Rural communities have not received many of the benefits that economic assistance programs provide for low-income families. In the United States, poverty tends to disproportionately affect rural communities more so than urban communities, with generational and insular poverty creating a cyclical nature that traps people for prolonged periods of time. However, the government has determined that a possible avenue to break up this phenomenon is to promote self-sufficiency for families to escape economic hardship and reach prosperity. The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program intends to provide cash assistance for recipients in return for their active search for employment. Due to structural conditions and barriers to social mobility, rural communities are not receiving TANF to the same degree as urban communities.
Rural communities often experience several economic factors that inhibit their ability to achieve economic security, especially in comparison to urban areas. Rural communities tend to have lack public transportation options; a variety of child care options; high degrees of food insecurity; stagnant wages; limited access to government services; little technological capacity; and lower health insurance coverage. And poverty is inherently intertwined with all these factors. The official national poverty rate comes in at around 14%, but in examining how rural and urban communities compare, rural communities experience much higher poverty rates. The figure presented to the below shows the geographical spread
of poverty in the United States, where clear patterns of rural areas in the American South, in Appalachia, and on Native American reservations. Some areas demonstrate poverty rates that are double or triple the national average. This attests to the insular poverty theory, which proposes that certain areas of the United States have higher poverty rates because of their large geographic isolation that separates them from the rest of America. Poverty’s economic and social effects demand America’s attention as the U.S. experiences fiscal costs of $500 billion each year, which equates to roughly 4 percent of GDP.
The federal government has assumed the de facto role of alleviating poverty in communities around the United States. Policy-makers have instituted economic assistance programs that aim to reduce health disparities, food insecurity, and unemployment assistance. However, TANF operates much differently. TANF’s goals are to secure stable, full-time employment for recipients who seek benefits and provides cash assistance as a means to reach it. Because recipients must verify their employment and limited access to government offices, it is difficult for rural individuals to participate in the program. States receive block grants to provide assistance to families, which can be used to support cash assistance, child care, job training, and other services. States also have the ability to determine eligibility as well as the sanctions for breaking the rules of the program.
Using data between 2015 and 2017 for 13 states, the relationship between rural communities and TANF recipiency can be explored. After inserting other factors that influence TANF recipiency, such as income, unemployment, and demographics, there seems to be a significant relationship that confirms more rural communities tend to have fewer TANF recipients. Many explanations describe this phenomenon. Some studies argue that rural areas may hold more negative stereotypes around accepting welfare, which may be derived from small social networks that exist in these communities. In addition, many factors involving the coverage and generosity of the program undoubtedly affect its uptake. States with more rural communities may receive lower benefits as a result of lower costs of living, and they may face more eligibility issues with limited job opportunities and training in comparison to urban communities.
There is sufficient evidence to believe that rural communities have less TANF uptake than urban areas. The austere environment of social and economic hardship for rural communities makes it harder to receive TANF funding and thus to escape poverty. Not only are there disparities in the areas that endure poverty, but federal welfare-for-work programs such as TANF are ineffectively reaching rural areas. States must devise new approaches to administering the program, especially in regard to rural communities, which experience significant challenges to access and usage of welfare programs. Further investment into human development programs and educational opportunities would also benefit rural communities, which allow for further mobility to escape poverty.
New suggestions for other federal welfare programs, such as SNAP, to include work requirements have faced much debate. Most debates revolve around their disproportionate effects on the elderly, on the disabled, and on people of color. However, as we’ve seen with TANF, work requirements and other components part of TANF, have also disproportionately harmed rural communities. Changes to other welfare programs may have similar effects on rural communities.
Leave a Reply