text:
Final Report
presented to
Governor Bruce Babbitt
Aliki Coudroglou, D. S. W.
and the Women in Poverty Advisory Panel
State of Arizona
Governor's Office of Women's Services
The Governor's Office of Women's Services and the Advisory Panel on Women
in Poverty commend Governor Bruce Babbitt for recognizing the need to study
the impoverishment of women in the state of Arizona; and to further take
action through appointing and directing this panel to formulate
recommendations that will alleviate the poor economic status of Arizona's
The Governor's Office of Women's Services wishes to acknowledge the
dedication of the Advisory Panel during the hearings on Women in Poverty. The
Panel was chosen to be representative of the state's ethnic, cultural,
geographic and age composition. A balance was also attempted with regard to
personal and professional interest on the topic. Throughout the forty ( 40)
hours of testimony, the panel members remained sensitive and respectful to
those individuals presenting information. This was an arduous task and all
who participated are to be commended. Special recognition should be given to
Edwin Naylor and Catherine R. Eden who chaired the hearings and to A1iki
Coudrog1ou who compiled the volumes of testimony and research to write this
report. Thanks also are due to Laura Orr for typing the manuscript.
The success of the hearings was a direct result of the efforts of the
local steering committees. Through their combined efforts, approximately 900
individuals attended and more than 450 persons submitted testimony at the six
locations. The local steering committees provided the direction and the
impetus to mobilize community participation. The involvement and interest
from the general community was beyond our expections. These ad hoc committees
were dedicated organizers and an important, integral part of the process.
At each of the hearings we had the honor of having locally elected
officials present. We commend the dedication and the concern displayed by
these individuals who spent their time to find out more about the women in
their community. Through this hearing process, public awareness to this issue
was heightened.
Our appreciation also extends to those individuals who represented
government and non- profit social service agencies. On a regular basis these
people work with the poor women and their children in Arizona. They are the
" front liners" and it takes a special person to maint. ain their energy and
dedication in working with needy populations.
Our deepest thanks is extended to those women who testified, who on a
daily basis are confronted with poverty and who came before us to help. By
telling their stories, their real stories, the panel members were able to
empathize with the feelings of rejection find despair that are a constant
companion to many of these women. These women are to whom we dedicate this
report and with whom we will strive to establish a humane system for helping
people to help themselves.
Governor's Office of Women's Services
Sandra Junck, Director Nanette Sookiasian, Program Coordinator
( The direct testimony from the hearings in this report is single spaced and in
quotations. All of the information presented during the hearings, over 1,000
pages of both verbal and written testimony is cataloged and available through
the Arizona Department of Library and Archives, 1700 West Washington, Phoenix,
Advisory Panel Members
Hearing Schedule
Local Steering Committees
iii - v
Introduct. ion . . . . 1
Changing Social Dynamics 7
Labor Market. 17
Social Support. s 28
Facing The Present 37
Confronting The Future 42
Conclusion 52
Footnot. es 55
Bibliography 57
Test. imony
Tables . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Al - A5
Ms. Sandy Albo, Teacher
Lee Kornegay Junior High School
Globe, Arizona
Ms. Wendy Black, Director
Best Western International Headquarters
Phoenix, Arizona
Ms. Anne Christensen
Community Representative
Paradise Valley, Arizona
Ms. Catherine R. Eden*
Coconino County Manager
Flagstaff, Arizona
The Honorable Jaime Gutierrez
State Senator
Tucson, Arizona
Ms. Gloria Heller
Department of Health Services
Phoenix, Arizona
Ms. Betty McCant, Principal
Jefferson Elementary School
Tucson, Arizona
Mr. Freddie Morales, General Manager
KPHX Radio 1480
Phoenix, Arizona
Ms. Johanna Phalen, Executive Director
Arizona Action for Displaced Homemakers
Phoenix, Arizona
Mr. William Sims, Dean of
Institutional Services
Arizona Western College
Yuma, Arizona
The Honorable Thomas Volgy
Tucson City Council
Tucson, Arizona
* Co- Chairs
Ms. Olga Aros
USA Today
Chandler, Arizona
Ms. Jan Chilton
Community Representative
Payson, Arizona
Dr. Aliki Coudroglou
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona
Ms. Amy Gittler, Director
Arizona Center for Law
in the Public Interest
Phoenix, Arizona
Ms. Naomi Harward
Grey Panthers
Tempe, Arizona
Mr. Joe Machado
Santa Cruz County
Attorney's Office
Nogales, Arizona
The Honorable Debbie McCune
State Representative
Phoenix, Arizona
Reverend Edwin Naylor*
Luthern Social Service
Ministry of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Ms. Josephina Rodriguez
Community Representative
San Luis, Arizona
The Honorable Tom Tso
Chief Justice
Navajo Supreme Court
Window Rock, Arizona
Ms. Pattie Weiss, News Anchor
KVOA TV - Channel 4
Tucson, Arizona
Thursday, May 22, 1986
3: 00 p. m. - 8: 00 p. m.
Yuma City Council Chambers
180 West 1st Street
Wednesday, June 11, 1986
3: 00 p. m. - 8: 00 p. m.
Flagstaff City Council Chambers
211 West Aspen Avenue
Wednesday, September 17, 1986
2: 00 p. m. - 7: 00 p. m.
Nogales City Council Chambers
1018 Grand Avenue
Tuesday, September 30, 1986
12: 30 p. m. - 7: 30 p. m.
El Rio Neighborhood Center
1390 West Speedway
Wednesday, October 15, 1986
2: 00 p. m. - 7: 00 p. m.
Gila County Board of Supervisors Hearing Room
Gila County Courthouse, 1400 East Ash Street
Tuesday, October 28, 1986
9: 00 a. m. - 1: 00 p. m. - Senate Hearing Room 1
1700 West Washington
2: 00 p. m. - 7: 00 p. m. - South Phoenix Adult Center
212 East Alta Vista
wamN IN POVERTY
YUMA STEERING < nIMITl'EE LIST WOI1F. N IN POVERTY
TUCSON STEERING COHHITl'EE LIST
Mayita Acosta
Community Representative
Yuma, Arizona
Melinda Ornelas
Community Representative
Yuma, Arizona
Josephina Rodriguez
Community Representative
San Luis, Arizona
Sylvia Martinez
Community Representative
Somerton, Arizona
Debbie Pallack, Director
Safe House - Domestic Violence
Yuma, Arizona
Ramona Corales
Chicanos Por La Causa
Somerton, Arizona
Pearl Jefferson
Community Representative
Yuma, Arizona
Pua McLeod
Yuma Daily Sun
Yuma, Arizona
Estevan Rodriguez, Asst. Deputy Director
Dept. of Economic Securlty - Tucson
Tucson, Arizona
Karen Fields
Pima County Health Dept.
Tucson, Arizona
Veronica Diaz
Chicanos Por La Causa
Tucson, Arlzona
Jane Cox
Community Representative
Tucson, Arizona
Janice Caesar
Governor's Office for Children- Tucson
Tucson, Arizona
Rebecca Hill
Pima County
Tucson, Arizona
Susan Shetter, Special Asslstant
Governor's Office - Tucson
Tucson, Arlzona
Gail Gibbons
DES- Refugee Resettlement Program
Tucson, Arizona
Marlon Lupu
Area Office on Aging
Tucson, Arizona
Laurine Smith
League of Women Voters
Tucson, Arizona
Miriam Morrls, Presldent
League of Women Voters, Tucson
Tucson, Arizona
Dr. Nelba Chavez- Exec. Director
Virglna Zeeb
La Frontera
Tucson, Arizona
wamN IN POVERTY
FUGSTAll STIKIlING COIfITTD LIST Diane Wilson/ Lenore Grund
PHASE Project
Tucson, Arizona
Laura Pendleton
E. F. Hutton
Tucson, Arizona
Mary Fran Liesk
Community Representative
Cottonwood, Arizona
Lindsay Morgan Lee: s
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, Arizona
Joe Montoya
Coconino County Community Services
Flagstaff, Arizona
Linda Williams
Coconino County Community Services
Flagstaff, Arizona
Karan English
Coconino County Board of Supervisors
Flagstaff, Arizona
Sara Aleman
Department of Economic Security
Flagstaff, Arizona
Susan Slasor, Director
Coconino County Legal Aid
Flagstaff, Arizona
Honorable Judge Evelyne E. Bradley
Ramah District Court, Navajo Nation
Ramah, New MeXico
Mike Goodman, Director
Coconino Co. Career & Training Ctr.
Flagstaff, Arizona
Mel Hannah
Flagstaff City Councilman
Flagstaff, Arizona
Shannon Davis
Pima County Board of Supervisors
David Yetman's Office
Tucson, Arizona
Valerina Quintana
Tucson Women's Commission
Tucson, Arizona
Janet Regner
Arizona Committee Action Association
Tucson, Arizona
Connie Cornelius
Community Representative
Tucson, Arizona
Susan Gilbert
League of Women Voters
Tucson, Arizona
Laura Almquist
Chairman- Task Force on Child Care
Tucson, Arizona
Janice Monk/ Rita Marko
Southwest Institute for
Research on Women, U of A
Tucson, Arizona
Carol Orin
Information & Referral Service
Tucson, Arizona
Stephen Roseman
League of Women Voters & RESULTS
Tucson, Arizona
Abe Rochlin
Nogales Housing Authority
Nogales, Arizona
Martha Brightwell
Dist. VI Council on
Developmental Disability
Willcox, Arizona
Amanda Paz
Trlcar Sales
No~ ales, Arizona
Bonnie Feldman, SlPeech Therapist
Nogales Public Schools
Nogales, Arizona
Geneviene Johnston
Community Representative
Nogales, Arizona
Marty White
DES - Family Asst. Program Mgr., Dist. VI
Bisbee, Arizona
Josephine M. Petty
Secretarial Services
Nogales, Arizona
Teresa Ramirez
Dept. of Economic Security
Nogales, Arizona
Lillian Hoff
Santa Cruz County Young Audience
Nogales, Arizona
Myrna Ayala
DES - Child Protective Services
Nogales, Arizona
Locha Montiel
Foster Care Advisory Committee
Nogales, Arizona
Lupita Felix
DES - Family Assistance
Nogales, Arizona
Agatha M. Aldrete
Juvenile Court Referee
Santa Cruz Co. SuperIor Court
Nogales, Arizona
Mary Ann Palmer
Nogales, Arizona
Pamela Mathewson
Santa Cruz Co. Board of Supervisors
Nogales, Arizona
GLOBE STKKRING C( H[[ l" fKK LIST
Rebecca Bregen
f-'. Un i ted Way
<: 109 Nelson Ave.
Nogales, Arizona
Margie Weiss
Bisbee, Arizona
Yvonne ValenzuelBL
Santa Cruz Co. ME, dical Assistance
Nogales, Arizona
Rita Luz Ashford
Santa Cruz Co. Medical Assistance
Nogales, Arizona
Susan Fernandez
SCC Probation Superior Court
Nogales, Arizona
Ila Tittlebaugh
Nogales Unified School District
Nogales, Arizona
Janet Paz
U of A Coop. Extension Service
Nogales, Arizona
Caroline Sherman
DES - Children, Youth & Family
475 Grand Ave.
Nogales, Arizona
Josephine Moss
Santa Cruz Comm. Home Health Agy.
Nogales, Arizona
Connie Murrieta
AHCCCS - Enrollment
Nogales, Arizona
Annette Bruno
Catholic Community Services
Nogales, Arizona
Barbara Switzer
U of A Coop. Extension Service
Willcox, Arizona
Lourdes Machado
Community Representative
Nogales, Arizona
Brendan Litz Simons
Nogales International
Nogales, Arizona
Janice Chilton
Community Representative
Payson, Arizona
S. L. Ashworth, Title III Director
Globe, Arizona
Sharon Alston
Salvation Army- SHARE Program
Globe, Arizona
Leslie Clark
DES - ACYF Child Protective Services
Globe, Arizona
Marion Parker, Parent Aide
DES - CHARLEE Family Care, Inc.
