scholarly journals Unemployment Insurance: Strengthening the Relationship between Theory and Policy

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Nicholson ◽  
Karen Needels
Keyword(s):  
Unemployment Insurance ◽  
Social Insurance ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Insurance Program ◽  
Complex Program ◽  
Unemployment Insurance System ◽  
Key Policy ◽  
The Relationship

Ever since the U.S. federal–state system of unemployment insurance was founded in the 1930s, it has provided partial, temporary replacement of wages to eligible workers who lose jobs “through no fault of their own” (as determined by state-level regulations). Unemployment insurance is one of the largest social insurance programs in the United States, with benefits paid totaling about $34 billion in 2004. Economic theory can help us understand the challenges this complex program is likely to face over the next few years. We begin by summarizing the salient characteristics of the unemployment insurance program and then examine the theoretical and econometric research. Much of this research revolves around the main goals of the program, which include: 1) sustaining consumption for workers and their families; 2) helping recipients to make efficient job choices during a period of financial stress; and 3) minimizing the adverse incentives that may accompany partial wage replacement. Of course, these goals can come into conflict—for example, if replacing wages for an unemployed worker also discourages that worker from aggressively searching for or accepting a new job—and our discussion will focus on these conflicts. In conclusion, we address the key policy issues that the unemployment insurance system is likely to face in upcoming years and ways policymakers may be able to use economic analysis to adjust the program so that it remains effective in addressing the needs of unemployed workers.

Unemployment Insurance Reform

2019 ◽  
Vol 686 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Till von Wachter
Keyword(s):  
Wage Inequality ◽  
Unemployment Insurance ◽  
Social Insurance ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Technological Changes ◽  
Insurance Reform ◽  
Insurance Program ◽  
Working Age

The Unemployment Insurance (UI) system is the largest general social insurance program for working-age individuals in the United States and currently insures more than 140 million workers against temporary income losses related to unemployment. UI has been the bedrock of U.S. social policy in recessions, but the system has remained largely unchanged since the mid-1970s despite substantial changes in the labor market that include deindustrialization, higher female participation, increases in wage inequality, and technological changes. This article summarizes existing empirical evidence on the state of the UI system and its effectiveness in achieving its stated goals. A range of reform proposals are discussed that aim to address both the well-known, long-term issues with UI, as well as UI’s readiness to support the workforce of the twenty-first century.

scholarly journals Distributive Consequences of Risk Privatization: The Case of the Swedish Unemployment Insurance System

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-235
Author(s):  
Jayeon Lindellee
Keyword(s):  
Unemployment Insurance ◽  
Unemployment Benefit ◽  
Income Loss ◽  
The Public ◽  
Insurance Benefit ◽  
Insurance Program ◽  
Unemployment Insurance Benefit ◽  
Income Insurance ◽  
Unemployment Insurance System ◽  
Retail Workers

Abstract The public unemployment insurance program in Sweden has retrenched in terms of its benefit generosity in the last three decades. As a response to this trend, in which an ever-smaller proportion of the previous income of unemployed persons is compensated by public unemployment insurance benefit, complementary income insurance schemes provided by unions have expanded rapidly in the last 15 years, currently covering one half of the working population. What does this change mean for people who need income protection upon unemployment and are more likely to find themselves unemployed or underemployed? By analyzing survey-based benefit recipiency data among retail workers who were unemployed in 2014, this article explores the outcomes of the multi-pillarized unemployment benefit provision system in Sweden. While public unemployment insurance benefit does not fully compensate for the income loss for the majority of retail workers, the promise of a complementary income insurance scheme seems to be illusory for many individuals as they repeatedly oscillate between precarious work and benefits, accompanied by the burden of navigating a complex system.

