early poverty is particu- oped in the articles that follow.
larly strongly associated with lower levels of
educational achievement and attainment, T h e E ffec t i v e n e s s o f C u r r e n t
holding constant other family advantages A n t i - p ov e r t y P o li c i e s
(Brooks-Gunn and Duncan 1997). Emerging re- Over the past twenty-five years, anti-poverty
search in neuroscience and developmental policies and related social welfare benefits have

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
largely shifted from a system of guaranteed in- to, rather than substitutes for, formal employ-
come support to a work-based safety net. These ment.
changes were solidified in PRWORA, which re- The policy changes associated with the 1996
flected a long-standing debate about the ad- welfare reform have been studied extensively,
verse effects of income transfers and the effec- although much of the evidence was collected
tiveness of job training programs and work during a period of economic expansion. On the
supports, as well as a shift toward a cultural whole, welfare “reform generally raised earn-
norm of parental employment, even for moth- ings, although not by amounts that are likely
ers of young children. In addition to emphasiz- to raise many poor families out of poverty”
ing work, PRWORA also included provisions to (Grogger and Karoly 2005, 153). Specific aspects
encourage marriage and bolster child support of TANF’s work-based safety net have also been
enforcement. The shift during the 1990s to evaluated and generally been found to be as-
work-conditioned benefits reallocated public sociated with anticipated labor market effects,
benefits from nonworking to working house- though effects on poverty are less evident. For
holds. Those with the lowest market incomes example, mandatory work requirements (or re-
(less than 50 percent of the poverty line) once quirements to participate in work-related ac-
received substantially more in benefits than tivities) are associated with reduced welfare use
those with higher incomes (Moffitt 2015). This, and increased employment (Blank 2002, 2009b;
however, is no longer the case: for single-parent Grogger, Karoly, and Klerman 2002), as are fam-
families under 50 percent of the poverty line, ily caps, sanctions, and time limits. More gen-
increases in earnings now result in larger pub- erous childcare subsidies have also been found
lic benefit transfers; moreover, families that are to promote maternal employment (Dunifon
near or just above the poverty line receive sub- 2010; Grogger and Karoly 2005).
stantially larger transfers than in the past Although, on average, employment in-
(Scholz, Moffitt, and Cowan 2009). Whereas creased and there were limited improvements
low-income working families have benefited, in economic well-being in the wake of welfare
the shift has left families increasingly vulner- reform, as noted above, limited cash support
able to periodic unemployment; it also coin- may have increased economic hardship and
cides with an increase in the proportion of fam- deepened poverty for those who were not able
ilies that experience very little cash income, to find steady work. Moreover, welfare sanc-
deep poverty, or high rates of material hard- tions and reduced access to cash welfare were
ship—because families without income from associated with other negative outcomes, in-
formal employment are ineligible for many cluding child welfare involvement (Slack, Lee,
forms of public assistance, and cash assistance and Berger 2007). There are also concerns that
in particular (Sherman and Trisi 2014; Ziliak the end of the entitlement to cash assistance
2016). has contributed to disparities in access to eco-
State policies regarding work requirements, nomic support, for example, by race and eth-
lifetime limits on program participation, fam- nicity (Fording, Soss, and Schram 2011). Finally,
ily caps, and time-limited cash benefits, as well the limited effectiveness of TANF as a safety
as diversionary tactics for applicants, appear net program was made clear during the Great
to have affected rates of deep poverty (Hetling, Recession, when unemployment rates rose
Kwon, and Saunders 2015) or, at the very least, sharply, but TANF participation did not. As a
resulted in a considerable segment of the poor result, trends in poverty and especially deep
population having very little access to cash in- poverty are now more closely aligned with the
come (Shaefer and Edin 2013; Shaefer, Edin, business cycle than in the past (Bitler and
and Talbert 2015). At the same time, funding Hoynes 2016).
for work supports, such as childcare subsidies, Of course, patterns of public program par-
subsidized health insurance, nutrition assis- ticipation look very different today than they
tance, and wage supplements (in the form of did twenty years ago. Specifically, TANF has be-
the EITC) grew extensively. Income support come much less salient, whereas SNAP, sub
programs thus now function as complements sidized health insurance, and the EITC have