Payson, Arizona
Charlotte Tilta
Director, Shelter Home
San Carlos, Arizona
Mildred Sowden
DES - Job Service
Globe, Arizona
Sandy Alba, Teacher
Lee Kornegay Junior High School
Globe, Arizona
Dennis Stevenson, MSW
DES - Aging & Adult Administration
Globe, Arizona
Nobi Yonekura
DES - Vocational Rehabilitation
Globe, Arizona
Harvey Shepard
Globe Food Bank
Globe, Arizona
Katheleen Bowers, DES- ACYF
Gila/ Pinal Task Force Against
Domestic Violence
Globe, Arizona
Alene Hughes
Bureau of Indian Affairs
San Carlos Agency
San Carlos, Arizona
Julie Bathel
The Caring Place
Miami, Arizona
Terry Cruz
Chicanos Por La Causa
Phoenix, Arizona
W( JIPJiI IN POVERTY
PHO! NIX STKKRING aHfiTl'KJ! LIST
Helen Eastman Black
1st Interstate Bank of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Cassandra Mason Motz/ Nancy La Placa
Con~ ressman Udall's Office
Phoenix, Arizona
League of Women Voters
Phoenix, Arizona
Gloria Feldt, Director
Planned Parenthood
Phoenix, Arizona
Georgia G. Hall, PhD, MPH, Director
Institute of Gerontology/ Geriatrics
Good Samaritan Medical Center
Phoenix, Arizona
Vicki Douglas
< Catholic Social Services
Mesa, Arizona
Connie Williams
Valley Big Brothers/ Big Sisters
Phoenix, Arizona
Aneesah Nadir
Maricopa County Health Dept.
Phoenix, Arizona
Kay Martin
Chicanos Por La Causa
Phoenix, Arizona
Melinda Ornelas
Rio Salado Community College
Phoenix, Arizona
Susan E. McCraw, MPH, MAT
Dept. of Health Services
Phoenix, Arizona
Norma Farris
Methodist Women's Group
Phoenix, Arizona
Francisca Cavazos
Arizona Farm Workers
Glendale, Arizona
Linda Fowkes
Dept. of Corrections
Family Assistance Program
Phoenix, Arizona
Ruth Serafini
Refugee Resettlement- Tolstoy
Phoenix, Arizona
Cori Wilson
Phoenix, Arizona
Joy J. Hanley
Affiliation of Az Indian Ctr.
Phoenix, Arizona
Marilyn Boess
City of Phoenix
Phoenix, Arizona
" I am a single parent. I have a fourteen year old son who is 6 foot, 181
pounds and eating me out of house and home. I also have a toddler who is three
years old. So I have an incredible experience with being in a house with a
teenager and a toddler. This is my decree of disolution, ordered and issued by
Maricopa County Court. I brought this today to talk to you about my experience
with what would you say, my economic instability, poverty, whatever you want to
call it. When I left court, I felt pretty confident that my family and I could
proceed. I was in school, I hadn't completed yet but I had very strong hopes and
faith in myself and my ability to graduate and go into the work world. I have
now been working for about eight years, and I am lucky. I have gainful
employment, I have relatively good medical benefits. This document has become an
order that's a debt card. Presently, my ex- husband owes me in excess of $ 23,000
in child support. I have utilized the Maricopa County Attorney's Office,
starting in May, 1979 and at this point, after dismissals and different things on
the part of court lawyers, I am now working with one of the Assistant Attorney
General's. My ex- husband, within a year of our divorce, moved to New York. That
is probably, besides Illinois, the best state you could flee to. If it were any
other individual who had absconded in some way with funds that size and they were
found, in court, by felony laws they would have grabbed him by the collar and
brought him back. I do not know why my utilities are on right now. This is my
rent, it's one month behind due. This is my car payment, it's three months
behind due. This is a loan in December of 1984 I got to pay rent. I have been
evicted no less than seven times, I have moved no less than fourteen times.
Being poor is very expensive. Because every time a check doesn't clear, you pay.
Every time it gets to a service or collection account, you pay. When you get
evicted, you pay the attorney's fees. Every time you move you leave behind more
and more possessions. My mother says, why do you keep moving these things. For
me, it's the only thing that makes any sense. I have lost so much. My house was
foreclosed within 60 days of when child support stopped. There was a program
through BUD, I couldn't qualify for it, they turned me down within six months as
a result of a class action suit. They said please send in another application,
you might be eligible. I do not believe my son will have the quality of life I
did as a child and I had a two income household as a child. My parents worked
very hard. I did not have a store- bought dress until I was 16, but I didn't know
we weren't wealthy. Our home does not have a television. My son gets
assignments to watch a television program and critique it. His teacher is hard
pressed to understand why he cannot complete that assignment. He is getting more
and more aware of what he does not have compared to his peers. He's getting mad
like me. He's angry and he's depressed and he's frustrated. You go to lunch and
your friends say " Don't you want something to eat?" You say, " No, I'm not
hungry. I'm trying to go on a diet. I'm just thirsty." And that's because you
have less than $ 1.00 in your pocket. You have peridontal disease because you
can't get to a dentist. My mouth is that of a 55 year old woman. A year ago, my
son and I both had bleading gums. My ex- husband lives in a house of value over
$ 100,000. He has two modern cars. My car runs on E-- that's empty. It runs on
fumes. It defies modern technology. It runs on fumes, bald tires, no air
conditioning, no heating and a prayer. Thatls what my car runs on. I'm rather
loyal to that car, even though in my excitement today, I've locked my keys in it.
I know I can get out with the security department's help. I am very frustrated
with the state. I am the third generation Phoenician. 1 1m kind of proud of
that. We've worked hard. I grew up in a home with a work ethic that if you work
hard, things will happen. You may not be wealthy, you may not even be middle
income, but you will be able to do, and I get very upset when I see newpaper
headlines, although I must say I don't have the utmost confidence in our
newspaper, but I see a headline that says $ 3,000,000 in child support buried by
State Agency Task Force Findings. State Ranked as One of the Worst in Child
Support Collections. I am a majority in a population that is rising, only it is
not rising, it's falling to the sub- basement in this society of women, single
parents who are trying very hard to provide for their children and themselves.
There is a provision in our law right now, ARS 122458. Basically, it says
failure of a parent to provide for children is classified as a Class 6 Felony. I
have yet, and I have been doing extensive research, to find where a County
Attorney's Office in Maricopa County has ever utilized that provision. Likewise,
there is a provision for intra- state rendition. I see little or no hope that I
will ever get child support from my former husband until he's in jail.
Absolutely not. They talk about incomes and budgets. They say as income
decreases people st",' L!" t cutting out recreation, travel and cloths. We don't have
recreation in our budget, we don't have travel, as you can see we do have cloths,
because I'm not nude. But I am nude in some ways -- I'm baring my soul to this
panel. I'm a proud person. I was on AFDC for eight months. I looked for work,
I set a goal and I tried very hard to get work. I had promised myself I would
never, never be on AFDC again. I cannot express the experience of going through
that system. So we aren't system dependent, but we don't have the medical care,
we don't have the dental care that we need. My son goes to school without much
money. The school district that he is in as a high school student don't have
resources for lunch assistance. His paternal grandparents live here. When they
found out they got assistance at school for lunch, they were enraged. They were
embarrassed because she was a former employee there and she was afraid of what
people thought. She thinks it's fine her son doesn't pay child support. In
1981, I was in the system and in contact with the former director at DES for
child support enforcement. He wrote a letter and told me " Let's wait and see
what the court in New York does." Well, as you can see, it's many years later.
I still do not have any help, and my children and I cannot wait any longer. I am
at the point where I am considering relinquishing custody of my children though I
never thought I would. But yet I always had this thought that as long as I can
provide food, I will have these children. We will live in a one room shack, but
I will have these children. As far as my recommendation, we have good programs
that have no accountability in them. People are overworked, the case load is too
high, the County Attorney's effort finally ended with a order of dismissal issued
by a foreign court. The reason the judge gave was the foreign, that being the
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, did not respond to New York and that court's
request for information. I think to top this off, you have to understand, this
dismissal had appeal rights. It was dated April 16, 1984. It was date stamped
and received here in Maricopa County, May 8th. It advised that I had 30 days to
appeal the decision of that court. This document I received December, the next
December. So, my perspective is you have a system, I think the laws are there - I
do not think the Federal Authorities who administer child support enforcement
are aware of, though we all are, the problems within the system in Arizona and
the damning report they issued. My experience has left me with a perspective
that this world is a little bit cruel, and when you look at the laws, the laws
are good, the intentions are good, but when you look at the application, it is
severely deficient. II
" I'm a high school student, a representative of someone who lives below the
poverty level, and really thinks that it's pretty sick that the amount of money
you have to live on has to affect the outlook you have on life, and I know this
is true, I see this first hand. And I think one of the reasons for this is
because the system that is providing you with your funds won't let you get ahead.
They just will not let you get ahead. You get an $ 11 increase in from someone,
you get a $ 13 decrease from someone else. I personally look at it like a ladder,
if you're trying to climb the ladder to get out of the hole you start to get to
the top and they add more rungs. I would like to be able to get out of that hole
and lead my own life, I really would. For some reason the people who are suppose
to be helping you in some of these agencies half the time act like they don't
know what you're talking about and you're just bothering them. Now, that might
seem a little harsh, but that's true. I see it happen, I don't like coming home
from school one day and seeing my mom sitting there crying, because someone was
real ••. well, you know. That upsets me, that makes me want to go down there and
tell them a few things, and I know better than to do that. One of the things
that bothers me the most about these people is that they feel like you don't
deserve any better than what you got, and we all know that's not true. I feel
like we deserve better that what we get. I feel that America throws away a lot
of money on a lot of different things. Some experiment somewhere, some far away
country, you know that's good, I think we need to learn a lot of these things,
but if America would just open its' eyes and look and see that we've got people
right here at home that can't eat. I realize this because I live this everyday,
and just becuase I might not look like someone who lives below the poverty level
shouldn't mean anything. I'm in band in school, we go on a lot of trips, the
band fund isn't always full of money, we have to take $ 5.00 to eat, I don't
always have that $ 5.00, but I've got to go, it effects my grades, what can I do.
And that's about all I'd better say."
" I'm his mom, and I'm forty- eight years old and I'm disabled and I suppose
the hardest part about that is I don't look disabled. I was being treated at the
Mayo Clinic and if I worked I'd just keep getting worse and worse. I have a
muscle disease, and if I rest a lot I get along pretty good. So, I was married
for twenty years and then I got divorced, I was married to an alcholic and I felt
that if I got divorced, I didn't know how I'd live, but I couldn't stand it
anymore, so I finally got divorced. So I live on, I filed for disability and it
took a year and a half to get disablility, because you have to fight so hard, you
have to get hearings and it takes forever to get a hearing. and then when you win
your disability it takes forever to get your check. And in the meantime you just
keep asking, you know, your house payment if they'll wait, and your APS bill and
everything, and they were very nice that they waited, but then when my money
came it all went to them. I have a court order for my ex- husband to pay child
support, but I've asked three lawyers to help me get this and they said it's too
hard if they are out of state. I've tried and tried to do that. Everytime you
try to get something you usually have to have a hearing to do it, and you have to
hire a lawyer, like I had to have a hearing because they gave me AFDC and then
they cut it off. The court system has really hurt me because I have been waiting
for two years to get a court order to be able to sell my house, and I finally
went to the presiding judge myself and asked him if he wouldn't please set this
hearing, and he did, but in two years the lawyers didn't set it, they'd just say
we'll call you when we hear, but in the meantime I'm paying this high house
payment. So, now I finally did get the hearing, I sold my house, but the money
is sitting in the clerk of courts office and I can't have it until the judge
issues an order for it be released and this was in August."
" There is no one among us who does not understand
that the overwhelming cause of female poverty is
the second class status that women occupy."
Recently there have been alarming reports on the economic status of the
American family. Bureau of the Census data indicate that the gap between
rich and poor is widening, with the rich increasing their level of affluence
while the poor sink even deeper into abject poverty. The ominous outcome is
that the backbone of American society, the middle- income family, is slipping
from the country's mainstream, losing ground in its struggle to realize the
American dream.
Today there are more than 33 million Americans " officially" considered
poor. Their poverty status is based on their $ 10,989 or less annual income,
the current national level of poverty for an urban family of four. However
such statistical measurements, by their very nature, tend to be rigid.
Families in the $ 5,000 annual income bracket are considered in the same
category as those at the highest " official" poverty level; while those with
only $ 1.00 above the poverty threshold are left out of the counting. It is,
therefore, reasonable to assume that the number of impoverished Americans far
exceeds the present estimate.
