Means Tested ProgramsWelfare- TANF

Source: Brookings

1. Quiz – Overview and Misconceptions of Welfare

2. Attitudes about Welfare –Ideology

3. Race and Welfare

4. Welfare Reform

5. Why Judging Reform Success is So Complex

First a True False Test of your knowledge on Welfare/TANF

A good deal of information and misinformation abounds in common knowledge.

Answers:

Food Stamps

HUD

SSI

UI

EITC

“Welfare”

VESID

Public School

College Loans

One Stop Centers

CDC

FDA

SCHIP

Prescriptions for seniors

Begin from the reason for means-tested policy.

Poverty

Stratification by Social Class

Note: The data points represent the midpoints of the respective years. The latestrecession began in July 1990 and ended in March 1991.

Source: Figure 1 in Joseph Dalaker. 2001. Poverty in the United States: 2000. Current Population Reports Series P60-214. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Also accessible at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty00.html.

Since some argue it over estimates and others that

it underestimates, the primary importance of the poverty line in the United States is analyzing changes over time

Census Bureau Census Bureau uses set of money income thresholds uses set of money income thresholds vary by family size and composition to vary by family size and composition to determine who is poordetermine who is poor

poverty thresholds do not vary geographically; poverty thresholds do not vary geographically; updated annually for inflation but they have updated annually for inflation but they have not kept pace with rising real incomesnot kept pace with rising real incomes

The thresholds in 2000 were:The thresholds in 2000 were:1-person under 65: $9,2141-person under 65: $9,214

3-person family (adult & 2 children): 3-person family (adult & 2 children): 14,26914,2694-person family (adult & 3 children): 4-person family (adult & 3 children): 18,02218,022Quiz question: 4

Source: U.S. Census Bureau Source: Brookings

http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/p60-236.pdf

Stratification by Social Class

1959 1964 1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 20000

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45Numbers in millions, rates in percent Recession

Number in poverty

Poverty rate

31.1 million

11.3 percent

Note: The data points represent the midpoints of the respective years. The latestrecession began in July 1990 and ended in March 1991.

Source: Figure 1 in Joseph Dalaker. 2001. Poverty in the United States: 2000. Current Population Reports Series P60-214. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Also accessible at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty00.html.

Since some argue it over estimates and others that

it underestimates, the primary importance of the poverty line in the United States is analyzing changes over time

Census Bureau Census Bureau uses set of money income thresholds uses set of money income thresholds vary by family size and composition to vary by family size and composition to determine who is poordetermine who is poor

poverty thresholds do not vary geographically; poverty thresholds do not vary geographically; updated annually for inflation but they have updated annually for inflation but they have not kept pace with rising real incomesnot kept pace with rising real incomes

Number of Poor and Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2000

The thresholds in 2000 were:The thresholds in 2000 were:1-person under 65: $9,2141-person under 65: $9,214

3-person family (adult & 2 children): 3-person family (adult & 2 children): 14,26914,2694-person family (adult & 3 children): 4-person family (adult & 3 children): 18,02218,022Quiz question: 4

Source: U.S. Census Bureau Source: Brookings

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/13/us/income-poverty-rate-at-1990s-levels.html?ref=us

The median household income adjusted for inflation fell to $49,445 in 2010, a 7 percent decrease from a peak in 1999. The last time American households earned less than a median of $50,000 was in 1996. Meanwhile, the nation’s poverty rate reached 15.1 percent in 2010, the highest level since 1993.

As with unemployment, median income and poverty are affected by recessions.

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/10/156387172/poverty-in-the-u-s-by-the-numbers?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=share&utm_campaign =

Source: 2010 Census, 2006-2010 American Community Survey, Legal Momentum's "Reading Between the Lines: Women's Poverty in the United States, 2010"Credit: Stephanie d'Otreppe, Nicole Cohen, JoElla Straley/NPR

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/10/156387172/poverty-in-the-u-s-by-the-numbers?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=share&utm_campaign =

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/10/156387172/poverty-in-the-u-s-by-the-numbers?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=share&utm_campaign=

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/10/156387172/poverty-in-the-u-s-by-the-numbers?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=share&utm_campaign=

History of Government Assistance in the United States

Commonly Known as Welfare

Social Security Act of 1935 (Great Depression) Social Security, pensions for elderly Unemployment compensation Aid to mothers with dependent children

Later became AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children)

In 1996 it became TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996)

Data Source: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/stats/3697.htm

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

1936

1940

1944

1948

1952

1956

1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1996

2000

Families Recipients

http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2001/takeitfromme/abouttheissues.html

States had discretion primarily over States had discretion primarily over setting income eligibility limits and benefit setting income eligibility limits and benefit levelslevels

Was an entitlementWas an entitlement

Beginning in early 1990s, states Beginning in early 1990s, states increasingly used waivers to try new increasingly used waivers to try new approaches to reducing welfare approaches to reducing welfare dependencedependence

