The Census Bureau announced a drop in the poverty rate, but NBC and, especially CBS, on Tuesday night managed to turn the good news into bad by emphasizing an increase in the number of Americans without health insurance while ABC, in contrast, portrayed the decrease in poverty as good news. “A bright spot of economic news today,” fill-in ABC anchor Kate Snow announced, “the percentage of Americans living in poverty dropped last year” by “three-tenths of a percent from the year before.” Reporter Barbara Pinto actually acknowledged some positive trends during the Bush years, pointing to how “in the past four years, the country has added nearly 7 million jobs. And in those four years, the average household income has risen about $700.” Pinto didn't ignore liberal class-warfare arguments, but after a left-winger asserted “there's very little that trickles down to those at the bottom,” Pinto countered: “Obviously, some of that growth is trickling down.”
Though the AP headlined its story, “U.S. poverty rate declines significantly,” NBC anchor Brian Williams reported it dropped “a bit” and CBS anchor Katie Couric relayed how “the poverty rate is down slightly.” And while most of those in poverty manage to have many comforts of life, from good-sized homes to cars, Couric insisted poverty level income is “hardly enough for food and housing, much less other items like health insurance.” Wyatt Andrews devoted a full story to “the highest number of uninsured Americans in 20 years: 47 million without health insurance.” Andrews failed to note that 16 million of the uninsured are illegals or on Medicaid while most people are uninsured for only short periods.
Brian Williams read this short item on the August 28 NBC Nightly News:
There's news on the economy tonight. The percentage of Americans living in poverty dropped a bit last year to 12.3 percent from 12.6 percent of the population the year before. But there was bad news on this front as well. The number of Americans without health insurance has gone up from nearly 45 million in 2005 to 47 million Americans last year.
Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, in an August 27 report, “How Poor Are America's Poor? Examining the 'Plague' of Poverty in America,” put the poverty numbers in perspective:
Most of America's "poor" live in material conditions that would be judged as comfortable or well-off just a few generations ago. Today, the expenditures per person of the lowest-income one-fifth (or quintile) of house-holds equal those of the median American household in the early 1970s, after adjusting for inflation.The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:
- Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
- Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
- Only 6 percent of poor households are over-crowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
- The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
- Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
- Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
- Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
- Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
An August 28 Heritage press release outlined how the 47 million uninsured statistic exaggerates the problem:
- Analysis of data from earlier Census Bureau and other government reports shows that roughly 7 million are illegal immigrants; roughly 9 million are persons on Medicaid; 3.5 million are persons already eligible for government health programs; and approximately 20 million have, or live, in families with incomes greater than twice the federal poverty level, or $41,300 for a family of four.- Most of the uninsured are in and out of health coverage. The professional literature also shows that, overwhelmingly, the vast majority of the uninsured are persons who are in and out of coverage, largely as a result of job changes. Only a small number of the uninsured are chronically uninsured. For most of the uninsured, the problem is fixable if policymakers simply take steps to make health insurance portable, so the insurance policy sticks to the person, not the job.
- Current Federal Tax Policy Fuels Uninsurance. A substantial portion of uninsured Americans are not poor but rather middle-class working Americans who are forced to face a major tax penalty, resulting in premium increases of 40 to 50 percent, if they do not obtain health insurance through the place of work. For millions of Americans without job based health insurance, both the tax policy, and the excessive regulatory burden on health insurance in the states, prices families out of coverage. Current federal tax policy then unnecessarily drives millions into the ranks of the uninsured.
A transcript of the August 28 CBS Evening News story:
KATIE COURIC: Here at home, mixed economic news tonight. For the first time in six years, the poverty rate is down slightly. In 2006, 12.3 percent of Americans lived in poverty, down from 12.6 percent in 2005. Poverty level income for a family of four is $20,400 a year, hardly enough for food and housing, much less other items like health insurance. And as Wyatt Andrews reports, more people are going without.