The vast majority of America's poor are women and their children. Two
out of three poor adults are women. Nearly one out of every four preschool
children lives in poverty. More than half of the country's poor children
live in female- headed households. The economic status of families headed by
women is in a perilous decline.
State Advisory Panel
The reality of women in poverty has prompted state efforts to appraise
the conditions of poverty in Arizona. On April 18,1986 Governor Bruce
Babbitt appointed an Advisory Panel to the Governor's Office of Women's
Services to study the issue of Women in Poverty. The Panel's charge was two
fold: to develop thorough knowledge about the state of poverty among women
in Arizona; and to formulate recommendations for an action plan that will
alleviate the poor economic status of Arizona's women.
Twenty- two members representing wide expertise and interests formed the
Advisory Panel. A total of six Public Hearings were conducted in sites
corresponding to the state's county organizations of government and the
delivery areas of the Arizona Department of Economic Security. Specifically,
hearings were held in Yuma ( May 22nd), Flagstaff, ( June 11th), Nogales
( September 17th), Tucson ( September 30th), Globe/ Miami ( October 15th) and
Phoenix ( October 28th). Local agencies and volunteer groups assisted with
arrangements for each of the hearings. The Governor's Office of Women's
Services coordinated the efforts.
Testimonies were heard from agency personnel, interest groups,
representative of government and the general public including social agency
clients. A number of written testimonies and other data were also submitted.
More than 45 hours of public hearings were conducted. Members of the
Advisory Panel also received background material and other pertinent
literature. In addition, the Panel held several sessions analyzing and
organizing the collected information.
Arizona's Changing Profile
The emerged profile of the state's poverty conditions indicates that
Arizona's women and children have not escaped the fate of their counterparts
in the rest of the country. Despite the State's spectacular growth and
economic vitality, families headed by women are, by and large, experiencing
the stress of economic insecurity and social inequality.
National social changes have affected the make- up of the state's labor
force and the structure of Arizona's families. According to the Bureau of
the Census* the State's population has increased by 53 percent during the
1970- 1980 decade, and by 20 percent in the last five years. In 1980, 50.8
percent of Arizona's population were female. Almost half ( 47.8%) of Arizona
women 16 years of age and older entered the labor market. While this rate is
slightly lower than the national average, it nevertheless represents more
than a 15% increase since 1960. During the same period, male participation
in the labor market experienced a slow ( 3.4%) but steady decline.
As Arizona's economy changes from agriculture and mining to service and
high tech industries, with a resulting population shift to urban settings 1 it
is safe to expect that women's involvement in the world of work will have a
tremendous role within the state's labor force growth. Yet the ratio of
female to male median income has not paralleled the changes in the labor
market. In 1980, the median income of Arizona's women workers was still less
than half that of their male counterparts. It seems as if the State's
prosperity depends heavily on women's economic sacrifice.
* For all statistical data see Appendix A
Equally forceful has been the impact of recent federal budgetary
measures on women1s economic vulnerability. Despite some adjustments in
1984, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act ( OBRA) of 1981 severely restricted
eligibility requirements for, and benefits of public assistance
programs designed to serve the needs of indigent women and their children.
These include provisions for training and work- related incentives. Accompanied
by other cut- backs in social services and financial supports to
low- income populations such as health care provisions and low cost housing,
administrative strategies erect formidable barriers to women1s economic
self- sufficiency.
The federal policy of privatizing the provision of social benefits has
amounted to a virtual loadshedding of social responsibilities upon voluntary
initiative. In order to replace the funding removed by public cuts, the
demand for voluntary giving represents an increase of 30% to 40% per year; a
rate of growth three times more rapid than that volunteered by the private
sector over the previous several decades. 2 There is neither national nor
state evidence that such expectations have been realized.
The resulting poverty profile for the state is frightening. According
to the last census, 296,301 were living below poverty in 1980. Another
249,426 were above the poverty line but marginal. The numbers are rising
because of sharp increases in the cost of living, persisting unemployment,
low- paying jobs and restrictions in eligibility for public benefits. In 1985
there were more poor in Arizona than in 1980.
In the state as elsewhere the burden of poverty falls heavily upon
minorities and female- headed families. The 1985 analysis of the last census
data by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities3 gives the following
profile of poor in Arizona. Among married couple families -- 6.1% of White,
12.2% of Black and 17% of Hispanic -- are poor, indicating a ratio of 1 in
16, 1 in 8 and 1 in 6 respectively. For female- headed families with children
the poverty rate is 50.5% for Whites, 66.9% for Blacks and 72.4% for
Hispanics; a rate that has become dangerous for the poor themselves and the
rest of the community. *
These data present a tremendous liability for the states. For the great
majority of them the onus is to counteract long term socio- economic discriminations
and renewed political attacks that have condemned women into an
existence of unilaterial dependence. The State of Arizona is no exception.
Needed Reform
Poverty hurts. It means the loss of one's job and the stigma of
failure; the fear of hunger and homelessness; life without hope and children
with no future. Poverty also costs. It is the lack of money to buy goods,
the foreclosing of shops, neglected health and resulting medical bills,
run- down neighborhoods and dilapidated houses, dropping- out of school and
long- term unemployment.
Widespread poverty in the midst of affluence is a social malignancy.
Arresting its devastating course is a sign of responsible stateslnanship
Based on the collected testimony, the study of the history of welfare reform,
and the experiences of other states, the Advisory Panel recommends a number
of measures which in toto, represent a courageous and resolute affront to
institutional poverty among Arizona's women.
The proposal is for a Family Security System, a comprehensive and
aggressive approach that will engage all sectors of Arizona's community in
enhancing women's socioeconomic relevance and ensuring their full social
participation thus bringing closer an integrated society.
* Statistics not available for Native American female- headed families.
The Panel believes that the Office of the Governor has a leadership role
in prompting the Family Security System. The Panel recommends that the
Governor's Office of Women Service's be strengthened by a broadly based
Advisory Board which will facilitate and promote the State's efforts on
behalf of Arizona's families.
" My story though unique in many ways is just one of many unique
stories you might hear in the streets. Due to a separation which
happened approximately three years ago, I found myself alone, homeless,
and without finances. Having led a normal life up to that point which
included husband, son, job, home, and three cars, I was unknowledgeable
of surviving in the streets. Surviving is something one learns and
it's usually by pain. It does not just happen. I was not aware of
shelters or where to go to receive food. I began asking for food from
churches in small towns. Simple things I had taken for granted like
brushing my long hair in the winter became impossible because I could
not feel my fingers to hold a brush. Due to the lack of nutrition, my
hair fell out by the handsful. People laughed at me because of the way
my clothing hung on me after losing a great deal of weight. Frostbite
nearly claimed several of my toes. Sometimes I would fall because I
could not feel my feet beneath me. The extreme cold caused my blood
pressure to rise to near- attack level. There were a number of times I
went many days without food. There were several near- death experiences
I encountered in the desert area of the country that first year. It
was only my faith in the God I loved and believed in which kept me
going. Eventually I learned of missions in larger cities. Their help
was only on a temporary basis. I found that because most transients
were men, women had fewer lodging opportunities available to them. Job
opportunities were even poorer. God however, is awakening the American
public and enlightening them to the needs of the hungry, the homeless,
and the less fortunate. Soup kitchens are opening up. New missions
are being instituted. Transitional housing is being formulated.
Meaningful things such as dignity and self worth are being restored to
the homeless and transitional by compassionate, caring people. We
cannot put a price on human dignity or worth. It is unconsciousable.
Each person, man or women should not be denied an opportunity to
acknowledge his or her own inner worth in their span of economic
endeavors. "
" All children whether born in or out of a marital
relationship, in a first or second marriage, with
a father in the home or not should be treated
equally. "
The image we all cherish about Arizona is that our state has experienced
tremendous growth without abandoning basic values of human decency and social
concern. Ours is not the fast pace of the East, nor the dense industrialization
of the Mldwest. Ours is the land of open spaces and sunshine, of hospi-tality
and economic progress. Yet testimony after testimony challenged the
illusion that the state has remained unchanged by the whirlwind of social
Three factors have been identified as influencing the conditions of
poverty experienced by women: changing family structures, labor market, and
social supports. While cause and effect relationships are indistinguishable,
as each factor stems from and shapes the other, the discussion addresses each
area separately. By identifying the problems in each area objectives for
corrective action become clearer.
Changing Family Structures
By far the most significant revolution of our times is found in the
changing texture of the American family. Differences in mortality rates
between men and women, and changes in marriage behavior have resulted in a
staggering number of female headed households.*
* The Bureau of the Census distinguished three types of households:
famil* household: two or more related persons living together; non- family
house old: two or more unrelated persons of the same or opposite sex living
together; single household: one adult living alone. Unless otherwise
indicated the use of the term includes all three kinds of households.
What is even more dramatic is the increase that occurred between 1960
and 1984 in the percentage of all the poor who live in households headed by a
woman. In 1960 some 27 percent of all the poor lived in households headed by
a woman. By 1984 more than 49 percent of all the poor lived in female- headed
households. Thus, the number of poor households headed by women nearly
doubled despite the fact that women head only 16 percent of all households
and 21 percent of all families with children.
Arizona's data are equally disturbing.
Older women. Women in all ages are twice as likely as men to be poor.
In 1984, 71 percent of the nation's elderly poor were women. Elderly women
are disproportionately represented in Arizona's poor population as well.
There are now more than 23 million American women in their middle- life
years, that is 45- 64 years old. 4 Women over 45 head 14 million households,
that is almost half of all female- headed households in the country. About
40% of the latter have a member over 65 years of age. There are some 27
million American women that are 65 years or older. A great number of them
live alone. Their percentage gets higher as their age increases. It is
estimated that 81% of all persons 75 years and over who live alone, some 3.9
million are women.
Due to greater migration of retired people to Arizona, the percentage of
older women in the state's population exceeds the national average. Many of
these women, as their counterparts in the nation, are facing the threat of
Poverty among elderly is closely associated to their sole reliance on
social security. A person whose only income is social security is seven
times more likely to be poor. 5 For elderly women the likelihood of poverty
is even higher as their social security benefits are usually lower than those
of men. In 1985 retired women received $ 300.00 monthly social security grant
to $ 521.00 of their male counterparts. These women are less likely than men
to supplementtheir social security grant with private pensions. Pragmatically,
low income during one's " working years" always translates to lower
income in retirement.
These women do not have easy access to earnings. Their age presents an
enormous barrier to employment and their lack of skills can secure them only
minimal pay. Yet there is no public income provision for women of " mid- life"
age who have no dependent children and suffer no serious physical disability.
Displaced from their homemaker's role as many are because of divorce, death
or illness of their " breadwinner", these women face an unfamiliar labor
market. Labor participation for the 50- 54 age group was 61% in 1986, up from
42% in 1955. For women 55- 59 years of age, the increase is from 36% in 1955
to the present 51%. This comes at a time when male labor participation for
the 45 and over age group is markedly decreased.
Added to the lack of income is the problem of health care. In our
country, access to health insurance is usually dependent both on marital and
employment status. Many of the jobs elderly women can secure provide no
health benefits. An approximate 40% of all divorced women, and 27% of widows
have no health insurance coverage. Medicare covers only 44% of the health
care expenses of married people and 33% of those who are single. For those
elderly qualified for medicare, out- of- pocket payments average $ 1700 a year,
an amount that represents over 25% of the median income of women living
Disrupted Marriages. Contributing to the growing number of female
headed households, is an increase in divorce and separation. Between 1960
and 1982 the number of divorced persons per 1,000 active marriages has
increased from 35 to 114. 6 The 19705 saw the most rapid rate of divorce.
The early 19705 were the first years in American history when more marriages
ended in divorce than in death. 7
There is evidence that the divorce rate is slowing down. There is hope
that it may be stabilized as people are entering marriage at a later age,
with the most recent data suggesting the mid- twenties ( 23.3 for women, 25.5
for men) for first marriages. Nevertheless divorce and separation are still
dominant causes for single- headed families with half of all marriages in the
United States still expected to end in divorce. 8 One significant change is
that 25 percent of a11 di vorces are now in " long- term marri ages", that is
marriages that have lasted for more than 15 years. Although these data
suggest that new marriages might become more stable as people enter them with
greater emotional and economic preparation, they also alert to the serious
problems facing older single women and the needed focus for policy and
The number of divorced women is much higher than that of men, as
remarriage seems more difficult for women due to differences in male- female
ratio and the responsibility of caring for children 80% of whom remain with
the mothers. The remarriage rate for women age 25 to 44 declined 30 percent
between 1970 and 1980.