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
grown dramatically in importance. Indeed, the lost their earnings advantage relative to women,
largest social welfare expenditures today are for often do not have co-resident dependent chil-
means-tested entitlements from Medicaid and dren and are therefore ineligible for programs
SNAP, as well as the EITC. In 2015, the EITC limited to resident parents. Disadvantaged
program paid approximately $67 billion (U.S. nonresident fathers may have few connections
Department of the Treasury 2017) and SNAP to agencies outside of the penal and child sup-
paid over $74 billion (U.S. Department of Agri- port systems, suggesting that reforms to lever-
culture 2017) in benefits to low-income fami- age these systems to increase employment and
lies, versus total spending of $29 billion for responsible fatherhood may hold promise. Pol-
TANF and its related childcare components, icymakers continue to confront questions
including state maintenance of effort spending about the right mix of policies to increase the
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser- availability of family-supporting employment,
vices 2017, table A1). Whereas TANF caseloads enable low-wage workers to support their fam-
dropped considerably in the wake of welfare ilies when working, encourage reemployment
reform and saw limited growth during the when work is scarce, and provide an adequate
Great Recession, SNAP participation expanded safety net for those not currently able to work.
significantly, real expenditures increasing over
200 percent between 1980 and 2010. SNAP also W h y I n n ovat e N ow ?
assisted the poor much more than TANF dur- The challenges are clear. The United States has
ing the Great Recession. If counted as an in- experienced significant economic growth, yet
come equivalent, SNAP benefits have reduced the fruits of productivity and labor market par-
the depth and severity of poverty substantially ticipation are not being experienced by a large
over the last two decades (Shaefer and Edin proportion of our population. Inter-and intra-
2013; Tiehen, Jolliffe, and Smeeding 2016). Like- generational inequalities in both opportunities
wise, EITC participation and expenditures have and outcomes by socioeconomic status and
grown dramatically over the past several de- race-ethnicity are significant across a wide
cades and were instrumental for working fam- range of social institutions, spanning neighbor-
ilies during the Great Recession. Liana Fox and hoods, housing, education, the labor market,
her colleagues estimate that the EITC and SNAP and the criminal justice system. Less-educated
reduced child poverty by approximately 8 per- workers face low (and stagnant) wages, insta-
centage points, leading them to argue that anti- bility in employment and hours, minimal
poverty programs have been more effective in employer-provided benefits, and limited oppor-
reducing poverty than previously thought tunities for advancement. The large population
(“Waging War,” 2015). Finally, Medicaid and of disadvantaged individuals with criminal jus-
subsidies for health insurance expanded for tice histories—particularly black men—faces
children as a result of federal funding for State substantial labor market barriers and has little
Child Health Insurance Program beginning in access to public benefits. Assortative mating
1997, and for adults significantly as a result of and differences in family formation, fertility,
state options to expand Medicaid under the Af- and stability between advantaged and disad-
fordable Care Act of 2010. vantaged groups have contributed to diverging
As first conceived, work-based welfare ben- patterns of family life, with striking implica-
efits were created as a way to push (and pull) tions for the next generation. In particular, chil-
welfare-dependent single mothers into the la- dren born to disadvantaged parents are highly
bor market. Yet, the increasingly apparent lim- likely to spend time in a single-mother house-
itations and volatility of the low-wage labor hold and to experience parental multi-partner
market raise the question of how a work-based fertility and associated family instability and
safety net can effectively bolster the employ- fluidity. Low-income children continue to ex-
ment and economic well-being of all workers, perience lower-quality neighborhoods, hous-
both those with and without families to sup- ing, and schools. Within this context, anti-
port. Of additional concern, many disadvan- poverty policy has increasingly offered
taged men, who have in recent decades all but work-conditioned benefits and, particularly for

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
nonworking individuals and families, has in- policies, postsecondary education, housing
creasingly offered in-kind rather than cash as- support, food security, family planning, and
sistance. Thus, a considerable portion of the two-generation human capital development.
low-income population relies on little cash in- Despite this range, the proposals do not explic-
come. Taken together, these factors suggest itly address several important policy topics: for
that anti-poverty innovations are warranted. example, immigration, incarceration, child-
The current political divides may undercut care, child welfare, transportation, subsidized
the potential for bipartisan initiatives to ad- health care, and Medicaid.
dress poverty. And, the early days of the Trump As Wimer, Collyer, and Kimberlin discuss in
administration suggest more support for limit- detail in the last article in this double issue
ing or dismantling programs designed to ad- (2018), the costs and impact of these proposals
dress poverty, than for expanding their reach. vary widely. So do the scale and ambition of the
On the other hand, class divides have received innovations, and the authors’ attention to de-
new attention, and there remains some bipar- tails of policy implementation and the organi-
tisan support for evidence-based policy change. zational contexts of programmatic implemen-
Social science scholars have developed a sig- tation. Some call for wholesale transformation
nificant base of research to inform what more of programs or institutions, such as establish-
could be done and what the effects of new in- ing a universal child allowance (Bitler, Hines,
novations might be. Social science theory and and Page 2018; Shaefer et al. 2018), or guaran-
empirical evidence have continued to accumu- teeing universal access to an above-poverty
late and point to key ways in which policy in- wage job (Paul et al. 2018). Others leverage ex-
novations could better support the current gen- isting programs to address key challenges fac-
erations of workers, both those who struggle ing the poor, for example, a minimum benefit
to find steady employment and earn a family- to reduce elderly poverty (Herd et al. 2018), and
sustaining wage, as well as those completing a renter’s tax credit (Kimberlin, Tach, and
their education, starting to work and, often, Wimer 2018) to address housing costs. Others
also starting their families. Such evidence fur- advocate for expanding investments to improve
ther points to how to help the younger genera- education and training—whether for children
tion—the children of low-income adults—who and their parents (Sommer et al. 2018), or adult
may be harmed by the experience of deep and workers (Holzer 2018; Strumbos, Linderman,
persistent economic hardship, and who often and Hicks 2018). Many of the proposals respond
miss out on experiences they will need to thrive to the needs of families with children, or to the
later in their lives. Finally, it points to innova- particular vulnerability of children in single-
tive ways to build on the current safety net to parent families. However, only Lawrence Wu
better assist low-income individuals and fami- and Nicholas D. E. Mark (2018) consider an ef-
lies, both those who are strongly and those who fort to directly alter family structure. They re-
are weakly attached to the labor market. view evidence on the potential for improved
access to contraception—specifically long-
I n n ovat i v e A n t i - p ov e r t y acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs)—to
App r oac h e s reduce unintended and nonmarital pregnancy
With policymakers’ need for evidence-based and improve economic and social well-being.
solutions in mind, each article in this volume In contrast to most of the other articles in this
focuses on a specific social problem or popula- double issue, Wu and Mark call for a pilot to
tion and presents a detailed, actionable re- test the impact of their proposal.
sponse. The articles leverage the best available Whereas all the proposals address concerns
theoretical and empirical social science re- with poverty, they vary substantially in their
search to present evidence-based arguments proximate goals, and at least implicitly, in their
for implementing a set of novel and potentially theory of poverty or anti-poverty policy. Mark
transformational policy innovations. The pro- Paul and his colleagues (2018), who propose a
posals span a wide range of policy domains, federal job guarantee whereby all American
including cash transfers, employment-related adults would be assured of full-time employ-