Trust in Government and the American Public’s Responsiveness to Rising Inequality

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 790-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Macdonald
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Income Inequality ◽  
State Level ◽  
Political Trust ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trust In Government ◽  
Combine Data ◽  
Election Studies ◽  
The Relationship

The United States has become increasingly unequal. Income inequality has risen dramatically since the 1970s, yet public opinion toward redistribution has remained largely unchanged. This is puzzling, given Americans’ professed concern regarding, and knowledge of, rising inequality. I argue that trust in government can help to reconcile this. I combine data on state-level income inequality with survey data from the Cumulative American National Election Studies (CANES) from 1984 to 2016. I find that trust in government conditions the relationship between inequality and redistribution, with higher inequality prompting demand for government redistribution, but only among politically trustful individuals. This holds among conservatives and non-conservatives and among the affluent and non-affluent. These findings underscore the relevance of political trust in shaping attitudes toward inequality and economic redistribution and contribute to our understanding of why American public opinion has not turned in favor of redistribution during an era of rising income inequality.

State-Level Sexism and Women’s Health Care Access in the United States: Differences by Race/Ethnicity, 2014–2019

2021 ◽  
pp. e1-e10
Author(s):  
Kristen Schorpp Rapp ◽  
Vanessa V. Volpe ◽  
Hannah Neukrug
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Hispanic Women ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Barriers To Health Care ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Barriers To Health

Objectives. To quantify racial/ethnic differences in the relationship between state-level sexism and barriers to health care access among non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic women in the United States. Methods. We merged a multidimensional state-level sexism index compiled from administrative data with the national Consumer Survey of Health Care Access (2014–2019; n = 10 898) to test associations between exposure to state-level sexism and barriers to access, availability, and affordability of health care. Results. Greater exposure to state-level sexism was associated with more barriers to health care access among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic women, but not non-Hispanic White women. Affordability barriers (cost of medical bills, health insurance, prescriptions, and tests) appeared to drive these associations. More frequent need for care exacerbated the relationship between state-level sexism and barriers to care for Hispanic women. Conclusions. The relationship between state-level sexism and women’s barriers to health care access differs by race/ethnicity and frequency of needing care. Public Health Implications. State-level policies may be used strategically to promote health care equity at the intersection of gender and race/ethnicity. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print September 2, 2021: e1–e10. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306455 )

scholarly journals The US Unemployment Insurance Scheme: A Model for the EU?

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (5) ◽  
pp. 314-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiaan Luigjes ◽  
Georg Fischer ◽  
Frank Vandenbroucke
Keyword(s):  
Unemployment Insurance ◽  
Great Recession ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Insurance Scheme ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
American Model ◽  
The Us ◽  
Minimum Requirements ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The system of unemployment insurance (UI) used in the United States has often been cited as a model for Europe. The American model illustrates that it is possible to create and maintain a UI system based on federal-state co-financing that intensifies during economic crises and thus reinforces protection and stabilisation. Central requirements and conditional funding can improve the aggregate protection and stabilisation capacity of the system. However, the architecture of the US system financially incentivises states to organise retrenchment of their own efforts for UI, which in turn leads to a divergence of benefit generosity and coverage levels. During the Great Recession, the federal government mitigated these incentives for retrenchment through minimum requirements attached to federal financial intervention. With regards to the European unemployment re-insurance system debate, the US experience implies both positive and encourageing conclusions and cautionary lessons.

How Courts Structure State-Level Representation

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P. Kastellec
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Median Voter ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Structure State ◽  
The Relationship

I examine how courts condition the relationship between state-level public opinion and policy. The system of federalism in the United States allows federal and state courts to establish the types of policies that states are constitutionally allowed to implement. In particular, federal courts can set “federal floors” for policy, below which no states can go. State courts, in turn, can raise the level of this floor. Thus, both federal and state courts shape whether state policy can match the preferences of the median voter in a given state. Analyzing data on public opinion, judicial decisions, and state-level policy on the issue of abortion, from 1973 to 2012, I show that changes in the set of allowable abortion restrictions, according to the combined decisions of state and federal courts, significantly affect whether states implement majority-preferred policies. I also show that ignoring the influence of courts on the policymaking environment significantly affects the estimated level of policy congruence and thus conclusions about the scope of representation. These results demonstrate the importance of placing courts in the larger study of state-level representation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document