Arizona's women do not fare any better. Between 1970 and 1980 the number
of the state's divorced/ separated women 15 years and older increased from 6.8
percent to 10.6 percent. The highest increase has occurred among Hispanic
women, a change from 6.3% in 1970, to 10.6% in 1980. Slightly lower is the
rate for White women: 6.6% in 1970 to 10.4% in 1980. Although the rate of
increase is the lowest among Black women { 15.1% in 1970 to 17.4% in 1980) 9
these women still suffer the greatest degree of marriage disruption.
For many of these women poverty begins when marriage ends. It has been
estimated that women experience an initial 29 percent loss of income
immediately after divorce. One year after divorce their income drops 73% of
what they enjoyed during marriage. 10
For the divorced husband, on the other hand there is a steady income
improvement after the initial setback of the first divorce year. Child
support and alimony laws allow absent fathers to meet normal household
expenses before seeing what is left for child support. In essence this
implies that support decisions are calculated on the lowest possible base of
a father's income rather than on what a child's living standard would have
been if shared household arrangements with the father. Arizona's policies
are no exception. No one who testified during this Panel's deliberations
suggested that a mother and her children were accorded similar consideration
in the divorce settlement as to the standard of living recognized as rightful
for the father.
Teenage Mothers. Contributing to the increase of female headed families
is the rise in teenage pregnancies and births to unwed adolescents. During
1969- 1984 there has been a 75% increase in birth rates among single parents.
In 1985 alone, 59% of teenage mothers were single. One in four of these
mothers gave birth to a second child. More than half of all babies were born
to unwed mothers who began child- bearing in their teens.
Equally alarming is the situation in Arizona. A recent ( 1985) report by
the Arizona Department of Health Services indicates that each day, 32 Arizona
teenaged girls become pregnant. Of them, 22 will give birth and the
remaining 10 will have an abortion. In 1985 alone, there were 8,023 births
to adoelscent mothers. The rate of increase is higher among those less than
15 years old.
While the number of births to teenagers in the state seems to have
stabilized since the late 1970s, it is projected that by 1990, three out of
ten births in Arizona will be to unmarried mothers. More than half of them
will be to teenagers.
If poverty was not present in the lives of these adolescents, it will
certainly become their constant companion when they enter single parenthood.
Family Maintenance
The financial dilemmas of female- headed families stem from many factors.
Primary among them is the inadequacy of the father's contribution to the
maintenance of the children.
Child Support. More than half of mothers raising children on their own
do so without regular financial assistance from the fathers. A recent study
from the Census Bureau indicated that in 1983, of the nearly 8.7 million
single mothers, 53 percent received no child support. About 3.7 million of
them had not been awarded any such help.
Courts have not been eager to enforce paternal liability for the
maintenance of children. For instance 82% of non- married mothers failed to
obtain a court order for child support. Fifty- nine percent ( 59%) of
separated mothers were not awarded such support. Among those divorced but
not remarried, 23.7% were denied an award, while the denials increase to
24.2% for those women divorced and remarried. Whatever this suggests about
institutional biases, the percentage of award denials is 33.1% for White
women and 66.3% for Black. 11
Awarded child support is not a guarantee for receiving it. For instance
about 24% of the 4 million mothers scheduled to receive such support were not
able to collect it. In more than 50% of these cases ( 51.5%) the father
refused to pay, while in another 20.7% the father could not be located.
Enforcing child support has been a futile struggle. There are some
realistic reasons. Many fathers are young, out of work, themselves
financially limited. Some have new families with additional economic
responsibilities. Yet by far the most serious reason is laxity of efforts on
behalf of authorities to pursue absent middle- class fathers, and institutional
hesitation to intrude in the affairs of employers and organizations.
Some of the problems presented during the Panel's public hearings, for
instance, referred to a father's job mobility, the nature of his employment
and the mere logistics of establishing contacts.
Arizona's record of collecting child support has been extremely poor.
In 1983, for instance, the state collected payments of 5.9% of its AFDC child
support enforcement caseload. 12 Wisconsin, in contrast, collected over 20%
of theirs. In 1984 Congress amended earlier legislation on Title IV. D of the
Social Security Act ( Child Support Enforcement Awards) requiring all states
to enact a number of specific remedies and procedures to improve enforcement
programs as a condition of continued receipt of the full federal share of the
state's costs for AFDC programs. In addition the law provides incentives of
cost- sharing in establishing paternity, locating noncustodial parents and
collecting support. Arizona has already passed appropriate legislation.
However the Panel found little evidence that these new laws are enforced with
any more diligence than earlier ones.
Even when received, child support is not always adequate to meet a
child's living expenses. Nationally in 1983, the average child support
received was $ 2,340.00 a year, practically the same as in 1981, despite steep
increases in the cost of living. Nevertheless, that refers to full court
awarded support. It is more appropri ate to think of a lower lIaverage II amount
as most women receive only partial support.
Income Transfers. In Arizona, as in all other states there are primarily
two kinds of income transfer programs. Social insurance is a work
related form of compensation that is received on the basis of one's work
record and is not dependent on one's state of need. Old Age Survivors and
Disability Insurance ( OASDI) is the commonly known social security program.
A woman can qualify for it either on the basis of her own work record, her
age or disability status; or as the widow of a qualified person if she is
left with dependent children or if she is of retirement age. Unemployment
insurance is a temporary income transfer, based upon the beneficiary's work
record and her involuntary unemployment.
The other type of income maintenance provision is Public Assistance
commonly called IIwe lfare ll
• Public Assistance benefits are dispensed on the
basis of financial need. For women with minor children the main program is
Aid to Families with Dependent Children ( AFDC). This is the only one of the
original categorical programs that is still partly financed and administered
by the state. The three adult categories were universalized in 1974 in a
single program: Supplementary Security Income ( SS!) 13.
AFDC has been a very controversial program. Being financed by state as
well as federal monies the program has no uniform benefits. Benefit levels
are established by the state on broad federal guidelines, and thus vary
depending on the resources of a state and its social philosophy. Arizona has
been very restrictive in its provisions allowing only a portion of the
assessed need. For instance the national average maximum monthly benefit for
a family of four in 1983 was $ 368 while in Arizona it was $ 282. The latter
figure represents 47.2% of the 1983 standard total determined by the state
authorities to be necessary.
As a result, Arizona has a very low post- transfer poverty rate; that is,
the number of people who are still below the poverty line after receiving
benefits is significant. In 1979, the state was found to have higher post
transfer rates than the nation as a whole. Transfers such as Social Security
or AFDC reduced poverty nationwide by 31 percent, whereas in Arizona they
reduced it by 27 percent.
While some of this difference in poverty reduction rates might be due to
higher pretransfer rates of poverty in Arizona, the low benefit levels of the
state1s cash transfer system are the primary factors. For instance, the
state1s pre- transfer poverty rate among the aged and female- headed households
are quite similar, 43.7% and 42.3%, respectively. However the post- transfer
poverty incidence among the elderly falls to 14.6%. Their transfers are
primarily Social Security benefits. Poor families with small children,
dependent as they are on AFDC benefits, still have 38.5% incidence of poverty
after the transfers. Actually the majority of Arizona's poor live on wages.
Only 20% of families and 33% of families headed by females with no husband
present receive public assistance. 14
Poor families with children are less likely to receive a cash transfer
in Arizona than the national average. The state remains among the last in
the nation resisting the provision of AFDC to families where the father is
present but unemployed. Repeated efforts to introduce legislation have so
far remained unsuccessful.
Social Neglect
Such persistent neglect of poor families might underlie social attitudes
toward this population. What for instance seems to influence most of the
controversy surrounding AFDC is that the program1s population has increased
in a very rapid rate, far exceeding the rate of Social Security recipients.
While changes in eligibility criteria might be partially responsible for
the increase -- particularly in the 1960s where entitlements to assistance
were seen as rights -- social characteristics of the recipients are markedly
different from those of the early days of the program. There seem to be more
divorced, separated and unmarried mothers than widows, and increasingly more
minority women in the welfare rolls. Whatever the social, economic and
welfare policy factors for these changes, AFDC today " tends to serve a higher
proportion of disadvantaged and disesteemed persons." 15 It is valid that
changes in the welfare characteristics have coincided with changes in
attitudes toward working mothers. AFDC, when established in 1935 ( then being
ADC) was based on the ethic that mothers of dependent children should not
enter the labor force. Nevertheless there is a pattern in the evolution of
benefits and requirements of the program that suggests a growing public
ambivalence about the " deserving" status of AFDC beneficiaries. There has
been a definite movement from the 1962 effort to encourage mothers to work
through a voluntary Work Incentive Program ( WIN); to the 1967 intent to
restore more families to employment through a mandatory referral for
training; to the present determination to establish a " wor kfare" ethic.
" Single parents, almost without exception, just
want the chance to rise above poverty and will
do so if given a decent wage and necessary support
to a11 ow it to happen."
Women's participation in the labor market is not a new phenomenon. From
the family farm to the Ma and Pa shop to cottage industries, women worked
alongside their men. Immigrant women filled the textile plants, sweat shops
and service occupations. What is new is the increase in the significance of
employment in women1s lives. From a supportive role, jobs have become central
agents to women's survival.
Demographics of Work
o Women now make up two- thirds of new entrants in the labor force.
o Women make up 52% of the national labor force.
o One- half of women with children under six years of age are in the
labor force.
o More than half of women with children under 18 years of age are in
the labor force.
o Women are still concentrated in low paying, dead- end jobs.
o Women working full time, year round, still earn only 59.5% for
every dollar men earn.
o The median income for a woman with a four year college education is
equal to the median income of a male with an 8th grade education.
o Out of 420 job categories listed by the U. S. Department of Labor,
women are significantly represented in 20 of them.
o Workforce benefits, by and large, still focus on the needs of male
workers. Benefits particular to women workers like child care and
maternity leave are still not recognized widely.
o Only one in five women receive any kind of pension to supplement
social security. Those who do, receive only a portion of what men
o As women enter traditionally " higher paying" jobs in large numbers,
the financial rewards decrease. For every 1% increase in the
number of women in the workforce, median salaries decrease by $ 400.
o Mean earnings of year- round, full- time women workers are lower than
men even when race is considered.
Income Ineguity
Paid employment represents a substantial source of income to women and
their families. However working women suffer serious inequities in employment.
Their wages are lower than that of men, their range of opportunities
is limited. Their work has been accorded very low status. See, for instance
the frustration of an employment service worker:
" Many of the positions that are called in range from
$ 3.35 to $ 4.00 per hour and we are finding that few
employers are willing to train. We are finding that more
employers, not only the small companies, but the major
companies are hiring at a part- time status without
benefits to applicants who must be available to work
various days, hours and weekends and this is sometimes a
hinderance to women in poverty because to be able to
support themselves and their children, it's sometime
impossible to do that on $ 3.35 an hour and especially if
you have no benefits."
There has been ongoing debate as to the reasons for women's segregation
in low paying occupations. One side of the argument assumes that women have
worked as secondary earners, playing only a supportive role in the family's
income. The concept of " family wage" suggests that the male worker has the
primary responsibility for the family's survival. Consequently, jobs held by
men were assigned higher renumeration. Within this framework, women entered
the labor market as secondary laborers with no aspirations for higher wages.
The system " offered economic security if not the dignity of economic
independence. 11
However the concept of " family wage ll was not upheld when women became
heads of households -- and there always have been such instances -- nor was
reconsidered in cases when men had no families. Changes in family structure
occurred without equalizing changes in the labor market.
On the other hand, the concept of a dual labor market bases compensation
on the value of labor, with primary labor considered more important to the
economy and, thus, assigned higher pay, better working conditions, promotion
ladders, job security, fringe benefits and other attractions. By contrast,
secondary labor, seen as dispensable in the economy is given low pay, poor
work conditions, few fringe benefits and little job security. Women,
concentrating in secondary labor jobs, suffer a greater share of the
Nevertheless, wage inequities between men and women are not evident only
in the nature of jobs held. Even when women and men are in same occupations,
there is salary differential. It is as if women's massive entry into the
labor force afforded the market additional classifications in the value of
labor. A sort of " internal labor market." l? By providing a larger pool of
workers in each of the labor tiers, women made it possible for employers to
cut down on their costs, as they can now compensate some of their employees
less than others though both groups have similar qualifications.