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
ment in a “public works” job with above- savings match—for a six-month period to en-
poverty wages and benefits, is the most costly, courage emergency saving among low-wage
and also the most transformative. By assuring workers.
employment—with adequate wages and ben- In contrast, this issue also includes a range
efits—the authors argue that the need for many of proposals to directly support individuals and
other programs would be eliminated. The pro- families with insufficient resources, regardless
posal may have limited policy relevance, but it of work status. Three proposals target families
provides an important counterpoint to other with children through new cash transfer mech-
articles in this double issue, which implicitly anisms: both Marianne Bitler, Annie Laurie
assume the current structure of the labor mar- Hines, and Marianne Page (2018) and H. Luke
ket, with a low minimum wage and limited re- Shaefer and his colleagues (2018) propose an
quired benefits. unconditional child allowance, albeit in very
A number of the proposals aim to reduce different forms; Maria Cancian and Daniel
the proportion of workers relying on low-wage Meyer (2018) propose a public guarantee of pri-
jobs by improving education and training in an vate child support payments available to all
effort to provide access to better jobs. Teresa children not living with both parents. Sara Kim-
Eckrich Sommer and her colleagues (2018) pro- berlin, Laura Tach, and Christopher Wimer
pose redesigning the Head Start program to (2018) also propose a new transfer program that
more fully serve the needs of both parents and would provide a refundable renter’s tax credit
children by combining parental education, for families facing high rental costs relative to
training, and employment opportunities with their income; Pamela Herd and her colleagues
the existing early childhood education compo- (2018) argue for a targeted minimum benefit
nents of the program. Diana Strumbos, Donna plan that would provide a guaranteed benefit
Linderman, and Carson C. Hicks (2018) argue through the Social Security system to bring the
for a national community college model based income of poor elderly individuals to the pov-
on the CUNY ASAP model, which provides stu- erty threshold, regardless of their work history.
dents with extensive advising, academic, career, Other proposals build off and expand existing
and financial supports while requiring full-time programs. For example, Craig Gundersen,
enrollment in a highly structured degree pro- Brent Kreider, and John V. Pepper (2018) pres-
gram. Harry Holzer (2018) lays out a competi- ent a plan to change the SNAP benefit formula
tive grant program to states to implement to increase benefits and substantially reduce
performance-based community college pro- food insecurity among SNAP recipients.
grams to improve academic and employment In short, the proposals highlighted in this
outcomes for disadvantaged populations. In- double issue all aim to reduce poverty, but they
divar Dutta-Gupta and his colleagues (2018) ar- offer markedly different solutions, in many
gue for a national on-the-job training and sub- ways solving different problems. If the problem
sidized employment program for low-skilled is insufficient resources, the solution may be
workers. to make more money available to families with
Other proposals aim to supplement the limited earnings, though the authors here have
earnings of low-wage workers in ways that gen- very different ideas about who should get what,
erally improve the returns to work, and target and under what conditions. A few would not
particular challenges. For example, Jennifer require work, but would provide support only
Romich and Heather Hill (2018) describe a plan to resident parents with children (child allow-
to “couple” minimum wage hikes with changes ance proposals of Bitler, Hines, and Page 2018
in existing benefit programs to avoid high mar- and of Shaefer et al. 2018), or with children liv-
ginal tax rates and benefit cliffs and, thereby, ing apart from a parent (child support assur-
to offer a package of increased wages and sus- ance proposal of Cancian and Meyer 2018).
tained benefit (particularly SNAP and EITC) re- These authors highlight the needs of children
ceipt. Sarah Halpern-Meekin and colleagues and the returns to public investments to reduce
(2018) propose enabling workers to defer 20 per- their vulnerability to poverty. The child allow-
cent of their EITC refund—with a 50 percent ance proposals offer a universal benefit. The

