Who’s living below the line?

Many challenges face the incoming 114th Congress. It will represent an electorate that is fearful of a slowly recovering economy, wary of stubbornly high poverty rates, and rightfully suspicious of improving unemployment numbers.  

Despite the unemployment rate of 5.9 percent reported for October, recession fallout continues to impact millions who live above the poverty line but struggle to pay for basic needs and achieve financial security. At best, this suggests a lag between economic recovery and improvements in families’ incomes, and at worst it reveals a disconnect between the strength of the economy and family well-being. Before serious discussions of how to make the economy serve workers and their families, we should redefine our collective understanding of security. 

{mosads}Economic insecurity is much more pervasive in our wealthy nation than federal poverty figures portray. According to a recent Wider Opportunities for Women (WOW) study, the U.S. economic insecurity rate—the proportion of Americans who lack incomes that will provide economic security—was 44 percent in 2012. This was almost three times the national poverty rate.  

Insecurity is highest for those groups historically vulnerable to financial instability, especially single mothers, minorities and children. In fact, over 54 percent of our nation’s youth live in households that lack economic security incomes. WOW defines security as the ability to afford basic expenses including housing (rent), utilities, food, child care, health care, transportation, clothing, telephone service, cleaning materials, taxes and emergency and retirement savings.  

That translates to a U.S. average economic security wage for a typical single childless worker of nearly $30,500 per year—two times the full-time, federal minimum wage. To achieve security, a typical single parent raising two young children in the U.S. requires approximately twice the annual income of a single childless worker, and dual-income households with two young children require approximately $74,000 for genuine security.  

These insecurity rates suggest insecurity is largely a story about low wages. As reported in 2014 by the National Employment Law Project,more than three million middle-skill jobs—many of which paid security wages to workers without 4-year degrees—were lost during the recession. In contrast, low-wage industries saw 22 percent of the job losses during the recession, but have accounted for 44 percent of the job growth post-recession. Insecurity reaches deep into the ranks of the fully employed—and those with degrees—suggesting traditional paths to security are often either unavailable or insufficient to stabilize families. 

By understanding how Americans are really living, we can more accurately assess the state of the economy and potential policy impacts. It is not enough to only understand how those defined as poor are living. A broader definition of well-being must be adopted so that we can have a shared understanding about what it means to make a living in our country.  

As Congress settles in, we hope these stark numbers and more-inclusive definitions of well-being become ingrained in policymaking processes and policy makers’ lexicons. By adopting new ways of discussing and understanding our nation’s workforce, we will ensure better decisions for our citizenry and economy.

Andere is CEO of Wider Opportunities for Women.