None of the above, however, justifies why jobs of any sort are paid such
low wages that their occupants cannot make a living. Yet this is the very
reason why the majority of the subjects of this Panel IS inquiry are poor.
Employability Development
In recent years, the trend in employment and training programs has moved
away from considerations of structural unemployment, targeting on those
populations that suffer serious employability disadvantages in the labor
market. This investment in training programs may also represent a conversion
to a more austere principle, a public message that Iione's upkeep" is one's
own liability. The tremendous growth in the size of population dependent on
welfare has certainly precipitated aproliferation of training programs.
Whether original governmental concern was solely with saving public
expenditures or restoring human dignity to those dependent on public support,
workpower policy of the last two decades has focused on those needing help in
order to participate effectively in the world of work.
" I was sent to the WIN office because my youngest had
turned three, and they told me that I had to quit school
and go through a short term training program. At that
point, they discovered that I had some minimum bookkeeping
skills. With some type of government subsidized
program, they could get me $ 5.00 an hour working. The
director told me I had to quit school and go to work. At
that point, it would have put me back on food stamps, it
would have ended up costing the state over $ 200 a month
more than what it would letting me continue school. I
was an engineering major and I was still maintaining a
GPA that allowed me my scholarships. If I quit school or
went part time, which they suggested, I could not continue
to do that. So they said that they were going to
sanction me. The sanction that they imposed was $ 60.00 a
month. To most people that probably sounds like a very
minimal amount, but to me it meant survival. I was able
through the grace of God, to get an additional scholarship
which helped to compensate part of it, but not all
of it. I was fortunate. I had a GPA that warranted
that, and the help of friends. If I had not been, and
there are many women out there that are told you cannot
go to school any more, you have to quit, you cannot
pursue an education, even though it would save the state
money. You have to quit and you have to be a part of the
job market. If I had gotten an entry level position, the
first time I had run up against a major catastrophe
because all medical insurance would be cut off, if one of
my children got sick I would have been right back in the
welfare system again."
Populations in Need. Conceptualized as human resources developing
programs, employment and training services were charged with the responsi~
bility of securing for their enrollees economic self- sufficiency, while
opening for them opportunities to productive and satisfying lives. 18 There
are no minor tasks considering the populations these programs serve and the
enormous social and economic barriers confronting them.
The centrality of the institution of work in our lives alerts us to the
need for the development not only of one's purchasing power but one's living
skills as well. Effective services in this context must address the special
needs and circumstances in the various clientele groups. The focus of this
Panel's inquiry are women who have serious employment handicaps because of
lack of skills, limited exposure to work, little or no education, physical
disabilities, responsibilities for carrying for a child or a dependent adult,
social isolation, language barriers, lack of support systems and at best a
marginal or poverty level economic existence.
Despite such handicaps, the majority of these women could benefit from
training services, given sufficient time for training, supportive social
mechanisms, and a favorable job market. 19 However existing training programs
have by and large failed to address the client's needs. Administrative and
budgetary restrictions in the design of the programs have placed almost
exclusive emphasis on placement with no consideration to preparation for
work, stability of the job, level of benefits, or the individual's personal
circumstances. Testimony left no doubt that practices of past programs still
continue in different arrangements. Employers' preference for male workers,
creaming- off of prospective trainees, the discouragement of failure by
forcing job search and make- work jobs before considering training needs, the
frustration of what appear as irrational eligibility standards.
Throughout years of struggle and continuous modifications in enrollee
and employer incentives and organizational structures from MOTA, to CETA, to
J. T. P. A. 20 training services have been criticized for their failure to stop
the drain on the public budget caused by the economic dependency of those
hard- to- employ. At the same time, actual and prospective clients are
pressing for their right to employability and self- sufficiency.
" I'm a welfare recipient. I am a mother that's 20 and I
have two children. I am really new to the program itself
... this is something that's going to help me for now,
because I figure this way I'm not going to let my
children grow up under the welfare program. I'ts
something to help for now ... since I did not graduate
from high school ... I can't find a day care that's
proper for them, even though the program helps assist
with day care, with education and so on .•• The area I
live in is a poverty area. I'ts someplace for me to
stay, but it's not a place to raise kids. It's not even
a place for me to raise myself. lim still growing up.
The welfare program is a good program, the Access program
is a good program. I'm not knocking anything that's
helping me and my kids. I'd like for them ( kids) to
start more things that get involved with the people more.
They need to get involved with them ... but what we get
from welfare, we're just able to make it, just barely
make it ... For now, everyone thinks of the welfare
system that people are staying on it because they don't
want to do anything. There are a lot of people who want
to help themselves. They just don't know where to find
it any more. I'm just pushing public awareness."
Training as Social Policy
It is well understood that the state of the labor force is by far the
most important factor to employment. It is also reasonable to assume that
all efforts to train employment- disadvantaged populations can be of no
practical use unless there are available jobs for them to fill. Futhermore,
a cost- beneficial program should secure jobs that provide a substantially
better living than public relief, while the costs do not exceed the benefits
it offers.
In addition, programs designed specifically for welfare mothers are
charged with the thrust to contribute to this country's economic growth
through saving public funds via reduction of welfare loads; and through
increasing public revenues via the productivity of hitherto unutilized human
Whether the above targets are containable within the design of public
training programs is seriously questionable. Statistically it seems
impossible for mothers to work their way off welfare given the prevailing
wages paid women, particularly those with little training. Incentives
provided to encourage them to pursue employment make it advantageous for them
to be both on training and on welfare. The fear of losing medical and child
care benefits makes many of those women conflicted: on one hand, the wish to
be accepted and offered a job; on the other the rejection and the recycling
of job- search and " interviewing" routines.
While understandable as a personal dilemma, the situation is an
indictment of the nation's incentive policy. Any social policy, in addition
to the direct effects it has on those for whom it was specifically designed,
is bound to influence the behavior of a larger population that shares similar
circumstances. The question is one of inequity, a penalty for poor people
for not applying for welfare. These people perhaps have not applied because
public provisions for support, through their eligibility requirements in
effect mandate the disruption of the family. Welfare offered them no
acceptable option to escape poverty. More vulnerable family structures might
succumb. They too might not escape poverty although they accepted welfare.
In any case the present incentive policy then might also be a challenge
for those not on welfare earning less than the total income the work
incentive program would allow. Furthermore, incentives for employers to
accept welfare recipients under On- the- Job- Training arrangements without
commitment for eventual provision of legitimate employment; or to provide
dead- end jobs that have no fringe benefits such as those of welfare
incentives, jobs that offer only minimum " non- living" wages, result in de
facto subsidized wages.
The issue of incentives, like any other policy, needs to be assessed
within the context of goals and objectives. If the purpose of training is to
assist socially disenfranchized women to reach economic self- sufficiency and
become fully contributing members of our commmunity, then human resources
development programs must anticipate in their provisions the accelerated
social expectations that " adjustment" to the world of work demands. Citizenship,
Lawrence Mead21 tells us, is a series of rights and responsibilities.
The very status of membership in society establishes one's benefits and
contributions. A policy of preparing women for work must not only instill in
these women aspirations for future compensations, but also influence appropriate
responses from others -- social institutions, the corporate world - that
will insure the realization of those aspirations. To do anything less
is to perpetuate the " inequality of sacrifice" experienced by women.
Changes in the Workplace. Women's presence in the labor force is not an
illusion. Whether as primary wage- earners or as partners in household
maintenance, women workers will continue swelling the labor market. They
already represent more than half the country's labor force. This reality
points to the need for changes in the structure of the workplace to support
and strengthen today's American family.
Innovations in the organization and management of the workplace demonstrate
an increasing awareness that employees' work and family lives are
interdependent. " Organizations of the future", Rosabeth Kanter wrote some
time ago, " wi 11 have to pay attention to their effects on people other than
employed persons ( spouses, children) and allow the needs of families to
influence organizational decisions and shape organizational policies.,, 22
The future in fact is now. Questions of child care, maternity and
paternity leave, counseling with personal and family problems, have been
probed for some time, many satisfactory solutions emerging as a result.
While some of the issues may have been initially addressed because of
manifested poor work performance, they were influenced in highlighting the
blurring between work and families.
Affirmative action directives and other rights related policy have
encouraged employer investment in the design of personnel practices
benefiting both the worker and the organization. Flexible work schedules,
career development opportunities, time- sharing and part- time employment
options now accommodate dual career and single parent families. They also
reflect a personnel system that integrates well with integrated career
planning and human resources management.
Testimony revealed no instances where such options were available to
poor women. Theres is an either or condition; work with no individualized
considerations or dependency on a stigmatizing welfare system. In either
case poverty is their lot. Yet exit from this lot is only possible if work .,
and family are integrated. " Recognizing the relationship between the
organization, its employees, and their families is a first step." 23
Reversing the Trend
Work is a fundamental social institution, the axis along which the
worker's pattern of life is organized. Our economic security, social
identity, sense of personal accomplishment are closely related to our place
in the world of work. If a job does not pay adequately to secure a living,
if its nature demeans and endangers one's existence, if the prospects of
improvement of one's lot are missing, that job becomes an entrapment, plung-ing
its occupant further down into misery and disrespect.
Such has been the experience of the majority of women testifying before
this Panel. Research data confirms that this experience is shared by women
throughout the country. If we are to bridge the " gender gap" in employment
we need policies which tend to equalize incomes across occupations. Employment
policy, therefore, must make equalization a priority. To postpone such
policies is to accept one of the most endemic features in American poverty.
Employment training programs serve the dual role of promoting the social
as well as economic welfare of their clientele. Yet a goal as dominated by
economic forces as employment is, necessitates a multi- policy intervention of
which the individual preparation for employment is only a part. A full
employment policy, for instance, might be more effective in bringing and
maintaining work- disadvantaged persons to the market place. Under such a
policy employers will be interested in mobilizing the best abilities an
individual has thus utilizing a worker's fullest potential. When assessing,
therefore, the cost- effectiveness of specific programs addressing the needs
of those disadvantaged in the work arena, we must see any policy relating to
them as part of society's comprehensive planning.
With regards to training services per se, the thrust of human resources
development is to provide opportunities which will enable program enrollees
to overcome not only the technical handicaps directly related with employability,
but first those barriers which indirectly interfere with the
trainee's engagement in her or his employability. This is particularly
important to women who have been systematically excluded from the labor
In a social service sense of a training program, the concept of human
resources development suggests the overall concern of how to use the institution
of work to improve the quality of life, to strengthen our human potential
and to contribute to a more just society. It is this approach that the
Panel believes is more appropriate when addressing unemployment needs of the
American family.
IIAmost 25% of American children live in poverty, 50%
of every dollar, directly or indirectly, supports the
defense industry. Here in the State of Arizona we paid
$ 83 million to farmers last year not to grow crops.
We spend $ 32,000/ year to house criminals. We spend
$ 2,000/ year to educate a child. We have cut WIC. We
have cut every major program that helps to house, feed,
and educate our children who cannot speak out in their
own defense. Whether the issue is child care, pay
equity, child nutrition, or health care, I am dismayed
and concerned that we seem to care more about fulfilling
our Rambo- type fantasies than we are about the realities
of food, shelter, and education."
This category refers to programs addressing specific problems hindering
a person's self- management. There are several such services that are perti-nent
to the needs of Arizona1s women and their families. Education,
affordable housing, child care, transportation, family planning, literacy
classes, shelters for victims of abuse, nutrition, health care clinics and
social networks; all are important in alleviating particular personal difficulties
thus freeing human energy to carryon with the usual life tasks.
Such services are crucial in the survival of women plodding in the margins of
socio- economic relevance.
Identified Needs
The intent of recent national policy to redress the federal- local
balance in favor of the states has resulted in serious shortages in social
services. Necessitated by less funding and eligibility requirements, service
cuts have placed low income populations in a position of greater stress and
The collected testimony has identified crucial areas where local
resources have been unable to offset losses of governmental funding. Coupled
with the state's level of employment and financial assistanc~ social service
cuts have added to the economic vulnerability of women and their children.