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
child support assurance proposal emphasizes 2010. “Parent’s Incomes and Children’s Out-
the need to support nonresident parents’ con- comes: A Quasi-Experiment with Casinos on
tributions—children receive government sup- American Indian Reservations.” American Eco-
port not when their custodial parent (usually nomic Journal: Applied Economics 2(1): 86–115.
their mother) is poor, but when their nonresi- Autor, David. 2010. The Polarization of the Job Op-
dent parent (usually their father) has inade- portunities in the U.S. Labor Market: Implications
quate earnings or otherwise is unable or un- for Employment and Earnings. Washington, D.C.:
willing to meet parental obligations. Center for American Progress and the Hamilton
Other proposals target the inadequacy of Project.
work and earnings—but the various proposals Autor, David H., Alan Manning, and Christopher L.
are based on very different assumptions about Smith. 2016. “The Contribution of the Minimum
the nature of the problem. If work is not avail- Wage to U.S. Wage Inequality over Three De-
able, and earnings are the preferred resource, cades: A Reassessment.” American Economic
then providing jobs is a logical solution. But, Journal: Applied Economics 8(1): 58–99.
should there be a universal and unlimited guar- Barr, Andrew, and Sarah E. Turner. 2013. “Expanding
antee of government work at above-poverty Enrollments and Contracting State Budgets: The
wages, as Paul and colleagues (2018) propose, Effect of the Great Recession on Higher Educa-
or time-limited, targeted subsidized jobs, pay- tion.” Annals of the American Academy of Politi-
ing minimum wages and often provided by cal and Social Science 650(1): 168–93.
private-sector employers, as Dutta-Gupta and Bartik, Timothy J., and Brad Hershbein. 2017. “Pre-K
colleagues (2018) propose? The answer depends in the Public Schools: Evidence from Within All
in part on whether low wages reflect the struc- States.” Paper presented to the Summer Re-
ture of the labor market and of workers in to- search Workshop, Institute for Research on Pov-
day’s economy—which argues for a job guar- erty, University of Wisconsin–Madison. Madison
antee to change workers’ options—or a skills (June 19–22, 2017).
mismatch that can be addressed with invest- Becker, Gary S. 1991. A Treatise on the Family. Cam-
ment in human capital, at least in the medium bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
to long run. Bitler, Marianne P., Annie Laurie Hines, and Mari-
The articles in this double issue respond to anne Page. 2018. “Cash for Kids.” RSF: The Rus-
a call for innovative policy proposals intended sell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sci-
to reduce poverty and improve economic well- ences 4(2): 43–73. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4
being. The individual responses differ across .2.03.
many dimensions and, as Wimer, Collyer, and Bitler, Marianne, and Hilary Hoynes. 2016. “The
Kimberlin (2018) stress in the final article, these More Things Change, the More They Stay the
differences can make comparisons challeng- Same? The Safety Net and Poverty in the Great
ing. At the same time, the range of approaches Recession.” Journal of Labor Economics 34(S1):
is instructive in highlighting the scope and di- S403–44.
versity of potential innovations. In the face of Blank, Rebecca M. 2002. “Evaluating Welfare Re-
continued high rates of poverty, growing inform in the United States.” Journal of Economic
equality, and significant dissatisfaction with Literature 40(4): 1105–66.
current efforts, there are reasons to substan- ———. 2009a. “Economic Change and the Structure
tially broaden the range of policies under dis- of Opportunity for Less-Skilled Workers.” In
cussion. The proposals that follow offer an im- Changing Poverty, Changing Policies, edited by
portant set of options to seed the debate. Maria Cancian and Sheldon Danziger. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
R e fe r e n c e s ———. 2009b. “What We Know, What We Don’t
Ahn, Thomas. 2016. The Labor Market Impacts of Know, and What We Need to Know About Wel-
Paid Sick Leave: Evidence from Connecticut. fare Reform.” In Welfare Reform and Its Long-
Washington, D.C.: Employment Policies Institute. Term Consequences for America’s Poor, edited by
Akee, Randall K. Q., William E. Copeland, Gordon James P. Ziliak. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
Keeler, Adrian Angold, and Elizabeth J. Costello. sity Press.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
Brame, Robert, Shawn D. Bushway, Ray Paternoster, ton: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Jus-
and Michael G. Turner. 2014. “Demographic Pat- tice Statistics.
terns of Cumulative Arrest Prevalence by Ages 18 Cooper, Daniel H., Byron F. Lutz, and Michael G. Pa-
and 23.” Crime & Delinquency 60(3): 471–86. lumbo. 2015. “The Role of Taxes in Mitigating In-
Brame, Robert, Michael G. Turner, Raymond Pater- come Inequality Across the U.S. States.” National
noster, and Shawn D. Bushway. 2012. “Cumula- Tax Journal 68(4): 943–74.
tive Prevalence of Arrest from Ages 8–23 in a Corak, Miles. 2006. “Do Poor Children Become Poor
National Sample.” Pediatrics 129(1): 21–27. Adults? Lessons from a Cross Country Compari-
Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne, and Greg J. Duncan. 1997. son of Generational Earnings Mobility.” In Dy-
“The Effects of Poverty on Children.” Future of namics of Inequality and Poverty (Research on
Children 7(2): 55–71. Economic Inequality, volume 13), edited by John
Buettgens, Matthew, John Holahan, and Hannah Creedy and Guyonne Kalb. Bingley, West Hamp-
Recht. 2015. Medicaid Expansion, Health Cover- shire: Emerald Group Publishing.
age, and Spending: An Update for the 21 States Council of Economic Advisers. 2014. “The Labor
that Have Not Expanded Eligibility. Policy Brief. Force Participation Rate Since 2007: Causes and
Washington, D.C.: Henry J. Kaiser Family Founda- Policy Implications.” Washington: Government
tion. Printing Office.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2015. “Women’s Earnings ———. 2016. “Economic Perspectives on Incarcera-
