An exhaustive critique of the federal social safety net released by Rep. Paul Ryan on Monday is meant to be the intellectual foundation for an overhaul of the federal anti-poverty programs. But interviews with economists – a number of whom are cited in Ryan’s paper – suggest that he may be building his house on sand.
Ryan’s 204-page report, The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later, is documented with hundreds of citations of academic work. The paper breaks down federal anti-poverty programs into eight separate categories – cash aid, education and job training, energy, food aid, health care, housing, social services, and veterans affairs – and reviews the evidence for and against their effectiveness, relying in large part on academic research. [snip]Also, hee-hee:
However, several economists and social scientists contacted on Monday had reactions ranging from bemusement to anger at Ryan’s report, claiming that he either misunderstood or misrepresented their research. (our emphasis)
Every time a Republican wins positive press by posing as a tribune for the poor, an angel gets its wings ripped off by the invisible hand of capitalism, which means today, the day after Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., unveiled a tendentious audit of U.S. anti-poverty programs, is an especially gory day. [snip]
Actually the evidence is right there on the first page of his new report. “Despite trillions of dollars in spending, poverty is widespread,” it reads. “In 1965, the poverty rate was 17.3 percent. In 2012, it was 15 percent.” Sounds like a huge bust, right?
Except, there’s a footnote at the end of that sentence, and it reads, “The Official Poverty Rate does not include government transfers to low-income households.”
I’m surprised Ryan included this caveat, even though it’s more honest to include it than to leave it out. Because it also reveals that his critique of federal anti-poverty programs is premised on a metric designed to create a false impression that tons of money has been wasted, when really it’s done exactly what it was supposed to.
The war on poverty has indeed been a bust if you treat the poor people it’s lifted above the federal poverty line as if they remain impoverished. But that’s like saying “The earned income tax credit has failed you because, if you don’t count the value of the tax credit, you’re still in poverty,” and then applying the same logic to millions of beneficiaries. (our emphasis)Ryan's expectation is that, once he throws it over the transoms of the "mainstream media," the chin-strokers will see this not as a "tendentious audit," but as an honest attempt to begin a dialogue on the need and efficacy of federal poverty programs as a precursor for budget cuts. It'll make them happy that, "See! A Republican is genuinely interested in governing! (And sticking it to the poors and grandpa!)" If the
(h/t Ed Kilgore, Washington Monthly)
(Photo: Poverty-fighter Paul Ryan cleaning already-washed dishes in 2012.)