Child Care. Perhaps the greatest impediment to the employment of
mothers is the lack of affordable and adequate day care for their children.
The costs of child care consume a significant part of the budget of most
working families, certainly of the low income families. It is estimated that
from about 15% to over 25% of a family's gross income is absorbed by day care
payments. Child care costs the family in other terms as well.
" Chil d care is a major issue every time we ta 1k to
somebody in our office. In my office, I am the Director,
I get one sick day a month - I have no children - my data
entry clerk makes a third as much as I do has three
children. Everytime one of those children is sick, she
has to stay home with them. It takes away from her sick
days and I had to talk to her about using her sick leave
for we earn sick leave at the same time. I have never
worked in a place where a mother with children did not
have to use her vacation time to take care of a sick
child at some point which robs them of that vacation - it
robs them of that time that they all look forward to."
In addition to the cost, quality day care is problematic. A recent
report by the Governor's Day Care Task Force drew a troublesome picture of
Arizona's day care conditions. Availability of centers, staff/ child ratios,
licensing standards, monitoring capability, physical and sanitary adequacy;
all were found seriously lacking. 24
While no state in the union has escaped the problem of day care, Arizona
has been slow in addressing it. 25 There have been, for instance, employer
initiatives in developing individual or cooperative child centers. A
consortium of companies in Connecticut have contracted with a YMCA to run a day
care center. A large industrial park runs a center for the employees of a
business renting there. Cities ( San Francisco, Sacramento to mention two)
have formed partnerships with major corporations in their areas to increase
child care facilities at local levels, providing cojoint1y financial
assistance for new centers or expansion of existing ones. There are several
governmental efforts to link new business development to funding the rising
demand for local child care. Such efforts benefit both the public purse that
would have to support mothers who cannot work, and employers who will secure
higher productivity from employees who would not need to agonize about the
care of their children.
Health Care. Equally important to the economic security of women and
their children is access to health care. Yet, such access is not always
available. A great number of low- paying jobs ( 21%) held by women provide no
health insurance, have no maternity leave or other short term disability
benefits. Being employed, many of these women are not qualified for
Similar is the situation for many widows and divorced women who lost
their health care coverage upon divorce or death of spouse. Older women,
even when eligible for Medicare are still subject to unmanageable health care
costs and undue hardships. See for instance this case of a 65 years old
" She receives Social Security in the amount of $ 369.00 a
month. She is diabetic - she has a heart condition - she
is currently hospitalized for this. She is over both our
AHCCCS and County income guidelines. Her Medicare covers
only her hospitalization at this point and this is after
the $ 492.00 deductible and this is on a salary of $ 360.00
a month to cover all of her living expenses. ( It) will
not pay for any of her medication that is needed to
maintain her health. More than likely, ( she) is not able
to afford her medication. She goes back into the
hospital - she incurs debts that we still can't use in
order to make her eligible for the AHCCCS or the County
program. II
The statistics are even grimmer for minorities. In a recent study undertaken
by the Rural Health Office of the University of Arizona, it was found that
while 87.9% of low income Anglo widows were covered by private health insurance,
only 30% of Mexican- Americans were protected. Native Americans do not
have easier access to health care despite the availability of Indian Health
Service. Testimony challenged the comprehensiveness of coverage particularly
for rural Indians living out of reservations, since Indian Medical Centers
are only a few and far apart.
Recent bUdgetary cuts have restricted AHCCCS eligibility for service
despite the recognized need to redefine and expand the category of economically
vulnerable populations. Pregnant adolescents are one example.
Teenage pregnancy posits serious challenge to health care cost containment
efforts. Medicaid pays 30% of all hospital deliveries to adolescents.
Many teenagers do not have health insurance. They become eligibile for
Public Assistance only in their third trimester. For the great majority of
these adolescents pre- natal care is almost unknown. Yet, without prenatal
care these girls have twice the normal risk of delivering a premature, low
birth weight baby. That baby is 20 times more likely to die than when the
mother is in the 20- 24 year age bracket. Teen age mothers develop 92% more
anemia and 23% have more complications than young mothers 20- 24 years old.
The average total cost of caring for a low birth weight baby in a hospital
intensive care unit is between $ 10,000 and $ 15,000.
Lack of early access to teenagers has been influenced by severe cuts to
Women, Infants and Children ( WIC) program. In the past WIC had been successful
in providing pre/ post natal care, nutrition services and overall safeguard
health prospects of pregnant mothers and newborn babies. In their
turn, these cuts have contributed to what Sylvia Hewlett estimates the
highest rate in premature babies than ever before. 26
Related services, such as family planning, sex education and family
counseling also fell victims of the budgetary ax, ironically becoming thus
contributors to higher medical expenses. As testimony asserted, the single
largest hospital inpatient service funded by Medicaid is routine newborn
Housing. Scarcity of low cost housing is a national urban problem. It
is estimated that 1986 mortgage payments take 29% of the median family
income, up from 17.9% in 1970. Gentrification of once abandoned IIdown town ll
areas has eliminated small, old structures in favor of multi- unit high- cost
housing. Arizona's urban centers do not fare any better. In the Phoenix
metropolitan area, the average available rental runs from $ 384.00 for one
bedroom to $ 564.00 for three bedroom apartments. Federal guidelines set
eligibility for subsidized housing to households earning less than 80% of
median income and pay more than 30% of this income for rent. For a
four- person household, 80% of the median income in metropolitan Phoenix is
$ 22,000. According to reports from the City's Housing Authority27 in 1986,
73,335 households would need housing. Yet only 1/ 5 ( 21%) of them are
assisted. If growth trends continue in the year 2000 Arizona will have
156,886 needy households.
Without help people live in housing that is physically inadequate,
overcrowded, or are required to pay more than 30% of income for shelter. The
average family's 30% of income is no more than $ 84.68 per month. However
according to a City of Phoenix Rental Survey the lowest rent and utilities
available in the private market is $ 151.00 a month for a studio apartment. 28
For the " working poorli
, a $ 3.35 hour wage cannot secure a decent, safe,
comfortable place to call home. The number of homeless give convincing
evidence of the housing dilemma in Arizona. As one of the people presenting
their case to this Panel said: " If I am a working woman and can't afford
housing, than I am not surprised that other Indians are living in cardboard
shacks. II
Domestic Violence. Withholding funding support from shelters for
battered women and children is an additional assault against poor families.
Testimony asserted that " poverty ranks high as the reason women return to
" abusive situations". Women who decide to leave employed husbands who abuse
them become " instantly poor." Frequently such women have no recourse II
to make claims on ••. the family income. II
Domestic violence is not a minor problem. Data indicate that 44% of all
homicide cases are related to domestic violence. The typical woman victim is
under 34 years old. She more often than not has small children. Their lives
too become battered. Victims of domestic violence need comprehensive
services to recover from the trauma of abuse, restore themselves and develop
skills and courage to start a new life. Such services are critical. Failure
to provide them threatens the very survival of these women and their
children. In the words of a woman victim of abuse, "... I have learned to
understand why some women never leave an abusive situation. It is a choice .
. . a choice of being battered or struggling on your own to support your
family. Only the strong survive, either way. II
Special Services. Several other areas of services were identified as
needed, but are sorely limited in our state. Transportation is one, critical
both to a woman's employment and her family's mobility. Dependable transportation
will alleviate much of the social isolation of the elderly, most of
whom are women. And, accommodating transportation will also connect the
disabled with the world around them.
Legal Aid is another service that was often mentioned during the
hearings as critically needed but not easily available. Legal aid was seen
by the elderly as the reassurance of managing their affairs, pursuing their
pension claims, or preparing their will. In lives so harrassed by
disruption, legal services provide the security of access to needed advice
and assistance with a divorce, home arrangements and child custody.
Testimony pointed out the need for services to minority women and the
new refugees, to alleviate cultural and communication barriers and literacy
classes providing opportunities to socialize and enjoy. Networks were seen
as services valuable to all age groups. For the ~ to help them develop
their capabilities and prevent their dropping out from school. For adults to
move out of their shell of fear and loneliness and build supports with others
who have experienced the same fate.
" The woman is the core of the family and now the woman
has to go and work for practically nothing because the
Native American, the minority woman is uneducated and all
they can do is the housework and get very little money
... We need a lot more of these unbureaucratic small
places - emergency places that people can go to when
everything else fails ... "
" I am a divorcee and the mother of three children and in
speaking to you on the topic of domestic violence although
it is very difficult to be one. .• I am one
of those one out of six families where there is domestic
violence ... I lived with that kind of violence for
fifteen years - partly because I come from an old
fashioned family if you want to call it - with high
morales. When I saw my son defending me - who is now
eleven years old - realized that it hurt them just as bad
as it did me. They came first. That is when I was
strong enough to say - no more - this is not going to
happen to me any more or to my children ..• I didn't
know who to go to not because I wasn't intelligent - or
because I didn't have an education - I do have an
education. .. It is very difficult for me to say to
come up and to say that I was part of that - most people
ask me why did you ever last that long - fifteen years if
I had that answer I would answer. Maybe because I
wanted it to work out - could of been the answer .•. "
liThe system we have built not only has taken away human
dignity, but even more destructive, it has taken away
hope. Hope, that spark in human spirit that inspires
motivation and willingness to strive forward no matter
what the obstacles. How, you might ask, can one destroy
hope in another person. In this case, it is quite
simple. People on the welfare system are maintained at
the most basic level of human existence in our state, and
made to feel that they should be grateful for this. For
example, a family of two receives $ 233 welfare. The
housing that one can find within the budget of welfare
assistance, places that family in a high crime area, and
housing itself is usually at a subsistence level. There
is at least a one year wait for housing. 1I
Inflicted Despair
The cummulative result of all financial calamities that befall poor
female- headed families is the rapid loss of social defense mechanisms.
Testimony made it evident that the availability of social supports in our
state is too limited to recover social deficits created by economic dependency.
While there is an excellent network of agencies alert to respond to
emerging needs, budgetary cuts, ideological resistance and polical expedience
have seriously hindered their effectiveness.
Not only is there inadequate coverage of needs, but shortages are
disproportionately felt in certain localities thus, leaving those populations
exposed to additional hardships. Most of the state's existing services are
concentrated in the two largest metropolitan areas. In a sense this is cost
efficient as the largest number of economically vulnerable women are also
concentrated there. Nevertheless, equally needy women in rural and remote
parts of the state are experiencing the constant threat of unmitigated crises
and the despair of social rejection.
Perhaps more detrimental than the lack of services is the personal price
exacted from dependent women as a condition for assistance. Testimony after
testimony described the humiliation and insult inflicted upon them by our
philosophy of social welfare; a philosophy that clearly ascribes failure to
those who are in need. This philosophyis expressed by our emphasis in
dealing with families only after they become destitute and by the meagerness
of our response, thus never allowing them to really recover. The stigma
associated with need and the conveyed sense of fault for one's circumstances
-- residuals of old poverty and vagrancy laws -- prescribe an attitude of
punitiveness in the help given that devastates the receiver of help. The
result is felt both by the individual whose self- respect is damaged, and by
the rest of society that then has to pay a higher price for additional care.
" We have been on food stamps for twenty months -- this
is the only help I receive from the welfare system. Each
time I go to DES, I find that I have to leave my pride and
self esteem outside the door. I am, for the most part,
treated like a lower form of life. Sometimes, I have felt as
though I am being interrogated, nearly always spoken down to,
as though I am uneducated. I strongly feel that women, like
myself, who try to get away from any form of welfare system
should be given more help with food stamps then those who do
not try. Food stamps should be used as a crutch to help a
family get back on their feet and become self supporting, not
as a lifetime disability check. We are continuously
penalized for trying -- if we make $ 100 more a month we get
$ 80 less in stamps, therefore having worked for only $ 20
cash. In this way, we can never get ahead, and I feel that
at this point, many women just become depressed and give up
trying -- that is when welfare becomes a lifetime vocation.
The entire system needs to be re- vamped -- giving more help
to those trying to help themselves, and less to the people
that just sit back and let the system support them in every
way. Perhaps a decent set amount per month, for say a period
of a year to let us get on our feet, needs to be considered
so that we can take a job that pays us benefits and lets us
advance to the point of survival after a while.
