How Southern state policymakers can strengthen democracy and protect voter health during the coronavirus pandemic

This is the final installment of a three-part series examining the economic and social conditions that impact health outcomes in Southern states, and how these conditions leave communities underprepared to protect front-line workers and communities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the earlier pieces of this three-part series, we described what actions are especially needed in Southern states to protect public health and front-line workers and communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we highlight action that is also needed in the South to address the threats the coronavirus poses to participation in our democracy at the expense of voter and poll worker health. The country witnessed this most recently during the Wisconsin presidential primary election last week. As we describe below, Southern states already face significant challenges to democratic participation. The coronavirus pandemic further heightens the need around the country and especially in the South to address longstanding barriers to free and fair elections, an accurate count for the once-a-decade census, and a legislative process that is accountable to the communities elected officials represent.

Free and fair elections and healthy voters

Today, voter suppression, which disproportionately impacts black and brown people, comes in the form of enforcing strict voter identification laws, disenfranchising people with felony convictions, purging registered voters from voter lists, closing polling locations, and failing to provide required language assistance. In Southern states, these barriers are layered on top of the legacy of Jim Crow, which as our colleague Jhacova Williams demonstrates in her research, continues to stifle rates of black voter registration today.

The coronavirus pandemic creates additional barriers, asking voters to choose between protecting their health and their right to participate in our democracy and compromising the health and safety of poll workers during presidential primary as well as state and local elections. Today, progress for fair and accessible election reforms remains mixed. In Kentucky, the legislature overrode a veto by the governor to create a new voter identification law at the worst possible time. On the other hand, Virginia policymakers have enacted the kinds of voting reforms necessary to strengthen democracy in the wake of the crisis.Virginia’s governor recently signed multiple bills that expanded early voting, repealed voter identification laws, made election day a holiday, expanded absentee voting, and implemented automatic voter registration.

Southern state policymakers and election officials have taken some useful steps to protect public health and limit the spread of the coronavirus by postponing elections. For example, though most states in the South have already had their presidential primary elections, officials in states such as Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, and West Virginia delayed theirs until June. The North Carolina Board of Elections and Mississippi Governor Reeves postponed congressional runoff elections, and other officials in Alabama, Oklahoma, and Texas postponed local elections. In Oklahoma, the secretary of state will identify a new deadline for collecting ballot initiative signatures once the governor indicates that the state’s emergency declaration is over.

Read more

Access to online learning amid coronavirus is far from universal, and children who are poor suffer from a digital divide

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers, parents, school districts, and communities are doing their best to replace in-person with online learning. But as a recent Washington Post article notes, the move to e-learning prompted by school closures has “exposed the technology divides”—with K–12 students who lack the resources they now need to learn at home facing long-term academic disadvantages.

Although the Post article focused on the digital divide in the District of Columbia, this is a national problem.

EPI analysis of data from the most comprehensive study of primary and secondary education in the country illustrates a widespread digital divide based on family income. The data, from the National Center for Education Statistics’ National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for eighth-graders, show that full access to online learning is far from universal and that students who are poor are less likely to have access to the key tools and experiences they need to attend school online. For example, nearly 16% of eighth-graders overall, and almost a quarter of eighth-graders who are poor, don’t have a desktop or laptop computer at home on which to follow their classes. About 8% of eighth-graders who are not poor lack access to these essential devices. The data also show that low shares of students have teachers with full technological proficiency to teach online. (Poor students are defined as students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program.)

Not all students are set up for online learning and students who are poor have less access to key tools: Share of eighth-graders with access to tool for online learning, by income level, 2017

All students 95.8%
Non-poor 98.4%
Poor 93.0%
All students 84.4%
Non-poor 92.3%
Poor 76.3%
All students 76.3%
Non-poor 81.8%
Poor 70.6%
All students 51.3%
Non-poor 56.1%
Poor 46.4%
All students 43.4%
Non-poor 45.0%
Poor 41.7%
All students 69.2%
Non-poor 71.4%
Poor 66.8%
All students 32.5%
Non-poor 32.5%
Poor 32.6%
All students 19.3%
Non-poor 18.3%
Poor 20.3%
ChartData Download data

The data below can be saved or copied directly into Excel.

