California Legislature—2013–14 Regular Session

Assembly Joint ResolutionNo. 40


Introduced by Assembly Member Mullin

February 21, 2014


Assembly Joint Resolution No. 40—Relative to the federal poverty level measurement.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AJR 40, as introduced, Mullin. Federal poverty level measurement.

This measure would urge the federal government to take steps to transition from the outdated and inadequate Official Poverty Measure and instead begin implementing the Supplemental Poverty Measure to determine the allocation of federal benefits.

Fiscal committee: no.

P1    1WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure is determined by
2the United States Census Bureau and is instrumental in determining
3an individual’s eligibility for a number of government programs
4including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,
5Medicaid, School Lunch Program, Women Infants and Children,
6Housing Assistance, and others; and

7WHEREAS, The method we use today was developed in the
81964 by Mollie Orshanksy of the Social Security Administration,
9and that method used before-tax cash income to determine a
10family’s resources, which was then compared to a poverty
11threshold; and

12WHEREAS, In determining this poverty threshold, Orshanksy
13used a food plan developed by the federal Department of
14Agriculture that was designed for “temporary or emergency use
P2    1when funds are low,” and then multiplied the cost of the plan by
2three because at the time a family typically used about a third of
3their income on food; and

4WHEREAS, Other than minor changes, the method has remained
5the same over time, despite significant economic and governmental
6changes, including the introduction of Medicare and Medicaid,
7the shift from a manufacturing to a service economy, welfare
8reform of the 1990’s, and the general stagnation of wages; and

9WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure is a one-size-fits-all
10policy that leads to a distorted perception of poverty and an
11inefficient allocation of resources to fight poverty; and

12WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure has failed to
13accurately measure poverty because it has not kept up with the
14changes to our economy and social science research; and

15WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure does not take into
16account that families no longer spend one-third of their income on
17food; they currently spend between 5 to 10 percent; and

18WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure does not account
19for noncash transfers, such as the Supplemental Nutrition
20Assistance Program or Medicaid, as income; and

21WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure does not account
22for variations in cost-of-living in different regions of our country;
23and

24WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure does not account
25for the increase in child care expenses due to the rise in the
26workforce participation of both parents; and

27WHEREAS, The Official Poverty Measure does not account
28for variations in health care coverage and out-of-pocket medical
29costs; and

30WHEREAS, Historically, there has been widespread agreement
31among analysts, advocates, and policymakers that the Official
32Poverty Measure is inadequate, leading to a 1990 Congressional
33appropriation that was made for an independent scientific study
34on a new calculation method; and

35WHEREAS, This study was performed by The National
36Academy of Sciences, which established the Panel on Poverty and
37Family Assistance. The panel released a report in 1995 entitled
38“Measuring Poverty: A New Approach,” which established
39guidelines for creating a new method; and

P3    1WHEREAS, Fifteen years later, in 2010, the Interagency
2Technical Working Group on Developing a Supplemental Poverty
3Measure and the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor developed
4an alternative poverty measure known as the Supplemental Poverty
5Measure; and

6WHEREAS, The Supplemental Poverty Measure was designed
7to take into account changes in the United States economy over
8time, cost-of-living variations in different parts of the country, and
9the changing role of government; and

10WHEREAS, The Supplemental Poverty Measure more
11accurately measures poverty by using a basic set of goods that
12includes food, clothing, shelter, and utilities, adjusted to reflect
13the needs of different family types and to account for geographic
14differences in living costs to establish what is known as a poverty
15threshold; and

16WHEREAS, The Supplemental Poverty Measure defines family
17resources as the value of cash income from all sources, plus the
18value of noncash benefits, including nutrition assistance, subsidized
19housing, home energy assistance, tax credits, and other benefits
20that are available to buy the basic bundle of goods, minus the
21necessary expenses for critical goods and services not included in
22the thresholds; and

23WHEREAS, Necessary expenses include income taxes, Social
24Security payroll taxes, childcare and other work related expenses,
25child support payments, and contributions toward the cost of
26medical care and health insurance premiums or out-of-pocket
27medical costs; and

28WHEREAS, The Supplemental Poverty Measure offers a more
29accurate measure of poverty than the general Official Poverty
30Measure; and

31WHEREAS, The use of the Official Poverty Measure can have
32a detrimental effect on policies to combat poverty because it results
33in less efficient and less accurately targeted policies and
34expenditures; and

35WHEREAS, It is vital that we implement a fair poverty measure
36that allows us to efficiently allocate resources and focus on regions
37and populations that need help the most; and

38WHEREAS, Given the numerous inadequacies of the Official
39Poverty Measure as a tool to accurately target and efficiently
40allocate antipoverty resources, the Supplemental Poverty Measure
P4    1should supplant the Official Poverty Measure for administrative
2purposes in determining financial eligibility for programs intended
3to reduce poverty; now, therefore, be it

4Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of
5California, jointly,
That the Legislature of California urges the
6President and the Congress of the United States take steps to
7transition from the outdated and inadequate Official Poverty
8Measure and instead begin implementing the Supplemental Poverty
9Measure to determine the allocation of federal benefits; and be it
10further

11Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies
12of this resolution to the President and the Vice President of the
13United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to
14the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to each Senator and
15Representative from California in the Congress of the United
16States, to the Governor of California, and to the author of this
17resolution.



O

    99