" Trying to help myself but I don't get any help
to help myself. . . My mind is confused •.•
Disappointed that there is no help for people who
hurt so much ... Hurts to think I have to take
this for the rest of my 1ife. II
In the midst of all this social upheaval the only element that remains
constant in our society is that women are the primary care givers in the
family. Whether single or married, living in in- tact families or carrying
the main financial responsibility for their households, women are the ones
who care for dependent children, disabled adults, active spouses, and elderly
parents. It is through this bonding of caring that familial integration is
" Inequality of Sacrifice"
Despite the importance of their role in society, women themselves are
not valued by our system. A review of policies, census data, research
studies, and a careful look into the work of agencies make a strong case of
the " inequality of sacrifice" 29 exacted from women in the United States.
Income inequity, job segregation, social insecurity, inadequate services and
miserly supports, all contribute to a life of deprivation and despair.
Forty hours of testimony established the undisputable impression of the low
self- image, thwarted aspirations, traumatized sensibilities and the physical
and emotional hurt of these women. It is as if there is a systematic effort
blocking American women from entering society's mainstream and sharing in
this country's growth.
Perhaps there is one because a number of criticisms have been recently
mounted against women, accusing them for the calamities that have befallen
them. See for instance the argument that welfare has been conducive to
social disintegration by providing women with economic support. 30 Simply
the point made in this argument is that mothers have babies so to be on
welfare. Yet research has found no impact of welfare on fertility. 31 It has
not been established that AFDC serves as a direct incentive to terminate a
relationship. It may encourage already single pregnant women to keep their
babies, but even this decision is influenced by many other factors including
access to birth control, possibility of abortion, social pressures and
personal needs.
" Ri ght now our packet of bi rth control pi 11 s on the
market cost between $ 11.50 and $ 15.00 a packet - that is
one a month - and an exam at an OBGYNts office - initial
exam here in town is $ 50.00 for the initial exam if you
are a new patient. That is $ 50.00 plus $ 12.50 approximately
a month that these women have to pay - on low
income - on no money at all - many people eligible for
AHCCCS of course have virtually no money - they can't
afford this - therefore they are destined to have more
children because they are normal human beings - they make
love and they don't have access to getting things they
can use for birth control."
But accusations persist. Having been thus financially independent, the
argument states that women are interested neither in marriage nor in
developing their own earning capability. " What is going to happen to
marriage and childbearing" asks a demographer32 " in a society where women
really have equality?" In the above views, women's economic independence whatever
this means, has become the culprit of divorce, of young girls
becoming pregnant, of husbands abandoning their wives and fathers refusing to
pay child support. 33
This indirect indictment on men not withstanding, these criticisms are
voiced when "( T) here is no doubt whatsoever that the old are primarily
female, that the poor are primarily female, that those on welfare are
primarily female, that those in mental institutions are primarily female,
there is still no recognition that the condition of poverty is significantly
related to the condition of women; or that the status of old people for
instance, is that it is because the bulk of the old are women." 34
Individual Troubles, Social Concerns
" Private choices have public effects ' I rightly argues the Working Group
on the Family in its recent Report. 35 By the same reasoning, public
decisions influence private experiences. Forceful social revolutions have
changed the texture of women's lives and consequently the life of their
families. Women's increased participation in the labor force is one such
influence. Many families are well off financially due to working women. But
also many families cannot make ends meet despite the full employment of a
woman. Wage levels, conditions of employment, availability of resources such
as low cost housing are not individual choices but depend on governmental
Even small shifts in income can have potent effects. " If the upper
fifth of American households get an additional 1% of total income," estimates
David Wessel of the Wall Street Journal, " its purchasing power rises about
$ 20 billion". Similarly although the poverty rate last year was only one
poverty. 36
h. 1 · gher. 37
point higher than in 1980, 3.8 million more people were living in
Others estimate differences in poverty levels to be much
Nevertheless the point remains that there are definite " gainers"
and " losersll38 as a result of public policy. The growing gap between the
haves and have- nots is about to receive another jolt as the federal
government's new bill eliminates the steeply progressive tax rates thus
removing even the symbolism of distribution. This decision too will have a
strong impact on millions of private lives.
On the other hand there are those who argue that the present changes in
family structures though severe, give a deceptive picture. While they seem
as if they are departures from the norm, in fact they constitute now " 75% of
the norm.,, 39 That is, such recently witnessed phenomena as the decline of
child- bearing and rising age at first marriage, are really a resumption of
past trends interrupted by the post World War II economic euphoria. That
period, the argument goes, when optimistic young men and women were led to
early marriages and large families " was the real aberation" and not the
present one. 40
In either case the analysis conveys that the poor women and their
families today have a choice. Yet numerous studies demonstrate that people
on welfare wish for themselves the same kind of life that any person anywhere
in middle- America. 41 " To suggest that the women on welfare have substituted
a revered ethic with one of questionable virture implies that these women
enjoy their situation, that they have dynamically sought its attainment and
thus are now fulfilled and gratified.,, 42 Yet none of the women who shared
their experiences with the Panel conveyed any satisfaction with their lot in
life. What we saw among these women was not a relaxation of mores, not the
development of ~ new code of moral rectitude, but rather the helplessness of
entrapment, a gradual emaciation of their security and hope. " I am in a
limbo sort of existence," as a woman told the Panel. It is indeed amazing
that any of them has the resilience to persevere in seeking an exit from this
bureaucratic inhumanity.
Welfare Reform
Every administration, whether federal or state, has had welfare reform
as part of its objectives. The expressed intent is realistic. At time of
economic pressures such as these we face today, there is strong protest
against the deployment of public expenditures, particularly in the field of
However none of the recent reform efforts include a comprehensive set of
policies that could strengthen family life and protect the well- being of
women and children. From a pUblic policy perspective recent changes were not
guided by any new strategy for reducing poverty and meeting the essential
needs of the poor. At best, welfare reforms so far were incremental changes
in long established patterns of policy preference. Analysis of the recent
policies indicate that II no new goals have been set for ensuring even the
minimal well- being of families and individuals. 1I43
In fact there has never been a successful attempt to create a coherent
set of programs that work together to meet the needs of low income
individuals and families and to assist them to become self- sufficient. As a
nation we do not have uniform income maintenance provisions for poor
families. We have no statutory maternity benefits. We have no universal
child- care. We have no national health care program. Instead we have a
patchwork of programs, each developed separately from the other functioning
in uncoordinated, fragmented fashion. In short, reforms so far have been
" resorts to oversimplification in order to portray ( the administration's)
vision of what is wrong with an existing program or policy. 1144
" Some people tell me change does not come overnight. I am
encouraging those who are in a position to make changes - CHANGE
THE PLIGHT of the elderly so that they will be provided
for as they provided for us. 1I
This investigation has convinced the Panel that the barriers to women IS
economic development are pervasive and systemic. It has also made the Panel
aware that " policies that hurt some women, potentially hurt all women ". 45 It
is important therefore that, if we are interested in preserving the integrity
of the family, we must focus on minimizing the number of women and children
who live in poverty, so to enable them to engage in that " relationship of
connection," 46 that sense of belonging, which is their participation in
society's mainstream.
A Plan for Change
Problems so complex and long- standing cannot be resolved with simplistic
policies and quick remedies. Attempts to do so in the past have ended in
fruitless expenditures and the backlash of frustration.
In exploring fiscally prudent and morally responsible ways of addressing
poverty issues in Arizona, the Advisory Panel recommendes that the state
adopts a Family Security System plan.
The proposed plan is based on the Health Maintenance Organization ( HMO)
model. Like HMOs, Arizona's Family Security System ( FSS) is founded on the
concept that maintaining wellness is economically smart and socially advantageous.
The organizing principle of the Family Security System ( FSS), like
that of HMO, is that in illness prevention is better than treatment; and that
the goal of health is reached through multiple therapeutic interventions and
promotional efforts.
Furthermore, like HMO, Arizona's Family Security System ( FSS) must
function on an inclusionary policy. It addresses comprehensively the
vulnerabilities of social living and people at risk, and mobilizes a broad
spectrum of resources in creative public/ private sector partnerships. In so
doing, Arizona's Family Security System ( FSS) will afford the State's leaders
to both convey and take advantage of the interlockings of individual and
social wellbeing.
Whether we like it or not, all of us in the modern world depend upon one
another for our economic survival and social interaction. The test of
economic nationality, Topliss has pointed out, is the realization that social
responsibility for individual welfare must increase and must address broader
aspects of the citizen's life. " This realization marks the development of
the view that providing for the personal welfare of individuals is often not
only compatible with, but conducive to, the economic and social well- being of
the society as a whole." 47
It behooves then a caring and progressive society to establish the
conditions in which all its members have a fair chance to exercise their
citizenship. American women, including those in poverty, crave for their
fair chance too. Therefore, successful intervention "... must not only
offset chronic disadvantages, but should also instill the security of one's
entitlement to the " good life" if there is to be restored to the individual
some measure of equal ity of opportunity to compete." 48 It is the Panel's
conviction that the proposed Family Security System is a step towards that
Policy Recommendations
In presenting its recommendations the Panel wishes to emphasize the
imperative of an integrated effort in promoting the welfare of Arizona's
women. An effective Family Security System depends on the dynamic congruence
of needs and responding services. Therefore the Panel urges that the
Governor's Office of Women's Services is maintained and supported by an
Advisory Board to continue its role in assessing, coordinating and mediating
conditions influencing the well- being of women in the state.
The Panel is aware that the division in presenting these recommendations
is quite arbitrary. The issues are interrelated and provisions in one
category have enormous impact on the resolution of problems in other areas.
It is by the simultaneous mediation in all aspects of social/ individual
experience that any solution to the problems of poverty can be anticipated.
Specifically the proposed Family Security System ( FSS) includes
recommendations in all three areas of inquiry. They are presented in order
of priority of implementation. Recommended provisions are considered URGENT,
requiring immediate attention, CRITICAL, and must be responded to within one
year; and ESSENTIAL and their design should not be delayed for more than two
The primary purpose of the Arizona Family Security System is to
strengthen Arizona's families. The following blueprint identifies the
specific steps needed.
Changing Family Structures. The objective here is to meet income needs
for women and their families in ways that are less costly in both financial
and human terms; prevent further damage to them by supporting the integrity
and safety of the family and providing tools for self- management; and assume
leadership in the exploration and design of policies that utilize broader
financial and technical resources in the promotion of family well- being.
leadership in the exploration and design of policies that utilize broader
financial and technical resources in the promotion of family well- being.
• Revamp the AFDC program to: ( 1) increase family grant up to, or
closer to the standard of need; ( 2) allow a realistic transitional
period before termination of benefits after employment; ( 3) expand
AFDC benefits to households where father is present but unemployed.
• Enforce Child support laws and facilitate their implementation by
appointing pro- tem judges to expedite backlog of cases.
• Honor decision of tribal courts regarding child support and spousal
maintenance of Native American families.
• Establish a flexible entry into AFDC program so that mothers with
children could receive partial assistance without needing to become
destitute before they are eligible for benefits.
• Include in the general assistance category of Public Assistance
program provisions for middle- aged women who do not now qualify for
55I or AFDC.
• Demonstrate initiative in promoting national policy ensuring
uniform benefits in income maintenance and health care.
• Utilize public/ private resources to develop social/ educational
programs addressing evolving needs of women in their changing
roles. For example: career orientation, single parenting, budget
management, political participation.
• Utilize media to promote understanding of the challenges of modern
life and of ways of facing them.
• Undertake and support efforts to research and develop knowledge on
issues affecting changing family structures, and mechanisms to
meeting needs.
Labor Market
Objectives here concentrate on raising the value of women IS labor and
ensuring that employment leads to economic self- sufficienty. Such efforts,
while more costly in the short- run, are very cost- effective when long- term
planning is allowed. Successful employment that pays well safeguards womenls
well- being and personal satisfaction while minimizing welfare costs and
health care expenditures.
• Raise level of minimum wages so full time workers can secure a
• Revamp training programs to allow for skill development that
insures a woman's entry to stable employment and living wages.
• Enforce legislation that guarantees pay equity.
• Enact legislation that establishes proportional fringe benefits for
part time workers.
• Develop incentives for employer initiated child care programs.