Notes: Poor students are students eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch programs. Non-poor students are students who are ineligible for those programs. Frequent use of internet at home for homework means every day or almost every day. Students’ teachers were either “already proficient” in, “have not” received training in, or “had received training” in “software applications” and “integrating computers into instruction” in the last two years.

Source: 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), eighth-grade reading sample microdata from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics

Copy the code below to embed this chart on your website.

Read more

A coronavirus recovery: How to ensure older workers fully participate

Key takeaways:

  • Because older workers are more likely to be unemployed for long periods, have work-limiting disabilities, and live in areas of the country that were struggling even before the crisis, policies aimed at addressing these problems will especially benefit these workers.
  • While infrastructure spending could help jump-start the post-pandemic recovery, policies must ensure that older workers participate in training and jobs programs related to these investments.
  • Regulatory protections for front-line workers, especially older workers and others at heightened risk for contracting or suffering serious consequences from contagious diseases, need to be strengthened and updated using lessons learned from the pandemic.
  • Employer-provided benefits result in spotty coverage and higher costs for older workers. The United States should catch up to other countries and provide sick leave, paid family leave, and health insurance through government programs rather than leaving these to the discretion of employers.

(See the companion blog post outlining steps needed to protect vulnerable older workers in the economic collapse caused by measures needed to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.)

Once the worst of the outbreak is over and social distancing measures are relaxed, policies to help older workers will be needed to ensure they share in the recovery.

Deficit-financed stimulus spending—needed to quickly bring the economy back to something approaching full employment—will help but not ensure broad-based prosperity. Policymakers also need to address power imbalances between employers and workers and target policies at disadvantaged workers, including unemployed older workers.

Older workers, as I discussed in my last blog post, may find it harder to get back in the job market after layoffs for a number of reasons. They may have health conditions that limit what they can do or they may feel forced to accept large pay cuts because some skills and knowledge they’ve built up aren’t transferable and may be undervalued by prospective employers. Absent policies to help these workers regain their footing, they may become “discouraged workers” who give up on the job search and retire before they’re ready to.

This post lays out a series of policies to address barriers to employment for unemployed older workers and to protect older workers from health and financial risks.

Read more

Updated state unemployment numbers remain astonishingly high: Six states saw record-high levels of initial unemployment claims last week

This morning, the Department of Labor released the latest initial unemployment insurance (UI) claims data, showing that another five million people (not seasonally adjusted) filed for UI last week. In the last four weeks, more than 20 million workers—whose economic security has been upended by the coronavirus crisis and inadequate policy responses—filed for UI.

Last week, Colorado, New York, South Carolina, Connecticut, Mississippi, and West Virginia saw their highest level of initial UI claim filings ever. These six states, along with Florida, Missouri, and North Carolina, saw increases in initial filings compared with the prior week.

Most states had fewer initial UI claims last week than in the week prior, but the number of UI claims remained astonishingly high. California and Michigan—the two states with the largest decline since the week before—still had 661,000 and 219,000 claims filed last week, respectively—the third-highest week on record for both.

Figure A compares UI claims filed last week with filings in the pre-virus period, showing once again that Southern states are faring particularly poorly. Seven of the 10 states that had the highest percent change last week relative to the pre-virus period are Southern: Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Alabama.

Figure A

Initial unemployment insurance claims filed during the week ending April 11, by state