WYATT ANDREWS: It's the highest number of uninsured Americans in 20 years: 47 million without health insurance and dozens of them come in every day to the free clinic in Arlington, Virginia. For house cleaner Mariah Carvealio, who makes $8,000 a year, the clinic is her only option. What if this clinic did not exist?
CARVEALIO: I'm dying.
ANDREWS: You would die?
CARVEALIO: Yes, because I was so sick.
ANDREWS: Of the 47 million uninsured, 8.7 million are children, a jump of more than 7 percent in one year. The numbers are rising mostly because employers are dialing back. In 2000, more than 64 percent of Americans got insurance through their employer. Last year, that percentage fell below 60. This decline in employer-based coverage is happening because of costs. More and more employers these days struggling to stay afloat or profitable cannot afford the rising expense of health insurance. At the clinic, director Nancy Palleson says most of the uninsured and most people in poverty are working.
NANCY PALLESON, ARLINGTON FREE CLINIC: Maybe both parents are working, two or three kids, and they can't -- they can't get health insurance. They can't -- even if it's offered, they couldn't possibly afford it.
ANDREWS: The census brought mixed reviews on poverty itself. While the percentage of Americans in poverty fell, the number of people held steady at 36.5 million. This free clinic is a snapshot of the income gap in America. Everyone here is a resident of Arlington, which is listed in the census report as one of the richest counties in the country. Wyatt Andrews, CBS News, Arlington, Virginia.
The more upbeat take on ABC's World News:
ANCHOR KATE SNOW: A bright spot of economic news today that's been years in the making. The percentage of Americans living in poverty, dropped last year of 12.3 percent, a drop of three-tenths of a percent from the year before. A total of 36.5 million Americans were living below the poverty line in 2006. It's the first significant decline this decade. Here's ABC's Barbara Pinto.
BARBARA PINTO: The reason for today's good news is, in a word, jobs.
DOUGLAS BESHAROV, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: It's true that a strong economy is the best anti-poverty program that exists.
PINTO: Unemployment is falling. In the past four years, the country has added nearly 7 million jobs. And in those four years, the average household income has risen about $700. Another bright spot? More single mothers, once the bulk of the nation's poor, are finding workm largely due to welfare reform. East coast states, such as Maryland, New Hampshire and Connecticut, have the lowest poverty rates and are making strides. Among the highest in the nation, Mississippi, New Mexico and the District of Columbia. At the Chicago community assistance program, Sheryl Holman is on the front lines. She says even families who have pulled themselves out of poverty, are still struggling.
SHERYL HOLMAN, CHICAGO COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: I'm afraid that they're saying that the working poor is not poor, when they are poor.
PINTO: The government defines poverty as a family of four making about $20,000 a year.
HOLMAN: $20,000 a year is about $10 an hour or more, a little more between $10 and $11. If you measure that, who is living off of $10 an hour.
PINTO: Analysts also say the dip in the poverty rate pales in comparison to the booming economic growth this country has enjoyed for years.
SHELDON DANZIGER, NATIONAL POVERTY CENTER: Now, we have an economy, where most of the economic growth is concentrated among people who have high incomes. And there's very little that trickles down to those at the bottom.
PINTO: Obviously, some of that growth is trickling down. In addition, the recent hike in the minimum wage, was not factored in the numbers that were released today and economists say that could make those poverty numbers look even better in the future.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





WYATT ANDREWS: It's the highest number of uninsured Americans in 20 years: 47 million without health insurance and dozens of them come in every day to the free clinic in Arlington, Virginia. For house cleaner Mariah Carvealio, who makes $8,000 a year, the clinic is her only option. What if this clinic did not exist?
ANDREWS: Of the 47 million uninsured, 8.7 million are children, a jump of more than 7 percent in one year. The numbers are rising mostly because employers are dialing back. In 2000, more than 64 percent of Americans got insurance through their employer. Last year, that percentage fell below 60. This decline in employer-based coverage is happening because of costs. More and more employers these days struggling to stay afloat or profitable cannot afford the rising expense of health insurance. At the clinic, director Nancy Palleson says most of the uninsured and most people in poverty are working.
