CARSON CITY, Nev. – Almost 14 percent of Nevadans live below the federal poverty level - but that's an improvement over last year and is a little better than the national average, according to new data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The new statistics show that the median household income is rising, and stands at about $55,000. That's a bit under the national average, but the median price of a home is almost $35,000 higher than the national figure.

Elliott Parker, a professor of economics at the University of Nevada Reno, says the Reno area's white-hot real estate market, in particular, has hurt lower income families.

"Housing prices here have grown the fastest of any of the 400 metropolitan areas in the nation," he says. That is relative to the bottom we hit several years ago. I think it was around 2012 when housing prices finally stopped declining."

Anti-poverty advocates have been trying for years to get a bump in the minimum wage to $15 an hour. This year, the Legislature passed a $12-an-hour minimum wage, and $11 if you have health insurance, but Gov. Brian Sandoval vetoed that measure. The next Legislature doesn't meet until 2019 - after next year's election.

Parker says persistent inequality - the gap in income between rich and poor - is particularly striking in the Silver State.

"Nevada has one of the more unequal distributions of income in the nation," notes. "Some numbers I've seen suggest that the top one percent has 44 times the income of the average of the bottom 99 percent, and there's only a couple states in the country that have a higher ratio than that."

The supplemental poverty rate, which takes cost of living into account, shows Nevada is a more expensive place to live compared with the national average.

Almost 14 percent of Nevadans live below the federal poverty level - but that's an improvement over last year - according to new data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Suzanne Potter has more.


get more stories like this via email

This month marks 160 years since the first Medal of Honor was awarded by President Abraham Lincoln. More than a dozen of the 65 recipients alive today are in Washington D.C. to discuss a planned Medal of Honor museum in Texas and monument in the nation's capital.

Patrick Brady, a Seattle native and retired army general received the medal for his service piloting an ambulance helicopter in the Vietnam War, rescuing U.S. and Vietnamese soldiers wounded in battle.

He was in Washington, D.C. this week advocating for a Medal of Honor monument.

"The purpose is not so much to glorify those who have received the medal, but rather to emphasize the values that are embedded in the medal: courage, sacrifice, patriotism - which, of course, are the pillars of American excellence," he said.

Brady said he and his crew were able to rescue about 5,000 people wounded during the war, including civilians. In 2021, Congress unanimously approved the Medal of Honor museum for Arlington, Texas, and a monument in D.C.

The museum is slated to open late next year. Brady said he and other Medal of Honor recipients tour the country speaking to students about courage, sacrifice and patriotism, but added there is only so much you can convey in a school setting.

"The museum may be the best schoolhouse for values that we have, and so in that museum, we will show not just what these people did in combat, the recipients, but more importantly what they did as civilians," Brady said.

Chris Cassidy, Head of the Medal of Honor Museum and Foundation, said the museum bridges political disconnects.

"There's lots of stuff right now that divide people," Cassidy said. "There's very few things that bring people together. And this project is something that unites people. And that's why we're so proud to be part of it."

In 160 years, fewer than 3,600 people have received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for valor in combat.


get more stories like this via email

Like others across the country, many Missouri families struggle with the cost of child care, and state lawmakers are proposing some relief.

Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove, serves Webster County, where the average child care cost for a family with two young children is more than $12,000 a year a year. Kelly has introduced legislation to create a state child care tax credit for parents who qualify for the federal child care tax credit. As with the federal credit, it requires having earned income.

Kelly pointed out no one who's paying attention to "everyday reality" can miss the fact young families are struggling.

"Nobody wants to give a handout, we only want to invest and give a hand up," Kelly stated. "This is money that people have earned, and we're putting it back in their pocket, once we can verify that they're making responsible choices, for their family and for their businesses."

Under House Bill 1335, individuals earning up to $75,000 a year and couples earning up to $150,000 would be eligible for a tax credit toward their child care expenses. The amount would be $1,800 for children up to age two, and $1,200 for kids ages three to six, for a maximum of two children per family.

Kelly added the credit is nontransferable and nonrefundable, features which can make tax credits more expensive. She explained her bill allows parents to choose their child care provider, who does not have to be licensed, but it does include limitations.

"You cannot have your spouse qualify as a day care provider," Kelly noted. "You can't have an older child qualify. It's all very tightly run; it's all very accountable."

Kelly stressed she supports the governor's child care tax credits included in House Bill 870, sponsored by Rep. Brenda Shields, R-St. Joseph.

The credits in Shields' bill would go to child care providers, corporations subsidizing their workers' child care expenses, and donors to child care centers, whereas the credits in Kelly's bill would go directly to families. Kelly feels combining the tax credits in both bills would benefit people "in every corner of the state."

The Iowa Legislature's powerful Ways and Means Committee has advanced a measure to eliminate the state income tax. The move is the latest in a series of votes to reduce taxes in Iowa.

Senate Study Bill 1126 would lower Iowa's income-tax rate to flat 2.5% in five years.

Then in 2030, the income tax would be eliminated completely. This comes just after Iowa passed a 3.9% flat tax last year.

Executive Director of nonprofit, nonpartisan Common Good Iowa Anne Discher said - given that the state income tax accounts for 50% of the Iowa's budget - eliminating it would decimate crucial public services.

"State aid to public schools is 43% of our state budget," said Discher. "We could entirely eliminate state aid for our entire public school system and it wouldn't be enough to cover the kind of income tax cuts that we're talking about. So, the kinds of service cuts really would be draconian."

Republicans have said this bill, and the flat tax signed into law last year, are designed to give Iowans broad tax relief and also make the state attractive to businesses that may be considering locating in Iowa.

Discher pointed out that Iowa is already facing a revenue shortfall due to last year's tax cut.

She added that eliminating the income tax revenue would affect mental health, safety and other social service programs in Iowa. But she warned that it could have other consequences, too.

"It is certainly a shot across the bow against racial equity, as well," said Discher. "We are further advantaging the wealthiest Iowans - further advantaging, as a group, white Iowans. Iowans of color are over-represented at the lower end of the income distribution, because of longstanding discrimination in housing, education and employment."

The bill moves next to the full Senate.