Welfare Programs Lecture 17 Today’s readings: Schiller Ch 12, Welfare Programs •Ehrenberg and Smith, “Supply of Labor to the Economy,” eReserves •House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html •DeParle, Ch. 14: Golf Balls and Corporate Dreams: Milwaukee, 1997-1999 Today’s Questions • What means-tested welfare programs are available for poor people in the United States? • How much do these programs cost? • How many people are helped by these programs? • How are welfare benefits determined? • Why is welfare so hard to reform? What means-tested welfare programs are available for poor people in the U.S.? • Federal and State governments funded 85 welfare programs in FY 2002 at a total cost of $522 billion. – Federal Share: 71% – State and Local Share: 29% • The means-tested programs fall into 8 different categories. – Source for Slides 3-24: House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html Eight Categories of Welfare Programs and Total Costs, 2002 – – – – – – – – Medical Aid: $282 billion, 54% Cash Aid: $102 billion, 20% Food Aid: $39 billion, 7% Housing Aid: $36 billion, 7% Education Aid: $30 billion, 6% Other Services: $22 billion, 5% Jobs and Training Aid: $8 billion, 2% Energy Aid: $2 billion, 0.3% Medical Aid--$282 billion Cash Aid--$102 billion Food Aid--$39 billion Housing Aid--$36 billion Housing Aid, cont. Education Aid--$30 billion Other Services--$22 billion Jobs and Training Aid--$8 billion Energy Aid--$2 billion Analysis of spending • 54 cents of every welfare dollar went for medical assistance • 80% of State and Local dollars went to medical aid • Spending in each of 6 programs exceeds $10 billion and accounts for 77 percent of total spending. 7 largest programs by amount spent • • • • • Medicaid ($258 billion) SSI ($39 billion) EITC ($28 billion) Food Stamps ($24 billion) TANF cash, ,services, child care, and work activities ($24 billion) • Section 8 low-income housing assistance ($18 billion) • Pell Grants ($11) Trends in Spending • Real spending for cash and non-cash programs increased by 523 percent from FY1968 to FY2002. • Real spending for cash and non-cash programs increase 36 percent between FY1992 and FY2002. • Average annual rate of growth over this 32 year period was 5.5 percent. • The U.S. population increased by 43 percent over this period. • Real total per capita spending grew from $416 in FY1968 to $1,826 in FY 2002. Spending Trends by Type of Aid FY1968-FY2002 (Constant FY 2002 Dollars) 600 500 Total $ Medical Aid Cash Food Housing 400 300 200 100 0 1968 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 Medical+Cash+Food+Housing Aid=.88 x Total Spending Trends in Spending by Level of Government, FY1968-FY2002 (Constant FY 2002 Dollars) 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1968 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 Total $ Federal $ State/Local $ Trends in Federal Spending FY1968-FY2002 (Constant FY 2002 Dollars) • Real Federal spending climbed from $60 billion in FY1968 to $373 billion in FY 2002, an increase of 529 percent. • Cash aid was the leading form of Federal welfare until 1980 when medical aid overtook it. Trends in State and Local Spending FY1968-FY2002 (Constant FY 2002 Dollars) • State and Local real spending climbed from $24.5 billion in FY1968 to $149 billion in FY2002, an increase of 508 percent. • Medical assistance overcame cash aid as the leading form of income-tested assistance in1976. Share of Federal Budget used for Income-Tested Aid, FY1968-2002 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 8 6 19 Total Medical Cash Food 8 7 19 8 8 19 2 9 19 6 9 19 0 0 20 Participation in Means-tested Programs, 2002 • We do not have an unduplicated count of welfare beneficiaries • Average 2002 monthly numbers: – – – – Medicaid: 50.9 million persons Food stamps: 20.2 million recipients SSI: 6.9 million recipients TANF: 5.1million recipients • EITC: 16.8 million tax filers Source: CBO Economic and Budget Issue Brief, “Changes in Participation in Means-Tested Programs” http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/63xx/doc6302/04-20-Means-Tested.pdf Predicting Future Participation • Assuming no legislative changes, future levels of participation in means-tested welfare programs will depend on: – Demographic trends – Distribution of income – The state of the economy Participation in Means-tested Programs by Poor Persons, 2002 • Census Bureau found 23 million poor persons (two out of every three with pre-tax money income below the poverty threshold) lived in a household that received means-tested assistance. • Percent of the poverty population living in a household that