State Initial claims filed Percent change from the prior week Level change from prior week Percent change from pre-virus period Level change from pre-virus period Sum of initial claims for the five weeks ending April 11
Alabama 91,079 -14.7% -15,660 4221% 88,971 291,513
Alaska 12,752 -12.6% -1,838 1410% 11,908 50,083
Arizona 97,784 -26.2% -34,644 2878% 94,501 352,344
Arkansas 34,635 -44.2% -27,451 2241% 33,156 135,134
California 660,966 -28.1% -257,848 1517% 620,094 2,882,044
Colorado 105,073 126.8% 58,747 5418% 103,169 235,332
Connecticut 33,962 1.5% 498 1216% 31,381 129,193
Delaware 13,272 -29.6% -5,579 2224% 12,701 62,508
Washington D.C. 9,904 -35.4% -5,425 2079% 9,450 56,777
Florida 181,293 6.7% 11,408 3478% 176,226 660,438
Georgia 317,526 -18.6% -72,606 5831% 312,173 859,063
Hawaii 34,693 -34.7% -18,408 2955% 33,557 146,794
Idaho 17,817 -42.3% -13,087 1518% 16,716 96,279
Illinois 141,049 -29.8% -59,992 1402% 131,658 645,495
Indiana 118,184 -6.9% -8,826 4611% 115,676 446,719
Iowa 46,356 -27.8% -17,838 1887% 44,023 209,697
Kansas 30,769 -37.6% -18,537 1808% 29,156 159,723
Kentucky 115,763 -1.5% -1,812 4527% 113,261 398,295
Louisiana 80,045 -20.4% -20,576 4648% 78,359 352,759
Maine 13,273 -57.1% -17,637 1610% 12,497 90,046
Maryland 60,823 -44.4% -48,666 2103% 58,063 302,474
Massachusetts 103,040 -26.2% -36,607 1601% 96,982 580,011
Michigan 219,320 -43.6% -169,234 3870% 213,796 1,045,553
Minnesota 89,634 -18.7% -20,626 2447% 86,115 428,772
Mississippi 46,160 0.7% 308 5477% 45,332 130,693
Missouri 95,785 4.7% 4,327 3053% 92,747 337,796
Montana 13,437 -36.7% -7,807 1620% 12,656 71,610
Nebraska 16,391 -39.4% -10,663 3125% 15,883 84,665
Nevada 60,180 -24.1% -19,105 2509% 57,873 310,061
New Hampshire 23,936 -38.9% -15,266 4142% 23,372 124,537
New Jersey 140,600 -34.6% -74,236 1619% 132,421 686,971
New Mexico 19,494 -25.4% -6,638 2652% 18,786 92,449
New York 395,949 15.0% 51,498 2048% 377,519 1,201,266
North Carolina 137,934 0.4% 512 5263% 135,362 545,117
North Dakota 10,378 -31.4% -4,747 2374% 9,959 43,398
Ohio 157,218 -30.5% -68,973 2054% 149,918 861,052
Oklahoma 48,977 -19.1% -11,557 3076% 47,435 181,017
Oregon 50,930 -18.9% -11,858 1182% 46,958 195,539
Pennsylvania 238,357 -14.1% -39,283 1788% 225,736 1,313,564
Rhode Island 22,805 -19.3% -5,438 1931% 21,682 115,803
South Carolina 87,686 1.3% 1,113 4409% 85,742 274,653
South Dakota 6,152 -24.4% -1,986 3276% 5,970 23,042
Tennessee 74,772 -33.3% -37,414 3620% 72,762 320,237
Texas 273,567 -13.2% -41,600 2009% 260,596 1,036,521
Utah 24,171 -26.8% -8,869 2314% 23,170 106,738
Vermont 9,478 -42.5% -6,996 1440% 8,863 45,028
Virginia 106,723 -27.6% -40,646 3940% 104,082 415,572
Washington 150,516 -12.1% -20,736 2379% 144,446 648,766
West Virginia 14,595 0.7% 101 1192% 13,465 48,013
Wisconsin 69,884 -33.3% -34,939 1136% 64,230 341,862
Wyoming 4,904 -25.0% -1,639 885% 4,406 22,013

Notes: Initial claims for the week ending April 11 reflect advance state claims, not seasonally adjusted. For comparisons with the “pre-virus period,” we use a four-week average of initial claims for the weeks ending February 15–March 7, 2020.

Source: U.S. Employment and Training Administration, Initial Claims [ICSA], retrieved from Department of Labor (DOL), https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf and https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp, April 16, 2020

Copy the code below to embed this chart on your website.

Read more

9.2 million workers likely lost their employer-provided health insurance in the past four weeks

These estimates were updated on May 14, 2020. See the updated estimates.

We estimate that 9.2 million workers were at high risk of losing their employer-provided health insurance in the past four weeks. To avoid prohibitively costly insurance options, the federal government should fund an expansion of Medicare and Medicaid to all those suffering job losses during the pandemic period.

