This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Joint Select Committee on Poverty | |
|---|---|
| Name | Joint Select Committee on Poverty |
| Type | joint select committee |
| Chamber | United States Congress |
| Formed | 2023 |
| Jurisdiction | United States House of Representatives and United States Senate |
| Chair | U.S. Representative |
| Vicechair | U.S. Senator |
Joint Select Committee on Poverty
The Joint Select Committee on Poverty was a bicameral body established during the 118th United States Congress to investigate persistent poverty, evaluate federal antipoverty programs, and propose cross-branch policy reforms. The committee worked alongside standing committees such as the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee while drawing expertise from agencies like the United States Census Bureau, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Social Security Administration, and the United States Department of Agriculture.
The committee was created by a resolution introduced after debates following reports from the United States Census Bureau, analyses by the Congressional Budget Office, and investigations by the Government Accountability Office that highlighted rising income inequality, persistent deep poverty, and regional distress in areas referenced in studies by the Brookings Institution, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Urban Institute. Legislative momentum grew after hearings convened by members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the House Progressive Caucus, and policymakers aligned with the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Senate Republican Conference. The resolution invoked precedents such as the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis and was negotiated through leaders including the Speaker of the House, the Senate Majority Leader, the House Minority Leader, and the Senate Minority Leader.
The committee’s mandate encompassed review of federal programs administered through statutes like the Social Security Act, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families statute, and programs funded under the Farm Bill while coordinating with programs covered by the Medicaid statute and federal tax expenditures such as the Earned Income Tax Credit. Its jurisdiction was defined to allow cross-cutting study of intersections among programs overseen by the Department of Education, the Department of Labor, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee’s charter drew on legislative frameworks used by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and set reporting deadlines consistent with precedent from the Joint Committee on the Library.
Membership included Representatives appointed by the Speaker of the House and the House Minority Leader and Senators appointed by the Senate Majority Leader and the Senate Minority Leader, with seats allocated to members from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Problem Solvers Caucus, and the New Democrat Coalition. Leadership positions mirrored earlier bicameral arrangements such as those on the Joint Economic Committee, with a chair from the House Ways and Means Committee and a vice-chair from the Senate Finance Committee. Staff support included detailees from the Congressional Research Service, the Government Accountability Office, and policy offices associated with members from the House Committee on Education and Labor.
The committee held hearings featuring testimony from academics at institutions like Harvard University, Princeton University, Columbia University, and Stanford University and from policy experts at the Brookings Institution, the Urban Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. It received briefings from agency officials at the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Agriculture, and state officials from offices such as the California Department of Social Services and the New York State Department of Health. Field investigations visited regions cited in research by the Economic Innovation Group, including counties identified in reports from the Opportunity Insights project and recovery efforts following events like Hurricane Maria and economic dislocation in Appalachia.
Major findings cited disparities documented by the United States Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unequal access described in reports from the National Low Income Housing Coalition, and program fragmentation identified by the Government Accountability Office. Recommendations included proposals to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, reform Medicaid eligibility pathways, increase funding streams under the Child Care and Development Block Grant and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and pilot initiatives modeled after demonstrations run by the Social Security Administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee also recommended enhanced data sharing aligned with standards from the Office of Management and Budget and coordinated financing strategies similar to proposals advanced by the Tax Policy Center.
Following the committee’s final report, portions of its recommendations were incorporated into legislation considered by the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, amendments to the Appropriations Act, and entitlement proposals debated in budget reconciliation under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Several states referenced committee findings when designing programs in legislation passed in the California State Legislature, the New York State Assembly, and the Massachusetts General Court. Nonlegislative impacts included administrative rulemaking at the Department of Health and Human Services and program pilots funded through grants administered by the Office of Management and Budget and the Departments of Treasury and Labor.
Critics from factions including members of the Heritage Foundation, commentators at The Wall Street Journal, and some members of the Senate Republican Conference argued the committee duplicated work of standing committees and risked politicizing assistance programs, citing procedural disputes reminiscent of conflicts between the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee. Others, including think tanks such as the Cato Institute and advocacy organizations like Feeding America, contested specific data interpretations and recommended alternatives to proposed tax and entitlement changes, while legal challenges referenced precedents from cases argued before the United States Supreme Court.