Originally intended primarily for widows, Originally intended primarily for widows, AFDC increasingly served never-married AFDC increasingly served never-married mothersmothers

Applying for Welfare (TANF): Investigative Lens Quiz Question # 9 Section1

One Application for Many Needs: Programs often combined All Means-Tested Quiz Question # 10

Section 3 Name required, not anonymous -- Fraud

Section 4 Problem-Oriented/ Based on need/Residual

Section 8 Like Poverty Level, Depends on # in Family, and

Citizenship Important

Q 13-14

Applying for Welfare (TANF): Investigative Lens Quiz Question # 9

Last Page Top Left Consent (3 from bottom) Must consent to an investigation Fraud Quiz Questions #

14 & 17

Section 9 Absent Parent, Child Support Enforcement

$1

$3

$5

$7

$9

$11

$13

$15

$17

1994 2000 1994 2000

Year

Ch

ild S

up

po

rt C

olle

ctio

ns

in B

illio

ns

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

Pa

ternities E

stablish

ed in

T

ho

usa

nd

s

9.8

17.9

676

1,555

Section 13 & 17 Means, not income tested

http://www.cartoonwork.com/archive/socio-econcartoons/welfare-experience.htm

Quiz Question # 9

Shift to part B – Welfare Reform

www.claybennett.com/pages/welffare_reform.html

Two Views of PovertyTwo Views of Poverty

•The poor are The poor are victims of their victims of their circumstances circumstances and do not and do not have have opportunities opportunities to advanceto advance

•The poor are The poor are responsible for responsible for their their circumstances circumstances and do not take and do not take advantage of advantage of available available opportunitiesopportunities

•Liberal Liberal •Conservative Conservative

Source: Brookings

??? ???

Two Views of PovertyTwo Views of Poverty

•The poor are victims of their The poor are victims of their circumstances and do not circumstances and do not have opportunities to have opportunities to advanceadvance

•The poor are responsible for The poor are responsible for their circumstances and do not their circumstances and do not take advantage of available take advantage of available opportunitiesopportunities

•Liberal Liberal •Conservative Conservative

Source: Brookings

??? ???

Source: Mark Rank. 2004. One Nation, Underprivileged. Oxford University Press. P.80

Reading Q # 4 What are the 4 different ideologies profiled by Jansson?

Ideal Types Libertarians Conservatives Liberals Radicals 8 grps of 3 or 4, guess ideology then

unite a’s and b’s to see if they match and decide on final answer.

A CONSERVATIVE PERSPECTIVE

“MY CONCLUSION IS …[THAT] IN ADDITION TO ITS STRONG MORAL BASE IN PERSONAL FREEDOM, CAPITALISM AND COMPETITIVE MARKETS WORK TO DELIVER SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC PROGRESS;…BUREAUCRATIC WELFARE STATE[S] DO NOT WORK. THEY SAP INDIVIDUAL INCENTIVE, INITIATIVE AND CREATIVITY AND ULTIMATELY CANNOT DELIVER SUFFICIENTLY RISING STANDARDS OF LIVING TO MEET THE EXPECTATIONS OF THEIR CITIZENS….”

•Source: Katz MSU

MICHAEL BOSKINCHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS DURING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

1a

XXX’s argue that, especially in its more advanced European forms, the WS has become a dangerous anachronism. By requiring high taxes, the WS deprives society of needed investment resources and saddles employers with workers who feel that they are “owed” a living---by the state if not by the boss!

XXX’s concede that the WS may once have been fiscally tolerable (if never politically or economically desirable) but argue that it should now be dismantled because its extravagances are unsustainable in our age of intensified global competition. Indeed advanced nations that continue to adhere to old-style “welfarism” risk permanent inferiority within the emerging postindustrial division of labor.

XXX’s believe, that federal government in welfare is not good, however, involvement in international policy and in supporting business through subsidies etc. is good.

CONSERVATIVES

•Source: Katz MSU

1b

A LIBERAL PERSPECTIVE“I’m often asked if I’m a XXX, and I say, ‘Well, if Jack Kennedy was a XXX or… Franklin Roosevelt was a XXX, then I’m a XXX.’ This is not 1960, and it’s not 1932. We’re in a completely different world than then. But I believe in opportunity, and I believe in…fairness. The only way this country prospers is if everybody is sharing in the prosperity. I think my party has uniquely stood for that…,where government can be an active partner with the private sector in moving the country forward….”

•Source: Katz MSU

2 a

RICHARD GEPHARDTDEMOCRATIC LEADER, US HOUSE OF REPRESENATIVES.

LIBERALS XXX support a moderately high level of social services, but tend to favor equality

of opportunity more than equality of social condition. They do believe that society has a duty to help the poor and oppressed, and to make appropriate arrangements for the young and elderly, but they would not go as far as social democrats and other radicals in the pursuit of these goals.