Two weeks ago, when the two-week total of unemployment insurance (UI) initial claims was 8.7 million, we estimated that 3.5 million workers may have lost their health insurance at work. Since then, 11.4 million more workers filed claims for unemployment benefits, bringing the total of UI initial claims over the last four weeks to 20.1 million, currently the most comprehensive measure of the extent of job losses and furloughs due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

We estimate that across all industries where workers have filed UI claims, about 45.7% of workers had their own health insurance provided through their employer. As a result, of the 20.1 million workers who filed initial UI claims in the last four weeks, 9.2 million may have lost coverage through their own employer-provided health insurance (EPHI).

The analysis, described below, combines industry-specific UI claims data for 11 states, representing about 20% of national employment, with national, industry-specific health insurance coverage rates. Using these data, we provide a rough prediction of 9.2 million workers losing EPHI. We can’t say exactly how many people will lose insurance coverage altogether for several reasons. For example, some workers who lose EPHI due to layoffs or hours reductions that trigger UI claims may be able to obtain coverage through health care exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or through Medicaid. Some of this group may also be able to obtain continuing coverage through COBRA, paying out of pocket the full cost of their EPHI coverage. Some workers may be able to obtain coverage through other family members, or if only experiencing a temporary furlough or hours reduction, their employers might continue to pay for coverage. On the other hand, our calculations might understate the loss of health insurance coverage because they do not account for family members who are no longer covered because of the policyholder’s layoff. And, because not all layoffs result in UI claims, we will underestimate the actual magnitude of job losses.

Read more

Women have been hit hard by the coronavirus labor market: Their story is worse than industry-based data suggest

Key findings:

  • The latest payroll employment data for March show that women were the hardest hit by initial job losses in the COVID-19 labor market; women represented 50.0% of payroll employment in February, but represented 58.8% of job losses in March.
  • If women’s share of new unemployment insurance (UI) claims in recent weeks was driven solely by sector-level differences in gender composition, then they would have accounted for roughly 45% of new UI claims, or about 6.8 million new claims.
  • However, relying solely on the gender composition of sectoral unemployment may lead to an underestimate of new UI claims that were filed by women. Using three states that provide direct estimates of the gender composition of new UI claims shows that the female share of these claims is substantially higher than what we estimate by using only the sectoral composition of employment by gender.
  • We estimate that once the overrepresentation of women in sectors with new layoffs is corrected for, between 7.8 and 8.4 million women filed for unemployment insurance in the three weeks ending April 4.

Since March 15, 15.1 million workers in the United States have filed for unemployment insurance. Tomorrow, the latest initial unemployment insurance claims will be released by the Department of Labor for the week ending April 11, and estimates suggest that there could be another 4.5 million initial claims reported. These top-line numbers are vital for understanding what is going on in the economy and the extent of the economic insecurity millions of workers and their families are experiencing. But what is less clear is who these workers are and where they work. While national statistics that directly report the demographic characteristics of UI claimants will not be available for months, we use national employment data from March and preliminary state UI reports through April to begin to answer those questions. We find that job losses and furloughs have disproportionately affected women. This is the result of two factors: Women are more concentrated in sectors that experienced more job loss, and women also tended to see more job loss than men within these sectors.

Read more

New survey and report reveals mistreatment of H-2A farmworkers is common: The coronavirus puts them further at risk

The irony should be lost on no one that NPR’s reporting on the Trump administration’s push to lower wages for H-2A farmworkers came out the same week that a new report was published by Centro de los Derechos del Migrante (CDM) that calls into question whether the H-2A temporary work visa program should exist at all without major reforms to protect migrant workers.

The report details the findings of in-depth interviews with 100 H-2A workers, who “reported discrimination, sexual harassment, wage theft, and health and safety violations by their employers—and a chilling lack of recourse.” Every single H-2A worker “experienced at least one serious legal violation of their rights, and 94% experienced three or more.” And before they had even arrived in the United States, many were already heavily in debt as a result of paying illegal recruitment fees in exchange for the opportunity to work in a low-wage farm job.

