Economists are beginning to analyze how mass incarceration hinders economic participation and progress—adding more evidence for the need to stop the school to prison pipeline for boys and men of color. 

Last week, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) released a working paper titled: The Prison Boom and the Lack of Black Progress after Smith & Welch.  As the title suggests, the paper lifts up the destructive effect of mass incarceration on the economic prospects of the black community—particularly for black men. 

Analyzing data from the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP), National Prisoner Statistics (NPS), and the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting System (UCR), University of Chicago economists Derek Neal and Armin Rick find that—relative to white males—black males are no better off, and possibly worse off than they were in 1970. 

This conclusion is underpinned by several key trends and findings: 

• Employment rates for all men have fallen in recent decades, and simultaneously there has been an unprecedented increase in incarceration rates. Since 1980, these trends have been much more dramatic among black men than white men.
   
• Past research on the effects of changes in criminal justice policies has not established a strong link between changes in corrections policy and prison growth.  However, by constructing measures of prison admissions, releases, time served, and arrests by offense across states, the authors build a strong case that criminal justice policy changes (since the 1970s) have acted as “engines of growth” in prison populations.  Their analysis lifts up the fact that the majority of growth in the federal prison population is due to increases in three offense categories:  drugs, weapons, and immigration—arenas in which people of color are disproportionately criminalized compared to their white counterparts.
   

By highlighting convincing past research establishing the relationship between corrections policies and labor market outcomes, Neal and Rick argue that the population that has suffered the most under these punitive policies—black men—now likely faces worse economic prospects than they faced when policy shifts starting in the 1970s ignited the prison boom. 

This study is a follow-up to a widely cited 1989 paper by James Smith and Finis Welch that used census data to illustrate reduced racial gaps in education and earnings from 1940 to 1980.  Over those four decades, the average educational attainment of black men jumped from six to 12 years, compared to an increase from 10 years to 13.5 years for white men.  Large gains in educational attainment corresponded with gains in earnings for black men during this time period.  According to Neal and Rick, these gains stopped with the implementation of punitive criminal justice policies across the country starting in the 1970s. 

While not yet peer reviewed, this study offers important insights into the structural inequities embedded in the U.S. economy, and the economic impacts of punitive criminal justice policies in black communities.  Perhaps most significantly, it begins to develop a more nuanced narrative about rising income inequality in America not yet told in the existing economics literature.  Clearly, this area of economics research is ripe for more investigation.  As the authors note, “…economists need to carefully investigate the intergenerational consequences for families and communities of policy changes”.

Unfortunately, because of the numerous datasets compiled for this study to mitigate the dearth of quality data, the same type of analysis could not be conducted for the Hispanic population, since datasets used different types of classifications for people of Hispanic origin.  The trends among all other groups are lumped together in an “other” category, highlighting the need to improve data collection methods on a state and federal levels around crimes, arrests, and prisons activity to fully understand how criminal justice policies are impacting the social and economic prospects of every segment of our population.

To view the full study, visit the NBER site (with a subscription or with an individual purchase); and for more information on how you can improve the lives of black men and boys, visit The Institute for Black Male Achievement website for the latest information from the field and for specific ways on how you can take action.
 

Last week, New York City became the latest municipality to offer ID-cards for city residents, a move that eases the lives of nearly half a million undocumented residents and could provide a boost to the city’s economy.  For many Americans, the ability to provide proof of identity is taken for granted. For undocumented residents, the inability to provide proof of identity impacts nearly every aspect of their lives from being able to borrow books from a library to being able to register their child for school.

A valid photo ID lets people open bank accounts, enter into their children’s public school buildings, and establish identity when interacting with law enforcement. Municipal ID programs help more than the undocumented population. Some of the most vulnerable community members- homeless residents, youth in the foster system, low-income elderly people, formerly incarcerated individuals re-entering society, and people with mental illness and disabilities- face obstacles in obtaining necessary documentation. Municipal IDs can provide the necessary documentation for proof of identity or residency necessary for essential services.

For cities, the ID cards may increase resident’s spending and entrepreneurship, a secondary effect of having access to bank accounts. In addition, municipal IDs can ease the ability to sign leases and give access to government buildings, which could also make it easier for entrepreneurial residents to deal with regulators and other offices.

Several cities already offer their own municipal IDs, including Los Angeles, New Haven, San Francisco, Oakland, and Washington D.C. In addition, several local jurisdictions in New Jersey also offer ID cards and Richmond, CA’s program has been designed and IDs should begin being issued soon.