ANCHOR KATE SNOW: A bright spot of economic news today that's been years in the making. The percentage of Americans living in poverty, dropped last year of 12.3 percent, a drop of three-tenths of a percent from the year before. A total of 36.5 million Americans were living below the poverty line in 2006. It's the first significant decline this decade. Here's ABC's Barbara Pinto.
PINTO: Unemployment is falling. In the past four years, the country has added nearly 7 million jobs. And in those four years, the average household income has risen about $700. Another bright spot? More single mothers, once the bulk of the nation's poor, are finding workm largely due to welfare reform. East coast states, such as Maryland, New Hampshire and Connecticut, have the lowest poverty rates and are making strides. Among the highest in the nation, Mississippi, New Mexico and the District of Columbia. At the Chicago community assistance program, Sheryl Holman is on the front lines. She says even families who have pulled themselves out of poverty, are still struggling.
PINTO: Analysts also say the dip in the poverty rate pales in comparison to the booming economic growth this country has enjoyed for years. 















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
hmmmm..
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 08:21 ET by ksimm81Have they taken into account that we still have 12 million illegal trespassers here in this country and that many people have jobs that offer health insurance, but don't take it because they don't want the extra money taken out of their paychecks?
Did they also remember to mention that whoever is brought to an ER will still get treated, insurance or not?
GOTTA LOVE THE LIBERAL MSM.......
Percentages
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:13 ET by JDWYou have a valid point.
About 50% of the uninsured are illegals. The teens and out of college up to about 30yrs old fill about 45%.
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Good old MSM....for every
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 08:54 ET by motherbeltGood old MSM....for every silver lining, there's a cloud!
I'm sure....
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 08:59 ET by Prester John....the perky one and all the other MSM elites are lining up behind Hillary and the Breck Girl to buy insurance for all those who don't have it.
Oh wait, you mean they're not?
That's odd.
So let me get this
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:06 ET by dscottSo let me get this straight: 12.3% of the population is in what is defined as poverty in a country of 300 million, that translates into 36.9 million people. Of which, there are anywhere from 12 to 20 million illegals who in all probability would be considered poor. So what we are really saying here is that due to the incompetence of border enforcement or actually incompetence of Congress not funding the fence or border enforcement, the taxpayers of this country are being saddled with government hand outs to give to people who don't belong here?????
Then Congress had the nerve to raise the minimum wage to offset the flooding of the unskilled labor markets to cover up their incompetence. The incompetence of Congress directly hurt the poor "citizens" of this country by depriving them of higher paying jobs because they depressed the wages. Then libs have the nerve to complain about trickle down economics, living wage and wage disparity when it was their policies which they advocated in lacks border enforcement and employment verification that cause these problems they complain about????
Let's solve this problem right now, deport all the illegals, thus all 7 million people who are on unemployment can get jobs and all the poor will immediately get a pay raise due to the competition between businesses for a worker. At that point all the poor will be able to afford a car and health insurance. Once done, AFDC, WIC & Medicaid will no longer have clients and we can unemploy (send them packing) all those bureaucrats administering those programs. Poverty solved via the market place. But that's not what liberals want, they need to self righteously whine about something.
BTW- while we are talking about solving the poverty problem, let's advocate relocation of people from high unemployment areas like Mississippi and Michigan to the West where unemployment is down to 2%. If Mexican and others from further south can go 1000's of miles to the US, then surely people who need a job can relocate 100's of miles.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
Couric Failed.......and something I don't understand
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:11 ET by JayTeeFailed to Note......Failed to Include.....Failed to Report...E.G. Failed Journalism.
But BUT...I don't understand this information quoted above..