received: – – – – Medicaid: 53 percent Food Stamps: 33 percent cash assistance: 22 percent Subsidized or public housing: 18 percent Participation by Total Population, 2002 • Percent of the total population living in a household that received: – – – – – Medicaid: 19 percent Food Stamps: 6 percent cash assistance: 7 percent Subsidized or public housing: 4 percent Some form of major means-tested aid: 25 percent Eligibility vs. Participation • To be eligible, a person, family or household must satisfy conditions regarding – – – – Citizenship Demographic characteristics (children present?) Countable income Accumulated wealth (assets including cars, homes, insurance policies, bank accounts) – Employment status Eligibility vs. Participation • Participation refers to actual receipt of cash, non-cash benefits, or services. • Not all eligible persons participate. – Participation rates = participating population/eligible population • Participation levels/rates depend upon: – Demographic trends, labor market conditions, distribution of income, health care costs, and the level of benefits. Eligibility vs. Participation, cont • An individual’s decision depends on the net benefits of participation: • Net benefits=Gross Benefits-Costs • Gross Benefits include: – Primary benefits (cash, non-cash, services) – Secondary benefits (eligibility for subsequent programs depends on enrollment in the primary program • Costs include: – – – – Hassle Transportation documentation Stigma How are benefits determined? • Generic formula: B=G - t(E-DE) - (U-DU), where • • • • • • • B=Benefit level G=Maximum benefit (other income=0) T=marginal tax rate E=gross earnings DE=earnings disregard U=non-earnings incomes (pensions, interest) DU=non-earnings disregard Source: House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, pp. 38-39 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html How are benefits determined?, cont. • Note that in the preceding table grants vary with family size up to 6 persons. • Example using Texas: • Assume a mother of two works 30 hours a week for 4.2 weeks at the minimum wage $5.15 per hour. She has no other income. • B=$201-.67($649-30)=$201 - 415=-$214 • Source: Work Related Provisions of State TANF Plans http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/WRKREL.HTM Benefit Calculation, cont. • In the previous example, the mother would not receive a benefit. Negative benefits are raised to $0. • At the level of work hours (30) required by Federal law for a TANF mother to qualify as a work recipient, our Texas mother is not eligible for benefits. At what level of earnings could she receive benefits? Calculating Break-even Level of Earnings • • • • Recall that B=G - t(E-DE) - (U-DU). Set B=0, and solve for E: Generally, EB=G/t + D, when U=0. In our example, the Texas mother would be eligible for cash benefits if her earnings were less than $330. – EB=201/.67+30 – EB=$330 She loses eligibility if she works more than 15.25 hours per week. Source: House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, pp.36-37, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html Source: CBO Economic and Budget Issue Brief, “Changes in Participation in Means-Tested Programs” http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/63xx/doc6302/04-20-Means-Tested.pdf Source: House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, pp.45-47, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html Source: House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book, p. 89 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html Why is welfare so hard to reform? • We can gain insight into the difficulty of reforming welfare by considering the implications of the break-even earnings formula: EB=G/t + D Why is welfare so hard to reform?, cont. • Traditionally, policy makers heed three goals: – Adequacy – Cost minimization – Encouraging independence through work Why is welfare so hard to reform?, cont. • Policy makers have three parameters they can alter to achieve these goals: – G, maximum guarantee – t, marginal tax rate – D, the earnings disregard • Given the relationship of G, t, and D, at most two of the three goals can be achieved at any one time. Why is welfare so hard to reform?, cont. G t D Adequacy Cost Minimization Work incentives Why is welfare so hard to reform?, cont. • Welfare is so difficult to reform, that is it is difficult to find a long-lasting policy equilibrium, because our political parties differ in the emphasis they give the three goals. Traditionally, – Republicans pursed cost minimization and promoting work above adequacy, while Democrats championed adequacy.