The economic security of working families depends on reliable access to affordable health care, as well as opportunities to earn good incomes and to share in the benefits of economic growth.
New information released by the Census Bureau today shows that, in 2013, Massachusetts continued to lead the nation in the share of its state population covered by health insurance. With 96.3 percent of people in Massachusetts covered, the Commonwealth far exceeds the national average of 86.6 percent. Massachusetts has led the nation in health care coverage for its population since the implementation of the state’s health reform in 2006. [For more on health insurance coverage rates, see MassBudget’s new factsheet on this part of today’s Census release, available HERE.]
Today’s Census data also reveal that four years into an economic recovery, low and moderate income U.S. households are seeing limited benefits from the nation’s economic growth – median household income is lower and the poverty rate is still higher than in 2007, just before the start of the Great Recession. Modest reductions in the overall and child poverty rates, however, did occur between 2012 and 2013. Specifically, the data show the following:
- There was no statistically significant change in real U.S. median household income between 2012 and 2013. U.S median household income in 2013 stood at $51,939, an amount 8.0 percent (or $4,497) below pre-recession, 2007 levels (adjusted for inflation).
- The U.S. poverty rate fell to 14.5 percent in 2013, which is lower than the 15.0 percent rate in 2012 and is the first statistically significant decline since 2006. The 2013 rate remains significantly higher than the pre-recession (2007) rate of 12.5 percent.
- The U.S. poverty rate for children dropped to 19.9 percent in 2013, a decline from 21.8 percent in 2012. This is the first statistically significant decline in the child poverty rate since 2000. Across the country, however, 1 in every 5 children still lived below the poverty line in 2013.
Both short and long term factors have added to the challenges faced by low and moderate income households. In the near term, budget cuts due to sequestration as well as other austerity measures at the federal level during 2013 significantly reduced overall economic growth, likely impacting job and income growth. Over the long term, in a decades old trend, the well-being of working families has become increasingly disconnected from growth of the national economy. While workers’ wages rose in lock-step with productivity gains throughout the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, since the late 1970s, wage growth for most U.S. workers has fallen far short of growth in productivity. [See MassBudget’s Labor Day release on workers’ wages and incomes.]
The data in today’s release provide a useful overview of poverty, income, and health coverage on the national level (using Current Population Survey data), as well as health coverage data at the state level (using American Community Survey data). On Thursday (9/18), the Census Bureau will release additional state-level data from the American Community Survey. When that data is released, MassBudget will provide analysis of changes in income, poverty and child poverty levels in Massachusetts.
The full Census Bureau report is available on their website. Complete analysis of the national trends can be found at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
I mean really, with all screw ups with the connector, this is pretty amazing.
At the moment, we are left with two choices, both committed to do nothing but hurl a few targeted talking points at health care, but neither with the vision and leadership to move Massachusetts up to the same level as the developed world. No, let’s not lead…..let’s let Vermont show the way?
Time to move on, at least for now.
but it was the legislature that drove the argument. He only climbed on board and pushed his issues to get something he could sign. It was a freight train the wannabe president didn’t want to get run over by.
The bipartisan statesman who gets big things done in a market-based way. It became a headache once Obama’s name went on a somewhat similar bill and Republican voters decided they hated anything remotely connected to Obama. Poor Mitt.
I really hope we aren’t belittling a dedicated progressive activist for being a full throated supported of single payer healthcare, are we?
Again, the primary is over, and the strident ‘if only Berwick could have saved us’ tone is also not constructive. But, I think it is important to recognize that we led the way on coverage but are no longer leading the way on affordability. I would rather we not throw up our hands and say ‘Beacon Hill is Beacon Hill, no single payer there’, particularly when we have Stan Rosenberg and Jay Livingstone among other progressives emerging in leadership positions, and a good chance to have a Democrat remain in the Corner Office.
We need John T May out knocking on doorknobs talking to voters for Coakley, along with Harmony Wu, ProgressiveMA and others who were able to beat the expected result for their candidate by about 10-15 points. Grossman’s supporters were also quite impressive at beating the polls. Time to push Coakley to embrace the positions that will get the base excited to show up. The true believers like Judy, Petr, and Striker and the more ambivalent folks like me, fenway, and john t may-we are all on the same page in wanting the Democrat to win and embrace sound progressive policy. Let’s remember that, single payer was not, will not, and should not be a a single candidate issue-it’s been in the progressive movement since Teddy’s Progressive Party adopted it in their 1912 platform and has been in our platform since 1948. It’s a fight worth having and worth winning.
/
Here is the full text of the health and human services plank.
Yes, there is a list of things we also support, but it says clearly: single-payer healthcare system. The list isn’t a set of “steps along the way” or offered as a set of conditions that, if all met, would be an acceptable alternative to single payer.
It’s odd how little candidates use the platform, or maybe not that odd.
Candidates have to make their own decisions based on preferences, practicalities, etc. Keep in mind the platform conventions are dominated by idealistic activists that are not even representative of the nominating conventions, let alone the primary voter pool.
…as part of the most recent platform drafting process, that’s also how I remember the conversations evolving – single payer as the goal, with other steps we can take between now and then.
The language as drafted isn’t “these are nice temporary steps.”
Platforms don’t seem to mean much.
What we don’t believe is that policy gets made by waving a wand or snapping one’s fingers. Then again, the party is a huge tent so there is also the matter of some just not believing it.