"A substantial portion of uninsured Americans are not poor but rather middle-class working Americans who are forced to face a major tax penalty, resulting in premium increases of 40 to 50 percent, if they do not obtain health insurance through the place of work. "
What is the Heritage talking about.....since I fall in this category, is there a Penalty I'm facing that I don't know about ? ? No comprende'
They also say "Current federal tax policy then unnecessarily drives millions into the ranks of the uninsured."
I thought I voluntarily didn't have health insurance for 10 years because it was my choice......and all the time the Feds would have sent over a Cab and "driven me" there.
While un-insured (except by my own earnings) I even played Soccer on an over 40 Soccer league.
I'm not going to click on the "Heritage" article, because there is a Tax penalty I don't know about....Ignorance is Bliss.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
So we have you to blame
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:23 ET by dscottSo we have you to blame for Couric's whining? Thanks a lot. <sarcasm>
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
THere's more un-insured out there
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:54 ET by JayTeeWhile I was un-insured (and healthy) I had kids in college without Insurance(and Healthy). Today, I have health insurance...but none of my 3 kids have any health Insurance...other than PIP Auto insurance. Their choice (again). BUT..BUT....we all believe we have occaisional health issues that have to be (and are) addressed from time to time....prescriptions, Doctor visits, Dental care, etc..to be addressed at a vastly lower cost than 400$$ a month for coverage with 1500 family and 500 $$ individual deductable.
You're either covered by yourself at 50 $'s a month, or you have the illusion of being covered at 400 $$'s a month.
At best, the Government should push the private Sector into offering cheap catastrophic insurance.
I love this country, Freedom of choice......., personal responsibility for good health habits, and a severe penalty for taking risk and losing....Big Hospital bills, payable by you. If you can afford a $40,000 SUV, you can afford a $40,000 hospital stay...your choice....Sell one if you have the other.
IF you ARE POOR.........you have just as many options as an Illegal immigrant. You should ask Congress for "better than" options.
The only problem with insurance is Katie and company Screaming un-intelligently from the sidelines via MSM. Can I take out Psycho Babble Insurance ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
"What is the Heritage
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 14:02 ET by ckc1227"What is the Heritage talking about.....since I fall in this category,
is there a Penalty I'm facing that I don't know about ? ? No
comprende' "
Just guessing here, but I think the penalty you face is that you have to pay more for your premiums if you don't buy through your employer. So, what costs you $400 a month if purchased through your employer will cost you $800 a month if purchased outside of your employer.
Big gov
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:26 ET by JDWCouric is not rooting for the small guy, she is pushing larger government. The problems we have experienced today relate to departures from free market ideals. The system has been overridden with government mandates to the point where the toilet can no longer be flushed.
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Reason Poverty Rate Down
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:26 ET by PawpawNThat's down from 2005 because we made all of the KATRINA victims rich with free money, free housing, free everything and most of them moved out of the poverty holes they were kept in there in New Orleans and the rest of Louisiana!!
Health Plans
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:55 ET by iveseenitallHere's a senario. In 2008 we elect the first all-female, all- Communist ticket--Clinton-Edwards. The first thing they do is pull out of Iraq and initiate a massive "free" health plan for all America. Hillary falls at her girfiend's house and breaks her arm. She gets immediate treatment in a private hospital, along with Brian Wiiliams who slipped over at Edwards' mansion.You fall at work and break a leg.You die from a massive infection because you have to wait a month to get a doctor. Illegals and other criminals go to the head of the line, please.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
times
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 09:52 ET by dubuquemanThis was all the product of the Times headline yesterday morning. The networks will always follow the Times, even in the case of a nonsequitur like this. Of course, had the trends been reversed, the hed would have been, "Number of Uninsured Down, But Poverty Rate Rises." Barring that would have found some other factor to offset good news--rising milk prices, utility rates, whatever.
How poor are the poor?
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 10:44 ET by ricklailRead this story by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg2064.cfm
A bonafided and certified member of the beer guzzling, NASCAR watching middle class.