Compared to Men’s Earnings in 2014.” TED: The tion and the Criminal Justice System.” Washing-
Economics Daily, November 20, 2015. Accessed ton: Government Printing Office.
February 19, 2017. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted Courtemanche, Charles, James Marton, Benjamin
/2015/womens-earnings-compared-to-mens Ukert, Aaron Yelowtiz, and Daniela Zapata. 2017.
-earnings-in-2014.htm. “Impacts of the Affordable Care Act on Health
———. 2017. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Insurance Coverage in Medicaid Expansion and
Population Survey.” U.S. Department of Labor. Non-Expansion States.” Journal of Policy Analysis
Accessed September 20, 2017. https://www.bls and Management 36(1): 178–210.
.gov/cps/. Cuddy, Emily, Joanna Venator, and Richard V.
Cancian, Maria, and Daniel R. Meyer. 2018. “Reform- Reeves. 2015. “In a Land of Dollars: Deep Poverty
ing Policy for Single-Parent Families to Reduce and Its Consequences.” Social Mobility Papers.
Child Poverty.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution (May 7).
Journal of the Social Sciences 4(2): 91–112. DOI: Cunha, Flavio, James J. Heckman, Lance Lochner,
10.7758/RSF.2018.4.2.05. and Dimitriy V. Masterov. 2006. “Interpreting the
Cancian, Maria, Daniel R. Meyer, and Eunhee Han. Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation.” In Hand-
2011. “Child Support: Responsible Fatherhood book of the Economics of Education, vol. 1, edited
and the Quid Pro Quo.” In “Young Disadvantaged by Eric A. Hanushek and Finis Welch. New York:
Men: Fathers, Families, Poverty, and Policy.” Spe- Elsevier.
cial issue, Annals of the American Academy of Dahl, Gordon B., and Lance Lochner. 2012. “The Im-
Political and Social Science 635(1): 140–62. pact of Family Income on Child Achievement:
Card, David, Charles Michalopoulos, and Philip K. Evidence from the Earned Income Tax Credit.”
Robins. 2001. “The Limits to Wage Growth: Mea- The American Economic Review 102(5): 1927–56.
suring the Growth Rate of Wages for Recent Damme, Lauren. 2011. “A Future of Low-Paying,
Welfare Leavers.” NBER working paper no. 8444. Low-Skill Jobs?” Policy Brief 23. Washington,
Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic D.C.: New America Foundation. Accessed Sep-
Research. tember 20, 2017. https://www.newamerica.
Carlson, Marcia J., and Daniel R. Meyer, eds. 2014. org/economic-growth/policy-papers/a-future
“Family Complexity, Poverty, and Public Policy.” -of-low-paying-low-skill-jobs/.
Special issue, Annals of the American Academy DeNavas-Walt, Carmen, and Bernadette D. Proctor.
of Political and Social Science 654(1). 2015. “Income and Poverty in the United States:
Carson, E. Ann, and Daniela Golinelli. 2013. “Prison- 2014.” Current Population Reports, series P60, no.
ers in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases, 252. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Of-
1991–2012.” Bulletin no. NCJ 243920. Washing- fice.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
Desmond, Matthew. 2015. “Severe Deprivation in of Policy Analysis and Management 34(3): 567–
America: An Introduction.” RSF: The Russell Sage 92.
Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 1(1): Fox, Liana, Christopher Wimer, Irwin Garfinkel,
1–11. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2015.1.1.01. Neeraj Kaushal, JayHyun Nam, and Jane Waldfo-
Duncan, Greg J., Katherine Magnuson, and Elizabeth gel. 2015. “Trends in Deep Poverty from 1968 to
Votruba-Drzal. 2015. “Children and Socioeco- 2011: The Influence of Family Structure, Employ-
nomic Status.” In Ecological Settings and Pro- ment Patterns, and the Safety Net.” RSF: The
cesses. Vol. 4 of Handbook of Child Psychology Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sci-
and Developmental Science, edited by Richard M. ences 1(1): 14–34. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2015.1.1
Lerner. New York: John Wiley & Sons. .02.
Duncan, Greg J., Kathleen M. Ziol-Guest, and Ariel Friedman-Krauss, Allison, W. Steven Barnett, and
Kalil. 2010. “Early-Childhood Poverty and Adult Milagros Nores. 2016. How Much Can High-
Attainment, Behavior, and Health.” Child Devel- Quality Universal Pre-K Reduce Achievement
opment 81(1): 306–25. Gaps? Washington, D.C.: Center for American
Dunifon, Rachel E. 2010. “Welfare Reform and Inter- Progress.
generational Mobility.” Report for the Economic Garner, Thesia. 2010. “Supplemental Poverty Mea-
Mobility Project. Washington, D.C.: The Pew sure Thresholds: Laying the Foundation.” Wash-
Charitable Trusts. ington: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Dutta-Gupta, Indivar, Kali Grant, Julie Kerksick, Dan Glaeser, Edward. 2010. “Children Moving Back
Bloom, and Ajay Chaudry. 2018. “Working to Re- Home and the Construction Industry.” Economix
duce Poverty: A National Subsidized Employ- (blog). New York Times, February 16. Accessed
ment Proposal.” RSF: The Russell Sage Founda- September 20, 2017. http://economix.blogs.ny
tion Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 64–83. times.com/2010/02/16/kids-moving-back-home
DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.04. -and-the-construction-industry/.
Edin, Kathryn J., and H. Luke Shaefer. 2015. $2.00 a Goldin, Claudia, and Lawrence F. Katz. 2008. The
Day: Living on Almost Nothing in America. New Race Between Education and Technology. Cam-
York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Evans, Gary W. 2001. “Environmental Stress and Grogger, Jeffrey, and Lynn A. Karoly. 2005. Welfare
Health.” In A Handbook of Health Psychology, ed- Reform: Effects of a Decade of Change. Cam-
ited by Andrew Baum, Tracey A. Revenson, and bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Jerome E. Singer. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erl- Grogger, Jeffrey, Lynn A. Karoly, and Jacob Alex Kler-
baum. man. 2002. Consequences of Welfare Reform: A
———. 2004. “The Environment of Childhood Pov- Research Synthesis. DRU-2676-DHHS. Santa
erty.” American Psychologist 59(2): 77–92. Monica, Calif.: RAND.
Farber, Henry S. 2011. “Job Loss in the Great Reces- Gundersen, Craig, Brent Kreider, and John V. Pepper.