• Develop public/ private approaches to effect structural and policy
changes facilitating the empioyment of disabled workers.
o Develop support systems that promote the feminization of
capitalism: for example provide Iistart up" support in marketing,
financing, accounting, and legal services to establish small
businesses, women's cooperatives and other entrepreneurial ventures
which bring women into the market's mainstream.
o Establish a pension integration system that affords portability of
pension benefits.
o Establish flexible eligibility standards for participation in
educational and training programs.
o Work with educational institutions and employers in the development
of outreach programs to introduce children- at- risk to educational
and employment opportunities.
o Establish mechanisms and funding for portable delivery of
educational and training opportunities in rural areas.
o Establish flexible eligibility standards for participation in
educational and training programs.
o Establish coalitions with ethnic communities and agencies to
promote affirmative action programs addressing specific employment
needs of minority women.
o Invest through study and pilot projects in the application of
comparable worth.
o Pursue through legislation policy of full employment.
o Invest through study and pilot projects in the application of
flexible work schedules.
• Invest through study and pilot projects in the application of
flexible work schedules.
• Undertake efforts to research and develop knowledge on issues
influencing women's employability, development, and successful entry
into the labor force particularly as they relate to needs of
minority women in rural communities.
Social Supports
These recommendations address services that are crucial in overcoming
problems and meeting non- income needs. The effort is to make efficient use
of existing expertise and services and to develop a network of support that
facilitates a woman's engagement in her employability and life plans.
It is important therefore that the Governor's Office of Women's Services
link with local agencies whose professional focus relates to any of the
identified areas.
• Invest in building affordable housing to relieve the plight of the
homeless and insure accommodations for low income people.
• Establish public/ private approaches to dependable and affordable
transportation system to facilitate mobility of poor women.
• Establish public/ private approaches to develop quality child care
arrangements available on a realistic sliding scale fee for mothers
of all incomes.
• Insure funding for adequate services ( similar as all above) in
rural areas where resources have been traditionally lacking.
I Coordinate system of delivery of social services with centralized
information and data collection so that managerial efficiency is
• Utilize expertise and resources of specializing agencies, and state
funding to support family planning services.
• Utilize community expertise to develop approaches for protective
services for battered women and children.
• Utilize and support community resources to develop services
addressing the needs of middle- aged and older women in their
evolving roles and situations.
I Establish coalitions with community institutions for flexible child
care, including day, evening and after school care.
I Encourage local governments to establish ordinances requiring
industrial park developers to incorporate in their designs child
care facilities.
• Create an interest- bearing account for title companies ( similar to
Interest on Lawyer's Trust Accounts) and use the money for building
low- income housing.
• Establish State Health Insurance Fund, patterned on the State's
Worker's Compensation Fund, to make it economical for small
employers to insure their employees.
• Support existing state laws regarding shelters for victims of
domestic violence and provide needed staff and facilities to meet
present emergency needs.
• Adjust eligibility criteria for state supported health care
services to reflect a more realistic appraisal of costs to meet
medical needs.
• Establish pre/ post natal health care services specifically
addressing teenage mothers including outreach and education.
• Establish mobile clinics for general medical, nursing and social
services to reach neighborhoods in preventing serious health care
• Establish in collaboration with the private sector approaches for
health- education programs addressing particularly the needs of
• Develop intergenerational support systems by investing in pilot
programs exploring possible elderly/ child program linkages; senior
companion services; recreational guardian employment for elderly
women; adult/ citizen education for women and other occupational
programs that utilize the resources of elderly women.
• Utilize media to promote public awareness of problems besieging
women and their children and their possible solutions.
• Enlist the support of experts in developing programs aiming at
sharpening the sensitivity of lawmakers, law enforcers, and other
public servants about problems besieging women and their children
and the need for effective intervention.
• Undertake efforts to research and develop knowledge furthering the
effectiveness of supports and services available to women and their
• Initiate and/ or support coalitions with churches, schools and other
facilities in small and rural communities, to develop day care and
after- care cooperatives.
The need to see Arizona's Family Security System ( FSS) in its totality
cannot be overemphasized. To address certain aspects of it at the exclusion
of others not only will jeopardize its purposes but will reduce it into
another instrument of social division. Competition for programs, experience
has taught us, leads to " we- they" cleavages that separate beneficiaries of
the programs from the social whole and subjects them to the cruelty of
welfare backlash. If our intent is to strengthen Arizona1s families then we
need to provide for the poor among them the means to become undisputable
members of our community.
The members of this Panel are sensitive to the risks in making these
recommendations. Perhaps a more modest plan with emphasis on so- called
" feasibility" would have been more acceptable. However it was our decision
not to compromise the integrity of our task. We understood the thrust of
this Advisory Panel to be an assessment of the conditions of poverty among
women in Arizona. We did and we concluded that " the system" is the main
culprit. We recommend fundamental changes in this system and comprehensive
intervention in all areas of need. Political choices should not be allowed
to emphasize one area of intervention at the expense of others. To do so is
to misrepresent social reality. The danger then is that we might risk the
credibility of programs which are important in their own right, by linking
them with the solution of a problem with which the public happens to be
concerned at the time.
" I ask you to make a conscious ( sic) extraordinary
effort to hear these women directly for the sake of the
best followup of findings in these Hearings ... but
also, since there is so much despair and hopelessness
in poverty, to hear them for the sake of their children
and grandchildren, so that the message left with them
will be one of at least some hope rather than despair
and anger."
Poverty is insidious. It wastes human energy and leads to unproductive
public expenditures. Therefore it is both prudent and humane for the state's
leadership to establish the mechanisms which remove the hazards of indigence.
Reversing the detrimental course to which the American family has been
condemned, requires comprehensive intervention on the part of all levels of
government and all sectors of society. There is need for short- term measures
that attack immediate emergencies, and long- term strategies that set developmental
plans for the future. Such approaches must rest on the reasoning that
the costs of human neglect are eventually paid by the larger society in loss
of resources and compensatory expenditures. A comprehensive approach such as
this proposed by this Panel also rests on the basic ethos of a society that
feels revolted by the unfair sacrifice demanded from the American family.
Addressing conditions of economic vulnerability is the first step. The
Advisory Panel, in its review of the state of poverty among Arizona's women,
has identified factors which individually and synergistically jeopardize the
very livelihood of a great size of our population.
Many of these factors are the result of social changes, by- products of
historical developments far beyond the control of the individuals involved,
or even of governments. Nevertheless, these factors need to be confronted
with governmental intervention so that the risks do not fall heavily upon
women and their children. Several recommendations of the Advisory Panel aim
to counteract the detrimental effects of social trends on Arizona's families.
The Advisory Panel's inquiry confirmed that by far the greatest causes
of the poverty entrapment experienced by women and their children are rooted
in the practices of our social institutions. Meager minimum wages, unemployment,
job inequalities, inadequate child care, social prejudices that foster
women's second- class status, and a Public Assistance system designed to
restrict and humiliate, have plunged women in the hold of social insecurity
and economic impotence.
Past failures of our system should not be allowed to continue. The
Advisory Panel has made specific recommendations for reparative legislative
action. However rehabilitation of a dysfunctional system can have only a
limited scope. It is the Panel's intent to challenge the State's leaders out
of revised old formulas into establishing novel approaches which insure not
only economic adequacy for women and their children, but opportunities for
them to become full- fledged participants in society's functioning. The
proposed Family Security System advocates the economic self- sufficientY of
the family as the means to enhance the state's citizenry.
It is fashionable these days to blame the demise of the American family
on the size of the government and the extent of the interference with the
lives of individuals. There are recently several proposals for " constitutional
arrangements" to replace " social policies." 49 The irony of the
statements notwithstanding -- after all social policies by any other name are
policies, that is, tools for guiding social action -- these proposals claim
to solve the " welfare" problems by withdrawing all governmental assistance,
abandoning people to their fate.
The government has indeed been part of the problem, not because it has
intervented but because of the political choices in its social mediation
choices that systematically excluded women from society's mainstream. It is
now the need for " the government" to become part of the solution by
acknowledging the actual impact of its past practices and assuming the reins
of social reform.
The proposed Family Security System accepts as a legitimate goal of the
political system to intervene through governmental institutions in order to
create the conditions under which its citizens can pursue their individual
goals. As James M. Buchanan, the new Nobel Laureate in Economics, said in a
recent speech, "... We should be extremely irresponsible if we acquiesce in
the inference that reform and reconstruction are not possible. It is time to
move beyond the slogan that government is the problem and to think long, much
and hard about the prospects for constructive institutional change. 1I50 The
Advisory Panel strongly recommends the Family Security System in all its
components as the best direction for constructive social change in Arizona.
2. Lester M. Salamon and Alan Abramson. The Federal Budget and the
Nonprofit Sector. ( Washington, D. C.: 1982): Quoted in Marc Bendick,
" Privatizing the Delivery of Social Welfare Service," Project on the
Federal Social Role ( Washington, D. C., 1985), p. 10.
Sharon Bernstein Megdal. " Women in the Arizona Economy: A Profile."
In Women and the Arizona Economy. J. Monk and S. Schlegel, Eds.
Research Report Prepared by the Southwest Institute for Research on
Women. First Arizona I~ omen's Townhall, 1986.
In Arizona Informant. No comparable data were available for Native
Ameri cans. Current Popu1at i on Report gi ves the 1982 medi an fami ly
11. " Most Moms On Own Get No Child Support." The Arizona Republic ( November
16, 1986.
12. Report of the Governor's Task Force on Child Support ( Phoenix, 1986).
13. The three categories were: Old Age ASSistance, Aid to the Blind and Aid
to the Disabled. All income transfer programs mentioned so fat' were
part of the provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935. Only two
social insurance programs involve state funds: unemployment insurance
and worker's compensation -- a pol icy that preceded SSA. Perhaps one
should consider the provlsion of food stamps as a form of income
support. Established in 1964, and made virtually uniform in 1977, the
food stamp program is operated as a ccunty- by- county basis within each
state. Thi s program too e)( peri enced the recent budgetary cuts.
income of all families to be $ 23,433, with that of Native Americans only 14. Poverty in Arizona. A People's Perspective. Report prepared by the
$ 6,761 less. This puts American Indians above Black and Hispanics. The
category includes Eskimo Alentians who enjoy, in general, a higher
economic level due to Alaska property rights policy.
4. League of Older Women. Mimeographoed Communication.
5. Ibid.
Arizona Community Action Association, Inc. ( Tucson, December 1985).
15. S. Bernard. The Economic and Social Adjustment of Low- Income
Female- Headed Families. Quoted in A. Coudroglou, Work, Women and the
Struggle for Self- Sufficiency ( Maryland 1982), p. 37.
16. Barbara Ehrenreich and Frances Fox Piven. " Women and the Welfare
6. Harold Rogers. Poor Women, Poor Families. The Economic Plight of
America's Female- Headed Households. ( Azmonk, NY and London, England,
1986), p. 39.
State." In Alternatives, I. Howe, ( Ed.) ( New York, 1984), p. 46.
17. Bettina Berch, The Endless Day: The Politlcal Economy of Women and Work.
( New York, 1982), p. 88.
7. Ibid., p. 40. 18. For an extensive review of the literature on this issue see A.
8. Barbara Ehrenreich and Frances Fox Piven. " Women and the Welfare Coudroglou, Work, Women and the StruQgle for Self- Sufficiency, op. cH.
State." lin Alternatives, 1. Howe ( Ed.) ( New York, 1984).
S. Megda 1" op. cit., p. 71.
19. For an extensive review of research on training programs see A.
Coudroglou, op. cit.
10. L. Weitzman. " The Economics of Divorce: Social and Economic
Consequences of Property, Alimony and Child Support Awards." UCLA Law
Revlew, Vol. 28 ( 1981).
20. Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962; Comprehensive Employment
and Training Act of 1973; Job Training Partnership Act of 1983.
21. Ldwrence M. Mead. Beyond EntItlement. The Soc1al OblIgations of
CitIzenship ( New York, 1986).
22. Rosabeth Kanter. Work and Family in the United States: A CritIcal
Review and Agenda for Research and Policy. ( New York, 1977).
23. J. S. Hunsaker. " Work and Family Must Be Integrated." Personnel
AdmInIstration 28, No. 4 ( 1983).
24. Arizona's Children, p. 15.
25. IbId.
26. An interview with Sylvia Hewlett. People ( October 20, 1986).
27. DavId Bowler
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.