THE ISSUE: Helping Americans in tough times

OUR OPINION: Voters must decide how feds will go about helping hard-hit Americans

Both political parties claim they have policies that will benefit hard-hit Americans in tough times.

There are great differences in their approaches and voters will have to make determinations of national direction. What both parties must face is the level of need that exists and how much falls to states to be the primary assistance provider.

A new report is the latest indicator, examining how states are doing in assisting hard-hit families, with particular emphasis on effects on children.

Researchers at the National Center for Children in Poverty, part of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, found dramatic differences across the states, detailed in their report, Staying Afloat in Tough Times: What States Are and Aren’t Doing to Promote Family Economic Security.

The report examines three categories of state policy choices that affect the ability of low-wage workers to achieve financial security: work attachment and advancement, income adequacy, and asset development and protection.

Among the findings:

• Few states provide access to child care subsidies for families with earnings at or above the “low-income” level (defined as twice the federal poverty level, or $42,400 for a family of four).

• More than half the states offer tax credits (or deductions) to offset the cost of child care, but most of these provisions primarily benefit middle- and upper-income families.

• Eligibility for public health insurance for children tends to be more generous: 41 states set income eligibility at or above the low-income mark. However, eligibility levels for public health insurance for parents are dramatically lower than those for children.

• For many low-wage workers, earnings from full-time work are insufficient to provide for a family’s basic needs − such as housing, food, transportation, and child care − especially with the skyrocketing costs of food and gas.

• Forty percent of states have enacted a refundable earned income tax credit, which helps offset other tax expenditures.

• Roughly half the states have a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum of $6.55 an hour, although fewer than half of these states index that wage to inflation.

• Half of the states exempt families whose income is below the official poverty level from state income taxes.

• Very few states have enacted paid family or medical leave policies.

In South Carolina, according to the study, there are 585,268 families, with 1,015,265 children. Among these children, 44 percent live in families that are low-income Nationally, 39 percent of children live in low-income families.

Low wages and a lack of higher education contribute to families having insufficient incomes in this state. Nationally, 56 percent of low-income children have at least one parent who works full time, year round; in South Carolina, the figure is 57 percent.

Only 23 percent of adults in South Carolina have a bachelor’s degree. A substantial portion of children in South Carolina whose parents only have a high school diploma − 62 percent − are low income.

Although the authors note that state policies have made important differences in the everyday lives of struggling families, they conclude that stronger action is needed at the federal level.

“States’ efforts offer models that can be adapted for the national level,” said Nancy K. Cauthen, deputy director of NCCP and a co-author of the report. “But the fact is that as a nation, we’ve passed the point where states alone can be expected to make up for what America’s workers have lost. If American families are to thrive − and their children are to succeed in a global economy − the federal government needs to step up.”

How it will do so will be a decision made by voters in November.

You must be logged in to comment.