To maximize success, New York City’s program should ensure the highest level of privacy for applicants’ data and personal information. And, as raised by the New York Times Editorial Board, the City’s ID should also be used for discounts at museums, restaurants and other institutions to encourage the broadest level of participation so that the ID does not become de facto proof of the ID holder’s immigration status.

The New Haven example highlights both the need and the success of municipal ID programs. While not traditional considered a city with a large immigrant population, the immigrant population grew 69 percent between 1990 and 2006. Out of the 125,000 residents in the city, there are an estimated 10,000 and 15,000 undocumented residents. Without proper ID, undocumented workers were unable to open bank accounts. As a result, they became frequent targets of theft because it was widely believed that they stored large amount of cash either on at home or on their person.

Victims or witnesses to these crimes were reluctant to talk to the police for fear of being asked for identification and raise questions about their immigration status. The fear of interacting with law enforcement also deterred immigrants from reporting workplace violations, such as unlawful wage withholding. Parks and public beaches were also inaccessible without proof of ID.

When the state legislative effort to provide driver’s licenses to undocumented residents failed, New Haven’s Mayor John DeStefano launched a municipal ID initiative called the Elm City Resident’s Card in 2007. In just five months, the city issued more than 5,000 ID cards. By 2012, 10,000 residents had ID cards. Moreover, the resident card helped foster a sense of belonging and improved relationships between immigrants and law enforcement. It also made the city stronger economically with a thriving business corridor in the heart of immigrant-rich Fair Haven.

With meaningful comprehensive immigration reform at a stalemate on the federal level, issuing ID cards is a big step municipalities can take to protect their residents and provide a boost to local economies.
 

Cross-posted from Huffington Post

Transforming low-wage jobs into good jobs that provide living wages is a critical path to robust economic growth. Just ask Flora Johnson, a home care worker from Illinois, whose salary is rising from just under $6 an hour before joining a union to $13 an hour by year’s end and is now able to make ends meet. That increase came from a worker-organizing model that may no longer be possible thanks to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. 

Home care aides in Illinois were able to win substantial wage increases due to a contract won through union bargaining. The current wage for home care aides in the state increased from $7 in 2003 to $12.25 today and will increase again to $13 on December 1. Even though not all workers covered are union members, they all benefited from the power of collective bargaining. This effective model is now under threat because the court ruled in Harris v. Quinn that non-union members could opt out of making contributions to the costs of collective bargaining. Workers were never required to join the union, but instead, paid a small contribution to help cover the cost of negotiating better contracts. Now, the entire cost of contract negotiations will fall on the shoulders of only some workers, even though everyone benefits from contract wins.

But, must workers organize in order to increase wages and benefits? The simple answer is yes. Without organizing, workers lack the leverage necessary to win higher wages and benefits. Collective worker power is especially beneficial for women and people of color, who are too often left behind economically. The demographics of in-home care aides – over 90 percent women, more than 50 percent people of color – overlap with populations suffering from significant wage disparities, making union representation all the more important.

In the decades to come, raising the floor for home care workers will become increasingly important. Home health care is the second fastest growing occupation in the United States and also a major source of employment for women and people of color. Between 2012 and 2022, the number of home health aides across the country will increase nearly 50 percent, requiring nearly 600,000 new workers for this workforce.  With an aging population across the nation, demand for this work will grow. By 2050, the number of senior citizens is projected to nearly double and more than 10,000 Americans turn 65 every day.

Unfortunately, many of those who take care of our most vulnerable – even full-time workers – are still in poverty. Nationwide, women in direct care jobs are more than twice as likely to be poor than working women in general.  Low wages contribute to high turnover rates, which can impact the quality of care. Turnover rates for direct care workers can range from 40 percent to 100 percent annually. High turnover rates are disruptive to people who need care, especially for people with disabilities, and discontinuous care is a challenge to developing trusting relationships with care givers.

Poverty wages also drag down a state’s economy. For example, studies show that increasing hourly wages to $14 in California would save the state over $5 billion per year because workers would not need supplemental public programs for additional income.  A study of home care workers in San Francisco found that turnover fell by 57 percent following implementation of a living wage policy city-wide.

Without organizing, the fight for better wages, benefits, and basic work supports becomes an individual, not a collective, struggle, an outcome that is a step backwards for workers, those in their care, and state economies. Efforts to undermine economic prosperity come from all angles and we must be vigilant about tracking these attacks. The court may have ruled against working families but with strong support from all of us, workers can overcome this hurdle through organizing, joining a union, and using their collective power to build an equitable economy.