sion: Historical Perspective from the Displaced 2018. “Reconstructing the Supplemental Nutri-
Workers Survey, 1984–2010.” NBER working pa- tion Assistance Program to More Effectively Alle-
per no. 17040. Cambridge, Mass.: National Bu- viate Food Insecurity in the United States.” RSF:
reau of Economic Research. The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social
Floyd, Ife. 2017. TANF Cash Benefits Have Fallen by Sciences 4(2): 113–30. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018
More Than 20 Percent in Most States and Con- .4.2.06.
tinue to Erode. Washington, D.C.: Center on Bud- Halpern-Meekin, Sarah, Sara Sternberg Greene,
get and Policy Priorities. Ezra Levin, and Kathryn Edin. 2018. “The Rainy
Fording, Richard C., Joe Soss, and Sanford F. Sch- Day Earned Income Tax Credit: A Reform to
ram. 2011. “Race and the Local Politics of Punish- Boost Financial Security by Helping Low-Wage
ment in the New World of Welfare.” American Workers Build Emergency Savings.” RSF: The
Journal of Sociology 116(5): 1610–57. Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sci-
Fox, Liana, Christopher Wimer, Irwin Garfinkel, ences 4(2): 161–76. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4
Neeraj Kaushal, and Jane Waldfogel. 2015. “Wag- .2.08.
ing War on Poverty: Poverty Trends Using a His- Herd, Pamela, Melissa Favreault, Madonna Har-
torical Supplemental Poverty Measure.” Journal rington Meyer, and Timothy M. Smeeding. 2018.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
“A Targeted Minimum Benefit Plan: A New Pro- Hourly Workers.” Human Relations 61(9): 1203–
posal to Reduce Poverty Among Older Social Se- 27.
curity Recipients.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foun- Lambert, Susan J., Peter J. Fugiel, and Julia R. Henly.
dation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(2): 74–90. 2014. “Precarious Work Schedules Among Early-
DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.2.04. Career Employees in the U.S.: A National Snap-
Hetling, Andrea, Jinwoo Kwon, and Correne Saun- shot.” EINet Research Brief. Chicago: University
ders. 2015. “The Relationship Between State of Chicago.
Welfare Rules and Economic Disconnection Levy, Frank, and Thomas Kochan. 2012. “Addressing
Among Low-Income Single Mothers.” Social Ser- the Problem of Stagnant Wages.” Comparative
vice Review 89(4): 653–85. Economic Studies 54(4): 739–64.
Holzer, Harry J. 2018. “A ‘Race to the Top’ in Public Magnuson, Katherine, and Elizabeth Votruba-Drzal.
Higher Education to Improve Education and Em- 2009. “Enduring Influences of Childhood Pov-
ployment Among the Poor.” RSF: The Russell erty.” In Changing Poverty, Changing Policies, ed-
Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences ited by Maria Cancian and Sheldon Danziger.
4(3): 84–99. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.05. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Holzer, Harry J., Steven Raphael, and Michael A. Magnuson, Katherine, Jane Waldfogel, and Elizabeth
Stoll. 2004. “Will Employers Hire Former Offend- Washbrook. 2012. “SES Gradients in Skills Dur-
ers? Employer Preference, Background Checks ing the School Years.” In From Parents to Chil-
and Their Determinants.” In Imprisoning America: dren: The Intergenerational Transmission of Ad-
The Social Effects of Mass Incarceration, edited vantage, edited by John Ermisch, Marcus Jantti,
by David Weiman, Bruce Western, and Mary Pat- and Timothy Smeeding. New York: Russell Sage
tillo. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Foundation.
———. 2006. “Perceived Criminality, Criminal Back- Manyika, James, Michael Chui, Brad Brown, Jacques
ground Checks, and the Racial Hiring Practices Bugin, Richard Dobbs, Charles Roxburgh, and
of Employers.” The Journal of Law and Economics Angela Hung Byers. 2011. Big Data: The Next
49(2): 451–80. Frontier for Innovation, Competition, and Produc-
Isaacs, Julia B., Olivia Healy, and H. Elizabeth Peters. tivity. New York: McKinsey Global Institute.
2017. “Paid Family Leave in the United States: McLanahan, Sara. 2004. “Diverging Destinies: How
Time for a New National Policy.” Washington, Children Are Faring Under the Second Demo-
D.C.: Urban Institute. graphic Transition.” Demography 41(4): 607–27.
Jacobs, Elisabeth. 2015. “The Declining Labor Force McLanahan, Sara, and Wade Jacobsen. 2015. “Di-
Participation Rate: Causes, Consequences, and verging Destinies Revisited.” In Families in an Era
the Path Forward.” Testimony given before the of Increasing Inequality, edited by Susan M.
United States Joint Economic Committee, July McHale, Paul R. Amato, Alan Booth, and Jennifer
15. Washington, D.C.: Washington Center for Eq- Van Hook. New York: Springer International.
uitable Growth. McLendon, Michael K., and Laura W. Perna, eds.
Jäntti, Markus. 2009. “Mobility in the U.S. and in 2014. “The Role of State Policy in Promoting Col-
Comparative Perspective.” In Changing Poverty, lege Access and Success.” Special issue, Annals
Changing Policies, edited by Maria Cancian and of the American Academy of Political and Social
Sheldon Danziger. New York: Russell Sage Foun- Science 655(1).
dation. Miller, Gregory E., and Edith Chen. 2013. “The Bio-
Kalleberg, Arne L. 2009. “Precarious Work, Insecure logical Residue of Childhood Poverty.” Child De-
Workers: Employment Relations in Transition.” velopment Perspectives. 7(2): 67–73.
American Sociological Review 74(1): 1–22. Milligan, Kevin, and Mark Stabile. 2011. “Do Child
Kimberlin, Sara, Laura Tach, and Christopher Wimer. Tax Benefits Affect the Wellbeing of Children?
2018. “A Renter’s Tax Credit to Curtail the Af- Evidence from Canadian Child Benefit Expan-
fordable Housing Crisis.” RSF: The Russell Sage sions.” American Economic Journal: Economic
Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(2): Policy 3(3): 175–205.
131–60. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.2.07. Mitnik, Pablo A., Victoria Bryant, Michael Weber, and
Lambert, Susan J. 2008. “Passing the Buck: Labor David B. Grusky. 2015. “New Estimates of Inter-
Flexibility Practices That Transfer Risk onto generational Mobility Using Administrative

