October 2003 - Vol. 5, No. 8

• New Jersey Court Bans Incarceration Without Legal Representation For Nonpayment of Child Support
• Indicators of Worsening Economic Hardship Mount
• Racism in Employment and Traffic Stops Documented
• Fact Sheets on Ex-Offender Barriers and Recommended Actions Available
• Upcoming Events

New Jersey Court Bans Incarceration Without Legal Representation For Nonpayment of Child Support

Indigent New Jersey parents who are currently in jail on civil contempt charges for the failure to pay child support are to be released, and judges are prohibited from incarcerating indigent non-payors unless they are provided with a court-appointed lawyer, according to a recent ruling by the state Superior Court. The ruling will result in a review of all incarcerated non-payers to determine their ability to pay for legal representation. If they are without the means to afford a lawyer and have not been provided with one, they must be released.

A Superior Court judge made the ruling in May 2003, but it was not until September 24 that a state appeals court rejected a request by the state Attorney Generalís office to put the ruling on hold. Because the State Administrative Office of the Courts has no pool of attorneys to appoint for indigent people, it will not have the option of providing legal counsel. Probation officers have begun interviewing all persons jailed for non-payment to assess their financial status.

According to the lawyer representing the indigent parents, David Perry Davis, New Jersey is one of six states that do not appoint lawyers for poor parents facing jail for nonpayment. He expects that approximately 300 New Jersey parents will be freed based on the ruling.

The case is Anne Pasqua, et al v. Hon. Gerald J. Council, A-6875-02T3 New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Indicators of Worsening Economic Hardship Mount

A number of recent reports from the federal government confirm that poor families are experiencing worsening economic conditions. The Census Bureau has released poverty data showing a rise in poverty and fall in median income in 2002, and a report on health insurance coverage for American families. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has provided data on the growing income gap. All of these reports have been analyzed by the Center on Budget Policies and Priorities (CBPP). The following summaries are based on the original reports and on the analyses done by CBPP.

According to the Census Bureau report on poverty rates:

• The number of persons living in poverty rose by 1.7 million in 2002, to 34.6 million. This represents a rise in the poverty rate from 11.7% to 12.1%.
• Median household income fell by $500, to $42,409

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analysis makes the following points concerning the census figures:

• People who were poor in 2002 fell below the poverty line by $2,813. This amount was greater than in any year since 1979, the first in which the data were available. The amount was 23% larger in 2002 than in 1996, after adjusting for inflation.
• Nearly two-thirds of all poor families with children included a worker in 2002. Workers in poor families with children worked an average of 44 weeks per year.
• The number of people who live in severe poverty (whose income was less than half of the poverty level) increased by 600,000, to 14.1 million in 2002.
• Overall, median income fell 1.1%. Among black households, median income fell 2.5 to 3%. Among Hispanics, median income fell 2.9%.
• Shortened weeks of eligibility for unemployment benefits contributed to the rise in poverty.
• Cash welfare benefits contributed less to the income of poor families than in any year since at least 1989.
• Congressional Budget Office (CBO) data reveal that average after-tax income of the top one percent of the population rose 201% between 1979 and 2000.

Another Census Bureau report provides information on the number of families covered by health insurance, and is analyzed by CBPP:

• The percentage of Americans without health insurance coverage grew from 14.6% of the total population in 2001 to 15.2% in 2002. This represents 43.6 million individuals without health insurance, and a one-year increase of nearly 2.5 million.
• People with incomes below the poverty line were uninsured at a rate of 30.4%, more than twice the rate for people above the poverty line.
• More than 20% of African-Americans, 32.4% of Latinos and 18.45% of Asians were uninsured, compared to 10.7% of white, non-Hispanic Americans.
• Uninsured rates would have been much higher if Medicaid and other public health coverage had not been available to a growing number of Americans.
• The drop in private health insurance can be attributed to rising unemployment rates, a 12.7% increase in private insurance premiums that led employers to drop this benefit, and increased employer demands for employee contributions to coverage that made it unaffordable for some employees.

