Panel Discussion, NCRW Annual Conference, June 2004

Discussion Leaders

• Sumru Erkut, Associate Director and Senior Research Scientist, Center for Research on Women, Wellesley College
• Lucy Melvin, Public Policy Associate, Girls Incorporated
• Heather Johnston Nicholson, Director of Research, Girls Incorporated

Overview

Tax cuts shortchange youth. Publicly funded kindergarten, high-quality elementary and secondary education, and affordable higher education are dependent on tax revenues. Participants in this session addressed the impact of our tax system on education and girls' programs, noting that tax cuts have a particularly negative impact on the vast number of girls who benefit from the publicly funded girls programs designed to build independence, strength, and leadership.

Outline

Lucy Melvin and Heather Johnston Nicholson, both from Girls Incorporated, addressed the role of young women and girls in the economy. They argued that girls and young women are entitled to respect as earners, as spenders, and as taxpayers. Some facts:

• In 2000, there were approximately 1,342,000 households headed by girls and young women 15-24 years old, which was 10.5 percent of the total female householder families.
• At age 14, young women are slightly more likely than young men to work for pay. Young women are also more likely to do freelance work, like babysitting.
• Young women and girls are an active part of the economy as spenders: girls and young women 8-21 years of age spend approximately $2,564 per year, totaling approximately $41 billion in sales.
• Taxes are a part of girls' lives. If they are employed, then they are responsible for paying income taxes, paying into social security, and paying into Medicare. Girls are subject to taxes when they make any purchase.

Although they may not be entirely aware of it, girls and young women benefit from public services and programs paid for by taxes. In exchange for the taxes that they and their families pay, girls receive programs funded by federal, state and local tax and investment policies. In many cases, however, these programs are not adequately meeting girls' needs:

1. Education
   
   • While most girls are offered the opportunity to receive an education due to public funding, the educational system is not giving back to girls what they deserve.
   • Sexuality education is largely focused on abstinence only, thereby failing to provide girls with information necessary to protect themselves from sexually transmitted infections and other risks of sexual intercourse.
2. Public health care
   
   • When the public health care system fails to provide easy access to the morning after pill and other types of reproductive health care, it fails girls and young women.
3. Nutrition programs
   
   • Girls are affected by government-funded nutrition programs, which offer healthy school lunches, guidelines for healthy eating at home, food stamps, healthy bones education and obesity intervention.
   • While these programs offer a lot of good, they are often countered by the presence of junk food in schools and less exercise in the curriculum.
4. Girls are often protected by the government's "social safety net," which includes child protective services, child welfare, foster care, and the juvenile justice system.

With the release of the budget for fiscal year 2005 came the proposal for substantial cuts in programs, such as the Title V Local Delinquency Prevention Block Grant and the Community Development Block Grant, that benefit at-risk youth. In addition, President Bush has proposed the doubling of funds for abstinence-only sexual education programs, which have not been proven effective and might even cause harm. On top of these proposals, Bush has allocated $1.5 billion for so-called "marriage promotion" programs, which are also largely unproven. Clearly, the combination of tax cuts and current policies has damaging effects on the lives of girls and young women in this country.

Sumru Erkut spoke about girls from minority groups. She began by explaining that by "minority," she means not only race or ethnicity, but those girls who have less power in their society. This lack of power can arise from a girl's:

• Racial and ethnic background.
• Social class background.
• Personal characteristics: minority sexual orientation or disability.

Erkut focused on how cuts in services for girls affect those less powerful than the "average girl," noting that:

1. Minority status in race and ethnicity frequently is linked to proportionately greater poverty levels.
2. Existing resources for girls are not usually designed to accommodate the needs of disabled or sexual minority girls.
3. Cutbacks in programs for sex education, family planning, and adolescent parents disproportionately affect African American girls and young Latinas because, on average, these groups have higher self-reported rates of engagement in sexual intercourse.

Erkut noted that today, a conservative bias toward "abstinence only" programs results in an ideological misuse of taxes. As a consequence of these programs, young women and men are left without adequate knowledge of sexuality in order to manage their sexual activity.

Erkut also discussed the effect of war on social services. Federal spending on war inevitably results in cuts to other federal programs. Most often, the first programs to be cut are those designed to meet the needs of those who do not have a political voice.

She concluded by noting that while interest groups, such as the AARP and the NRA, with powerful lobbying abilities can advocate for their interests, no comparable groups exist for the interest of girls.