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
Data.” Statistics of Income working paper. Wash- United States: 2015.” Current Population Reports,
ington: Internal Revenue Service. series P60, no. 256(RV). Washington: U.S. Gov-
Moffitt, Robert A. 2015. “The Deserving Poor, the ernment Printing Office.
Family, and the U.S. Welfare System.” Demogra- Raphael, Steven, and Eugene Smolensky. 2009. “Im-
phy 52(3): 729–49. migration and Poverty in the United States.” In
Morduch, Jonathan, and Rachel Schneider. 2017. The Changing Poverty, Changing Policies, edited by
Financial Diaries: How American Families Cope in Maria Cancian and Sheldon Danziger. New York:
a World of Uncertainty. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Russell Sage Foundation.
University Press. Ratcliffe, Caroline, and Signe-Mary McKernan. 2013.
Morris, Pamela A., Greg J. Duncan, and Christopher “Child Poverty and Its Lasting Consequence.”
Rodrigues. 2011. “Does Money Really Matter? Es- Low-Income Families working paper 21. Wash-
timating Impacts of Family Income on Young ington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
Children’s Achievement with Data from Random- Renwick, Trudi, and Liana Fox. 2016. “The Supple-
Assignment Experiments.” Developmental Psy- mental Poverty Measure: 2015.” Current Popula-
chology 47(5): 1263–79. tion Reports, series P60, no. 258. Washington:
National Women’s Law Center. 2017. “Recently En- U.S. Government Printing Office for U.S. Bureau
acted and Introduced State and Local Fair of the Census.
Scheduling Legislation.” Washington, D.C.: Na- Romich, Jennifer, and Heather D. Hill. 2018. “Cou-
tional Women’s Law Center. pling a Federal Minimum Wage Hike with Public
Neumark, David. 2015. “The Effects of Minimum Investments to Make Work Pay and Reduce Pov-
Wages on Employment.” Federal Reserve Bank of erty.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal
San Francisco Economic Letter (2015): 37. of the Social Sciences 4(3): 22–43. DOI: 10.7758/
Osterman, Paul. 2014. “Career Ladders in the Low- RSF.2018.4.3.02.
Wage Labor Market.” In What Works for Work- Rose, Shanna. 2015. “Opting In, Opting Out: The
ers? Public Policies and Innovative Strategies for Politics of State Medicaid Expansion.” The Forum
Low-Wage Workers, edited by Stephanie Luce, 13(1): 63–82.
Jennifer Luff, Joseph A. McCartin, and Ruth Milk- Sawhill, Isabel V. 2014. Generation Unbound: Drifting
man. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. into Sex and Parenthood Without Marriage.
Paul, Mark, William Darity Jr., Darrick Hamilton, and Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Khaing Zaw. 2018. “A Path to Ending Poverty by Scholz, J. Karl, Robert Moffitt, and Benjamin Cowan.
Way of Ending Unemployment: A Federal Job 2009. “Trends in Income Support.” In Changing
Guarantee.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Poverty, Changing Policies, edited by Maria Can-
Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 44–63. DOI: cian and Sheldon Danziger. New York: Russell
10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.03. Sage Foundation.
Pavetti, LaDonna, and Gregory Acs. 2001. “Moving Schott, Liz, LaDonna Pavetti, and Ife Floyd. 2015.
Up, Moving Out, or Going Nowhere? A Study of How States Use Federal and State Funds under
Employment Patterns of Young Women and the the TANF Block Grant. Washington, D.C.: Center
Implications for Welfare Mothers.” Journal of Pol- on Budget and Policy Priorities.
icy Analysis and Management 20(4): 721–36. Schwartz, Christine R. 2013. “Trends and Variation
Peterangelo, Joe, and Rob Henken. 2016. “Who Are in Assortative Mating: Causes and Conse-
Milwaukee’s Unemployed Jobseekers?” Presenta- quences.” Annual Review of Sociology 39: 451–
tion at Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Eco- 70.
nomic Development Forum: Eliminating Barriers Seefeldt, Kristin S. 2016. Abandoned Families: Social
to Employment in Wisconsin’s Most Distressed Isolation in the Twenty-First Century. New York:
Communities—Expungement. Milwaukee, Wisc. Russell Sage Foundation.
(May 12, 2016). Shaefer, H. Luke, Sophie Collyer, Greg Duncan,
Pettit, Becky. 2012. Invisible Men: Mass Incarceration Kathryn Edin, Irwin Garfinkel, David Harris, Tim-
and the Myth of Black Progress. New York: Rus- othy M. Smeeding, Jane Waldfogel, Christopher
sell Sage Foundation. Wimer, and Hirokazu Yoshikawa. 2018. “A Univer-
Proctor, Bernadette D., Jessica L. Semega, and Me- sal Child Allowance: A Plan to Reduce Poverty
lissa A. Kollar. 2016. “Income and Poverty in the and Income Instability Among Children in the