A government report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and a CBPP analysis reveal the following:

• The year 2000 saw the disparity between the rich and the poor become greater than for any year since 1979, the year the CBO started collecting such data.
• In 2000, the richest 1% of Americans had more after-tax income than the bottom 40%. This represents a doubling of the income gap since 1979, when the richest 1% had less than half of the after-tax income of the bottom 40%.
• A CBPP analysis of incomes from this CBO report and another income study reveals that the top 1% of Americans had a larger share of the countryís total income than at any time since 1936, and probably since 1926.

The reports are available as follows:
Poverty in the United States: 2002 and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States, are available at www.census.gov.

Effective Federal Tax Rates, 1997-2000, is available from the Congressional Budget Office at www.cbo.gov.

Number of Americans Without Health Insurance Rose in 2002, Poverty Increases and Median Income Declines for Second Consecutive Year, and The New, Definitive CBO Data on Income and Tax Trends are available at www.cbpp.org.

Racism in Employment and Traffic Stops Documented

Two recent studies add to a growing body of research that documents race bias in the United States.

The first study looked at employer responses to black and white job applicants with criminal records and found that a criminal record represents a significant barrier to finding employment. The study also found that the race of an applicant had a significant effect on employment opportunities among applicants with a criminal record.

For the study, white and black college students were paired and given similar ìbackgroundsî except that one (the paired testers randomly switched which one) was given a criminal record to report to an employer. Three-hundred and fifty employers were tested by having the pair apply for an advertised position. Among the studyís findings:

• A criminal record reduces the likelihood of a call-back from employers by 50% for whites, and by 64% for blacks.
• Among blacks without criminal records, only 14% received call-backs compared to 34% of white non-criminals. Even whites with criminal records received more call-backs than blacks without criminal records.
• Only 5% of blacks with criminal records received a call-back, compared to 17% of whites with a record who were called back.

The study, The Mark of A Criminal Record, by Devah Pager is available at http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/2002-05.pdf.

The second study from the Council on Crime and Justice in Minnesota looked at racial profiling in police stops, which has increasingly become the focus of attention in several states and jurisdictions across the country. The study reveals a pattern of racial profiling in traffic stops and discretionary searches that occurs across a range of law enforcement jurisdictions in the state. According to the study:

• Black, Latino and American Indian drivers were stopped and searched at greater rates than White drivers, but contraband was found as a result of searches of Blacks, Latinos and American Indians at lower rates than in searches of White drivers.
• The greatest disparities in stops and searches for Black drivers were found in suburban cities and central cities other than Minneapolis. In one group of suburban jurisdictions, Black drivers were stopped about 310% more often than would be expected if drivers of all racial and ethnic groups were stopped at the same rate. Black drivers were subject to discretionary searches at a rate 108% greater than expected, but only 11% were found in possession of contraband compared to 18% of White drivers searched.
• Overall, 24% of discretionary searches of White drivers produced contraband compared to only 11% of searches of Black drivers and 9% of searches of Latino drivers.
• In Minneapolis, if officers had stopped Black drivers at the same rate as other drivers, approximately 12,804 fewer Black drivers would have been stopped in 2002, and 1,053 fewer Black drivers would have been searched.

The study, Minnesota Racial Profiling Study: All Jurisdictions Report, is available at http://www1.umn.edu/irp/mnrpreport.html.

Fact Sheets on Ex-Offender Barriers and Recommended Actions Available

The Center on Law and Social Policy (CLASP) and Community Legal Services, Inc. have released a set of fact sheets based on an earlier report, Every Door Closed: Barriers Facing Parents With Criminal Records. The fact sheets distill information from an earlier report released in 2002 that looked at barriers to employment for ex-offenders including legal, employment, housing, education, public benefits, immigrant status, foster care and child support issues. Each fact sheet summarizes the issue and offers recommendations for federal, state and local action to address the problem. The fact sheets are available at www.clasp.org.

Upcoming Events

• Latino Fatherhood Conference. The National Latino Father and Family Institute is hosting its 2nd annual National Latino and Fatherhood Conference in Atlanta, Georgia on November 20 and 21, 2003. For information, contact NLFFI at (323) 728-7770 or www.nlffi.org.
• Child Support Tele-Talks. The National Child Support Enforcement Association conducts a monthly series of telephone conferences on child support subjects. For each telephone connection, there is a $295 fee and the number of listeners is unlimited. Scheduled topics include undistributed child support collections, arrearage collection, and paternity disestablishment. More information is available at www.ncsea.org.