Read more

The Trump administration has weakened crucial worker protections needed to combat the coronavirus: Agencies tasked with protecting workers have put them in danger

Key takeaways:

  • The Department of Labor (DOL) issued a temporary rule that will exempt 96% of applicable firms from providing paid sick and paid family and medical leave to their staff. It could also exempt 9 million health care workers and 4.4 million first responders from receiving paid leave.
  • DOL issued guidance that narrows the eligibility of workers to receive Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA). For example, gig workers must be “forced to suspend operations” by a government quarantine in order to receive PUA benefits, rather than voluntarily quarantining themselves.
  • The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued guidance that will jeopardize the health and safety of workers. The CDC now allows essential workers to continue to work even if they may have been exposed to the coronavirus—as long as they appear to be asymptomatic and the employer implements additional precautions.
  • The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) advises that certain businesses are not required to investigate or record workplace-related coronavirus cases. Not only does this guidance make workers less safe, it will likely make the public health crisis worse as employers will not be required to record virus-related illness as officials work to track these cases.

In the last three weeks, an unprecedented 17 million workers applied for unemployment insurance (UI), while millions more risk their lives to provide essential services. To mitigate the health and economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, Congress has passed a series of bills aimed at providing relief and recovery measures. The Families First Coronavirus Relief Act (FFRCA) and the CARES Act included critical provisions to assist workers impacted by the pandemic; chief among those are an expansion of Unemployment Insurance (UI) and access to paid leave. However, rather than working to implement these relief and recovery bills efficiently and effectively, the Trump administration has instead looked for ways to narrow and weaken the worker protections included in the legislation.

Read more

Trump administration looking to cut the already low wages of H-2A migrant farmworkers while giving their bosses a multibillion-dollar bailout

Key takeaways:

  • The Trump administration, which recently deemed farmworkers essential to the economy, is considering lowering the wages of the 205,000 migrant farmworkers employed in the United States through the H-2A temporary work visa program, according to published reports.
  • H-2A wages are usually based on a mandated wage standard that varies by region—known as the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR)—aiming to prevent temporary migrant farmworkers from being underpaid according to local standards and to prevent downward pressure on the wages of farmworkers in the United States.
  • Farmworkers in general are paid very low wages—in 2019 they earned $13.99 per hour, which is only three-fifths of what production and nonsupervisory workers outside of agriculture earned, and they earned less than what workers with lowest levels of education in the U.S. labor market earned.
  • The national average AEWR wage, at $12.96 per hour, was lower than wages for any of these groups of workers, and many H-2A farmworkers earned far less in some of the biggest H-2A states.
  • The Trump administration may try to lower the wages of H-2A farmworkers through the regulatory process or a provision attached to a broader piece of legislation.
  • This comes at a time when farm owners looking to cut their workers’ wages are on the verge of receiving a federal bailout worth at least $16 billion, which will help cover potential financial losses related to impact of the coronavirus pandemic.

Last week, NPR reported that “new White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows is working with Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue to see how to reduce wage rates for foreign guest workers on American farms.” Apparently, the Trump administration believes that temporary migrant farmworkers—who earned between $11.01 and $15.03 per hour in 2019—are overpaid.

Why should migrant farmworkers have to take a pay cut, especially right now, when farmers and ranchers are about to receive at least $16 billion in direct payments thanks to a federal bailout?

Read more

The coronavirus will explode achievement gaps in education

This blog post was originally posted on shelterforce.org.

The COVID-19 pandemic will take existing academic achievement differences between middle-class and low-income students and explode them.

The academic achievement gap has bedeviled educators for years. In math and reading, children of college-educated parents score on average at about the 60th percentile, while children whose parents have only a high school diploma score, on average, at the 35th percentile.* The academic advantages of children whose parents have master’s degrees and beyond are even greater.

To a significant extent, this is a neighborhood issue—schools are more segregated today than at any time in the last 50 years, mostly because the neighborhoods in which they are located are so segregated. Schools with concentrated populations of children affected by serious socioeconomic problems are able to devote less time and attention to academic instruction.

In 2001 we adopted the “No Child Left Behind Act,” assuming that these disparities mostly stemmed from schools’ failure to take seriously a responsibility to educate African American, Hispanic, and lower-income students. Supporters claimed that holding educators accountable for test results would soon eliminate the achievement gap. Promoted by liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, the theory was ludicrous, and the law failed to fulfill its promise. The achievement gap mostly results from social-class based advantages that some children bring to school and that others lack, as well as disadvantages stemming from racial discrimination that only some children have to face.

The coronavirus, unfortunately, will only exacerbate the effects of these advantages.

Read more