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
United States.” RSF: The Russell Sage Founda- Two-Generation Human Capital Approach to
tion Journal of the Social Sciences 4(2): 22–42. Anti-poverty Policy.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foun-
DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.2.02. dation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 118–43.
Shaefer, H. Luke, and Kathryn Edin. 2013. “Rising DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.07.
Extreme Poverty in the U.S. and the Response of Strumbos, Diana, Donna Linderman, and Carson C.
Federal Means-Tested Transfer Programs.” Social Hicks. 2018. “Postsecondary Pathways Out of
Service Review 87(2): 250–68. Poverty: City University of New York Accelerated
Shaefer, H. Luke, and Kathryn Edin, and Elizabeth Study in Associate Programs and the Case for
Talbert. 2015. “Understanding the Dynamics of National Policy.” RSF: The Russell Sage Founda-
$2-a-Day Poverty in the United States. RSF: The tion Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 100–17.
Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.06.
Sciences 1(1): 120–38. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2015.1 Tiehen, Laura, Dean Jolliffe, and Timothy M.
.1.07. Smeeding. 2016. “The Effect of SNAP on Pov-
Shattuck, Rachel M., and Rose M. Kreider. 2013. “So- erty.” In Snap Matters: How Food Stamps Affect
cial and Economic Characteristics of Currently Health and Well-Being, edited by Judith Bartfeld,
Unmarried Women with a Recent Birth: 2011.” Craig Gundersen, Timothy M. Smeeding, and
ACS-21. Washington: U.S. Government Printing James P. Ziliak. Palo Alto, Calif.: Stanford Univer-
Office. sity Press.
Sherman, Arloc, and Danilo Trisi. 2014. Deep Poverty Turner, Lesley J., Sheldon Danziger, and Kristin S.
Among Children Worsened in Welfare Law’s First Seefeldt. 2006. “Failing the Transition from Wel-
Decade. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and fare to Work: Women Chronically Disconnected
Policy Priorities. from Employment and Cash Welfare.” Social Sci-
———. 2015. Safety Net More Effective Against Pov- ence Quarterly 87(2): 227–49.
erty than Previously Thought. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2017. “Supplemental
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Nutrition Assistance Program Participation and
Short, Kathleen. 2015. “The Supplemental Poverty Costs.” Accessed February 26, 2017. https://
Measure: 2014.” Current Population Reports, se- www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/SNAP
ries P60, no. 254. Washington: U.S. Government summary.pdf.
Printing Office. U.S. Department of Education. 2016. Fulfilling the
Slack, Kristen S., Bong Joo Lee, and Lawrence M. Promise, Serving the Need: Advancing College
Berger. 2007. “Do Welfare Sanctions Increase Opportunity for Low-Income Students. Washing-
Child Protective Services Involvement? A Cau- ton: U.S. Department of Education.
tious Answer.” Social Service Review 81(2): 207– U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
28. 2016. “Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guide-
Smeeding, Timothy M. 2006. “Poor People in Rich lines.” Federal Register 81(15): 4036–37.
Nations: The United States in Comparative Per- ———. 2017. “FY2015 Federal TANF & State MOE Fi-
spective.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20(1): nancial Data.” Accessed February 26, 2017.
69–90. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ofa
Smeeding, Timothy M., Irwin Garfinkel, and Ronald /tanf_financial_data_fy_2015.pdf.
B. Mincy. 2011. “Introduction to Young Disadvan- U.S. Department of the Treasury. 2017. “About EITC.”
taged Men: Fathers, Families, Poverty, and Pol- Accessed February 26, 2017. https://www.eitc.irs
icy.” Annals of the American Academy of Political .gov/EITC-Central/abouteitc.
and Social Science 635(1): 6–23. Warren, Robert, and John R. Warren. 2013. “Unau-
Smolensky, Eugene, and Jennifer A. Gootman, eds. thorized Immigration to the United States: An-
2003. Working Families and Growing Kids: Car- nual Estimates and Components of Change, by
ing for Children and Adolescents. Washington, State, 1990 to 2010.” International Migration Re-
D.C.: National Academies Press. view 47(2): 296–329.
Sommer, Teresa Eckrich, Terri J. Sabol, Elise Chor, White House. 2017. “Presidential Executive Order on
William Schneider, P. Lindsay Chase-Lansdale, a Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Ex-
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Mario L. Small, Christo- ecutive Branch.” Executive Order No. 13781.
pher King, and Hirokazu Yoshikawa. 2018. “A Washington: Office of the Press Secretary.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00
Williams, Erica. 2017. States Can Adopt or Expand Winship, Scott. 2016. Poverty After Welfare Reform.
Earned Income Tax Credits to Build a Stronger New York: Manhattan Institute for Policy Re-
Future Economy. Washington, D.C.: Center on search.
Budget and Policy Priorities. Wu, Lawrence L., and Nicholas D. E. Mark. 2018.
Wimer, Christopher, Sophie Collyer, and Sara Kim- “Could We Level the Playing Field? Long-Acting
berlin. 2018. “Assessing the Potential Impacts of Reversible Contraceptives, Nonmarital Fertility,
Innovative New Policy Proposals on Poverty in and Poverty in the United States.” RSF: The Rus-
the United States.” RSF: The Russell Sage Foun- sell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sci-
dation Journal of the Social Sciences 4(3): 167–83. ences 4(3): 144–66. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4
DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2018.4.3.09. .3.08.
Wimer, Christopher, Liana Fox, Irwin Garfinkel, Ziliak, James P. 2016. “Temporary Assistance for
Neeraj Kaushal, and Jane Waldfogel. 2016. “Prog- Needy Families.” In Economics of Means-Tested
ress on Poverty? New Estimates of Historical Transfer Programs in the United States, volume 1,
Trends Using an Anchored Supplemental Poverty edited by Robert A. Moffitt. Chicago: University
Measure.” Demography 53(4): 1207–18. of Chicago Press.

96.63.177.129 on Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:10:02 +00:00

Berger Antipovertypolicyinnovations 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Berger Antipovertypolicyinnovations 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anti-Poverty Policy Innovations

Author(s): LAWRENCE M. BERGER, MARIA CANCIAN and KATHERINE MAGNUSON

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7758/rsf.2018.4.3.01

This content downloaded from

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

Security). Especially for low-­income families rent experiences of oppression and

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

r sf: t he russell sage f ou n dat ion jou r na l of t he so ci a l sciences

This content downloaded from

You might also like

Security). Especially for low-income families rent experiences of oppression and