If the libs really were
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 10:55 ET by Conservative_in_mass.If the libs really were concerned about improving the quality of health care for the poor, they would support:
The immediate deportation of illegals, who account for billions on dollars annually in "non-recoverable" expenses for hospitals, which then have to offset this expense with resouces that could have been used to care for LEGAL citizens in need. How many businesses do you know of where an illegal alien can go in and recieve goods and services with out the ability to pay for them and walk out the door?
Tort reform to decrease the amount of frivolous lawsuits that hospitals, physicians and nurses have to contend with. This would result in a reduction of liability insurance premiums for hospitals and indviduals, which in turn would make more funds available to improve and expand medical facilities.
Support education initiatives to encourage individuals to enter the medical field so that their is adequate staffing to handle the increased demand for services that the aging baby boomer generation will present. As part of their required hands on training, these individuals could work in free/reduced cost clinics established for the disadvantaged.
Tax credits for longevity as a health care professional. A huge component of the current shortage of nurses and physicians is a result of more people leaving the profession than entering it. The current condition of increasing demand for services to be provided by fewer individuals will exacerbate the already precarious condition many hospitals find themselves in. These people must be incented to remain in the medical field, or the current brain drain will continue.
I'm aware this is all fantasy. Liberals cannot comprehend common sense. Maybe a clinic can be set up to help them.
I love how all these
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 12:23 ET by BruzillaI love how all these reporters can talk endlessly about the "rising cost of insurance", but never mention what is causing insurance costs to rise, i.e., the rising charges of healthcare providers. It is providers, not insurers, that are driving all the cost increases.
I will refine that a
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 12:57 ET by dscottI will refine that a little, the medical providers in a bid to 1. offset the non payment/default of some and 2. give discounts for the insurers/Medicare/Medicaid have to jack up their prices to make sure all expenses are met. There is a three tier pricing structure from the providers: 1. Top rate to unisured and rich, 2. Insurance Companies and 3. Medicare/Medicaid.
When someone (uninsured) defaults on their medical bill, those costs are passed on to someone else otherwise the provider goes bankrupt. IMO it is both the providers and insurers that equally bear the fault. End the 3 tier pricing system and discounts, charge everyone the same and you will find that less people will default on their medical bills. Of course it goes without saying or at least it should, deport the illegals and you won't have so many people defaulting on their medical bills.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
I've got to disagree with
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 13:07 ET by BruzillaI've got to disagree with you. As an insurer, we pass money from members to providers, and the cost of doing the business runs about 20%. If we pass through one million, or a hundred million, our burn rate stays the same, so the real variable is the providers.
I agree with you that providers have to pass along expenses to those who can pay, but the point that's missed is who determines how much a provider should make? Doctors are regulated in a myriad of ways, but not this one. Could doctors reduce insurance costs by 50% by reducing their charges 50%? Absolutely, but why would they lower their profits if they don't have to? Most Americans don't know how much their doctor is really charging, and don't care because insurance is paying the doctor. They don't comparison shop, they don't solicit offers, they just go to see who they want and price be damned because the expense is shared with others. This allows doctors to charge whatever they want to anyone they want, and as long as they don't violate CMS laws they are safe. And if the insurers tell them they are charging too much, the doctors threaten to pull their accounts.
Could doctors reduce
Wed, 08/29/2007 - 13:29 ET by dscottCould doctors reduce insurance costs by 50% by reducing their charges 50%? Absolutely, but why would they lower their profits if they don't have to? Most Americans don't know how much their doctor is really charging, and don't care because insurance is paying the doctor.
That is the core truth, the lack of true competition, however, doctors are not the only medical providers so are hospitals and others. I understand where you are coming from however, isn't it true that health insurance companies will deselect a hospital or provider if they (provider) won't accept their level of acceptable charges? I note on my own insurance plan that not all hospitals in my area are included on the plan. In fact I remember about a year or two back, there was a big stink between United Health Care and some Tampa area hospitals where some of the hospitals balked at the new rate structure and were thus deselected for a time.
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives, is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.