Quick Hit: Peter Edelman’s Take on Persistent Poverty in America

Peter Edelman, professor of law at Georgetown University and author of the new book So Rich, So Poor, has an opinion piece in Sunday’s New York Times looking at the persistence of poverty in the U.S. Edelman does what so many have failed to do, which is to outline the notable success of government action, saying,

“[W]e have done a lot that works. From Social Security to food stamps to the earned-income tax credit and on and on, we have enacted programs that now keep 40 million people out of poverty. Poverty would be nearly double what it is now without these measures…”

And yet, poverty remains widespread. Edelman identifies four key reasons why:

• The prevalence of low-wage work. With a quarter of jobs paying less than $23,000 annually and a full half paying below $34,000, it’s not surprising that vast numbers of Americans are struggling to make ends meet.
• A rise in the number of single-parent households. Coupled with the prevalence of low-wage work, the increase in single-parent households makes it increasingly difficult for a single parent to earn anywhere near enough to comfortably support children. (For more on the issue of single parenthood, check out this interview with Jason DeParle, Monica Potts and Reid Cramer.)
• Cash assistance, in the form of welfare, has declined. Low-income mothers with kids are left scrambling in the absence of a robust safety net. The SNAP (food stamps) program has filled some of this gap, but faces ongoing criticism.
• Ongoing structural oppression rooted in race and gender. The disproportionate impact of poverty on people of color and women can be attributed to a long history of discriminatory hiring practices, exclusion from fair lending and credit markets, a lack of educational opportunity, and a range of other factors.

As Edelman points out, these problems are not unique to this moment in time. He outlines a variety of ways we might improve the situation (from raising the minimum wage to strengthening welfare) but also acknowledges the lack of political consensus on these approaches.

All that said, Edelman does see potential for change to emerge from the political landscape. He writes: “A surefire politics of change would necessarily involve getting people in the middle — from the 30th to the 70th percentile — to see their own economic self-interest. If they vote in their own self-interest, they’ll elect people who are likely to be more aligned with people with lower incomes as well as with them. As long as people in the middle identify more with people on the top than with those on the bottom, we are doomed.” 

Edelman also gets at a few key ways we see to build equal access to economic opportunity: level the tax system and make sure that all Americans have opportunities to save and build wealth. Check out the whole piece; it’s a good read with data-rich points that are often absent from the national conversation. Let us know what you think by leaving a comment below.