Bethany Roberts, FISM News

[elfsight_social_share_buttons id=”1″]

A recently published analysis of data compiled by Columbia University found that there has been a 59% decline in child poverty rates in the U.S from 1993 to 2019.

Child Trends, a nonpartisan — but often far-left-leaning — research group, found improvements in several areas that encouraged the decline in child poverty, including unemployment rates, single mothers entering the workforce, and state-level minimum wage laws. A variety of other economic factors also helped families across demographics as well, leading to a kaleidoscope of factors leading to the encouraging trend.

This decline is unparalleled in the history of poverty in the U.S. Child poverty fell in every state, and fell by about the same percentage among white, black, Hispanic, and Asian households, those living with one parent or two, and in native or immigrant families.

The analysis identified several factors that played a role — the biggest of which was the expansion of government aid, according to Child Trend, an organization that also promotes liberal ideas like gender ideology and systematic racism.

The study excluded 2020 because of the leap in government aid due to the pandemic.

“This is an astounding decline in child poverty,” said Dana Thomson, a co-author of the Child Trends study. “Its magnitude is unequaled in the history of poverty measurement, and the single largest explanation is the growth of the safety net.”

Child poverty rates dropped by 9% in 1993 alone. Government programs have successfully helped cut child poverty by 44% and 6.5 million children have been protected from poverty, according to Child Trend.

“This decline in child poverty is very significant. I cannot say it enough,” said Dolores Acevedo-Garcia, a  poverty expert at Brandeis University who reviewed the data. “If we still had the rates as we had in the 1990s, there would be 12 million more children in poverty.”

Looking at the data, other more conservative organizations, have pointed to the successes of the U.S. private economy in the age of the internet and technology, not government aid, as the driving factor in bringing people out of poverty.

By the end of 1999, per capita GDP in the U.S. had risen to $35,280, a 66.8% increase from the start of the decade when it was just $23,591. By the end of 2018, it had nearly tripled from 1990, up to $63,647.

Two periods stand out in the analysis as the cause of such a major decline in poverty: the late 1990s and the late 2010s. Labor demand and economic growth were both high during these periods. Unemployment in 2019 was about half the rate seen in 1993.

According to the study, as much as 18% of the decline in child poverty could be due to these low unemployment rates. Single mothers’ participation in the workforce could explain about 9%, and higher state minimum wages could explain about 7%. That still leaves two-thirds of the explanation to other factors, such as other economic drivers.

Conservative and pro-capitalist groups argue that welfare’s role in reducing child poverty is minimal, noting the rise in the employment of single mothers, which rose to 79% in 2021, about a 10% rise compared to the early 1990s.

“The system sent a message: You can’t live on welfare anymore,” said Robert Rector, a poverty researcher at the Heritage Foundation.

Historian and author Lee Edwards pointed out in 2020 that capitalism makes everyone involved more wealthy, from the poorest to the richest.

“American capitalism has also produced the largest and most affluent middle class in the world, with a per capita GDP of more than $65,000. By contrast, Communist China’s per capita GDP is an estimated $10,900, one-sixth of ours,” Edwards wrote.

Analysis shows that real median household income has increased in the U.S. by around 26%, from $54,600 in 1993 to $68,730 in 2019.

Child Trend researchers believe that multiple factors contributed to the rising work levels, such as a strong economy and the expansion of tax credits making work more rewarding. Rector agrees that tax credits certainly helped reduce poverty, but argues that aid should be linked to work. He says the success over the last 20 or so years is evidence that aid, when linked to work, can be helpful.

“The lesson isn’t that ‘aid works’ — it’s that some aid is very harmful and some aid is helpful,” he said.