Documents
United By Interest Memo
Jun. 14 2017 — 10:29 a.m.

UNITED BY INTEREST
Republicans and Democrats in the 100 poorest districts
represent
a clear path to success
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2016 presidential election was a cry for help from millions of Americans on both sides of
the country’s deepening partisan divide. White voters who lack college degrees flocked to
Donald Trump and his pledge to “Make America Great Again,” while many Black and
Hispanic voters who turned out for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 stayed home last fall
rather than support his Democratic heir apparent, Hillary Clinton.
The two groups – Trump voters and dissatisfied Democrats – obviously don’t align on many
specific policy fights, but they share a general frustration that Washington is not working on
issues that impact them directly. And many of these voters are more motivated by
pocketbook concerns than the partisan priorities being debated in Congress – Planned
Parenthood and climate change, to name a few.
One of the reasons for this shared frustration is that the overwhelming majority of Blacks,
Hispanics and Whites who did not finish college tend to make less money than Whites who
have a four-year degree. This split feeds the growing resentment that many Americans
harbor against Wall Street, Hollywood, and Washington. It’s a driving force behind the
economic nationalism in both parties.
In 2016, the Brookings Institute studied Census data to analyze the poverty rate in each
congressional district from 2010-2014. They pinpointed the exact percentage of people in all
435 House districts who live below the poverty line. We matched the 100 poorest districts
with the lawmakers who represent them. In total, 73 of those districts are represented by a
member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC)
or a conservative Republican.
STATISTICS
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) represent 32 of the 100 poorest
districts.
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) represent 20 of the poorest
100 districts.
Conservative Republicans from the Republican Study Committee and Freedom
Caucus represent 22 of the 100 poorest districts. (CQ)
83 of the 100 poorest districts have at least 20% of their populations living below the
federal poverty line.
Republicans represent many of the districts with the fastest-growing populations of
poor residents, including the suburbs of Las Vegas, Atlanta and Phoenix.
President Trump won many of the states with the biggest increases in poor residents,
including Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.
White Democrats in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and the
Washington, D.C. area represent 10 of the 15 richest districts in the country.

CONCLUSION
Despite their ideological differences, members of the CBC, CHC, and conservative
Republicans represent districts that need the most help jump-starting their local economies.
Most of these districts have at least 20% of their populations living below the federal poverty
line and are in desperate need of jobs, transportation infrastructure, outside investment,
energy, and economic development. A major infrastructure bill could help reinvigorate these
communities by spurring much-needed investment that will provide jobs and result in future
economic growth.
Additionally, these constituencies need relief from the high costs of energy, education and
health care. Their communities often lack the same banking services or access to the
Internet as more affluent cities.
Politically, there is an opportunity for the members who represent these districts to coalesce
around practical pieces of legislation that will improve their everyday lives. For example,
support for an infrastructure package is broad and deep. Recent polls from CNN and
Quinnipiac show 79% and 90% of the country, respectively, supports more federal spending
on roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects. Support is roughly even among
Republicans, Democrats and independents – a rare show of unity in this hyper-partisan era.
Ultimately, conservative Republicans and members of the CBC and CHC in these districts all
share a common responsibility to deliver a much-needed boost for their constituents. The
economic unease in these districts gives the members of Congress who represent them an
incentive to work together to provide economic opportunities for the poorest Americans.