Many XXX also believe that the educated elite should lead society and that the power of rational persuasion (“ideas” again) are sufficient to convince voters of the moral correctness of their aims; they are thus “idealists” in the strictly philosophical sense of the term.

The dominant political ideology during certain periods of 20th century American history, classic reform XXX reached its high tide during the Johnson years (1963 - 68). While still strongly supported by minorities, intellectuals, femininists, and various other groups, XXX has essentially been on the defensive ever since. Indeed, the “X” word is now often shunned even by XXX’s themselves, who are afraid of alienating voters. Many XXX’s accordingly now prefer to be called “progressives.” That has not increased their electoral popularity, however.

•Source: Katz MSU

2 b

A RADICAL PERSPECTIVE

“THE CENTRAL QUESTION…IS WHETHER AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES THE CLASS DIVISIONS AND SOCIAL INEQUALITIES PRODUCED BY CAPITALISM CAN BE UNDONE BY [LEGISLATIVE] DEMOCRACY.”

•Source: Katz MSU

GOSTA ESPING-ANDERSENRADICAL WELFARE STATE ANALYST

3 a

RADICALS

To understand the WS, XX’s contend you must first understand the relative political strength of the principal classes (“forces”) in capitalist society:---on the one hand, the asset-owning rich (“capitalists”) and the top managers who work directly for them; on the other, ordinary wage - dependent workers in potential political alliance with the “new middle class” of technical/professional workers.

Distinct social classes can have distinctly different perceptions of their interests and, hence, different attitudes towards social welfare programs and the Welfare State. Blue-collar workers may well look to the WS for socially – financed protections against the uncertainties of life under capitalism, whereas owners see the WS as blocking their quest for a “free market” system in which worker resistance & government intervention are minimized.

XX’s thus view politics largely in terms of coalition-building, since failure to

form such alliances means that, as in the US, the WS is likely to be limited.

•Source: Katz MSU

3 b

A LIBERTARIAN PERSPECTIVEIMAGINE AN AMERICA WHERE CHILDREN HAVE ACCESS TO A BROAD SPECTRUM OF WORLD-CLASS EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES. WHERE SCHOOLS SPARK THE IMAGINATION AND TEACH THE FUNDAMENTALS— CONSISTENT WITH YOUR VALUES. IMAGINE AN AMERICA WHERE POLITICIANS DON’T DOLE OUT BILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS TO WEALTHY COMPANIES LIKE GENERAL MOTORS, AT&T, AND EXXON. WHERE THE RICH NEVER GET RICHER WITH YOUR TAX MONEY. IS THAT THE KIND OF AMERICA YOU WANT TO LIVE IN?….

Source: http://www.lp.org/services/files/libviewpdf.pdf

IT’S TIME TO KICK RONALD MCDONALD OFF WELFARE.THE RED-HAIRED CLOWN IS THE MASCOT FOR MCDONALDS -THE FAST-FOOD CORPORATION THAT RUNS 30,000 RESTAURANTS IN 121 COUNTRIES AND EARNS $40 BILLION A YEAR IN REVENUE. BUT EVEN AS MCDONALDS RAKES IN MASSIVE PROFITS, IT’S ALSO CASHING WELFARE CHECKS FROM THE GOVERNMENT. A FEW YEARS AGO, POLITICIANS GAVE THE CORPORATION $1.6 MILLION TO HELP IT ADVERTISE BIG MACS IN EUROPE....IT’S CALLED CORPORATE WELFARE, AND IT’S HOW DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS ENRICH THEIR BIG-BUSINESS FRIENDS — AT TAXPAYERS’ EXPENSE.

Libertarian Viewpoint Newsletter, Issue 1 Volume 1.

4 a

LIBERTARIANS Because of their emphasis on free markets, many XX are called conservative. But XX also think

people should be free to pursue "sex, drugs, and rock & roll," if that's what they want to do. This live-and-let-live attitude makes XX very difficult to pigeonhole in the traditional left-right paradigm.

As one publication explains: [THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE SAYS]“GOVERNMENTS ARE INSTITUTED AMONG MEN, DERIVING THEIR JUST POWERS FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED...” NOTE WHAT COMES FIRST:YOUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. THE GOVERN-MENT FOLLOWS. TODAY, THAT EQUATION HAS BEEN REVERSED. TOO FREQUENTLY, THE GOVERNMENT COMES FIRST. AND OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” COME SECOND. OR NOT AT ALL. XXX’S ARE WORKING TO CHANGE THAT. IN FACT, WE HAVE SOME BOLD, INNOVATIVE IDEAS ABOUT HOW TO START BUILDING A BETTER AMERICA.

Source: http://www.lp.org/services/files/libviewpdf.pdf

4 b

Even though these ideal types tend to be aligned with major political parties…

There is much variation within parties and, There is much variation over time