scholarly journals Toward a New Welfare History

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Pimpare

Histories of American welfare have been stories about the state. Like Walter Trattner's widely read From Poor Law to Welfare State, now in its sixth edition, they have offered a narrative about the slow but steady expansion and elaboration of state and federal protections granted to poor and working people, and have usually done so by charting increases in government expenditures, by documenting the institutionalization of welfare bureaucracies, and by tracing rises or declines in poverty, unemployment, and other aggregate measures of well-being. This has been the case even in more critical accounts that emphasize that American social welfare history is not a story just of progress, such as Michael Katz's In the Shadow of the Poorhouse. These narratives have emphasized programs, not people (whether it is the poorhouse, the asylum, and mother's pensions, or the more recent innovations of national unemployment insurance, Social Security, AFDC and TANF, and Medicare and Medicaid). In the investigations of the welfare state that dominate academic research, the content and timing of government policy itself has served as the dependent variable, while the independent variables have been a congeries of interests, institutions, and policy entrepreneurs. Our attention has been focused upon what government has done, why it was done, and what the effects were as measured in official data.

2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob S. Hacker

The welfare state—the complex of policies that, in one form or another, all rich democracies have adopted to ameliorate destitution and provide valued social goods and services—is an increasingly central subject in the study of American history and politics. The past decade has unleashed a veritable tidal wave of books on the topic, including, from historians, Alice Kessler-Harris'sIn Pursuit of Equityand Michael Katz'sThe Price of Citizenship, and, from political scientists, Robert Lieberman'sShifting the Color Lineand Peter Swenson'sCapitalists Against Markets. Journals ranging from theAmerican Historical ReviewtoPolitical Science Quarterly(and, with less regularity, even theAmerican Political Science Review) now routinely feature analyses of U.S. social policy. And going back just a few years more, the early 1990s saw the publication of several influential works on the subject, notably Paul Pierson'sDismantling the Welfare State?and Theda Skocpol'sProtecting Soldiers and Mothers, each of which won major book prizes in political science. If any moment deserves to be seen as a heady time for writing on the American welfare state, this is it.


2021 ◽  
pp. 000169932199419
Author(s):  
Arno Van Hootegem ◽  
Koen Abts ◽  
Bart Meuleman

This article aims to explain the paradoxical finding that socio-economically vulnerable groups express more economic, moral and social criticism of the welfare state. As these groups generally benefit more from the welfare state and hold more egalitarian world views, their stronger criticism cannot be explained by the traditional frameworks of self-interest and ideology. As an alternative, we highlight the importance of social experiences of resentment as a source of discontent with welfare state performance. Our contribution argues that the dissatisfaction is embedded in a broader welfare populist critique that pits the hard-working people against the deceitful elite and welfare abusers. This welfare populism emerges from experiences of resentment related to the restructuring of group positions in the process of modernization. We differentiate between three types of discontent: economic status insecurity, group relative deprivation and social distrust. By applying structural equation modelling, we test whether resentful experiences mediate the relationship between the social structural position and welfare state criticism. Results indicate that relative deprivation consistently leads to more economic, moral and social criticism. Social distrust, moreover, stimulates a higher level of moral criticism. This study illustrates that resentment is indeed an important element for understanding the paradoxical relationship between social class and welfare state criticism.


2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler Cowen

Does the welfare state help the poor? This surprisingly simple question often generates more heat than light. By the welfare state, I mean transfer programs aimed at helping the poor through the direct redistribution of income. (This excludes general economic policy, antitrust, the volunteer military, and many other policies that affect the well-being of the poor.) Defenders of the welfare state often assume that the poor benefit from it, while critics suggest that the losses outweigh the gains. The most notable of such criticisms is Charles Murray's Losing Ground, which suggests that the welfare state has failed to achieve its stated ends.


2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 747-748
Author(s):  
Candace Johnson

Gendered States: Women, Unemployment Insurance, and the Political Economy of the Welfare State in Canada, 1945–1997, Ann Porter, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003, pp. 355It is amazing that Canadian society has been consistently bewildered as to the social, political and economic placement of women. In her new book, Ann Porter explains that the labour requirement that enabled women's participation in the workforce during the Second World War created a post-war environment that was inequitable, illogical, gendered, and “regulating.” Thus, progressive measures were to produce regressive results, as they were taken for the sake of nationalism and not gender equality. Porter documents the change in Unemployment Insurance (UI) policy from limited coverage for certain groups of male workers that could not engage in productive labour to “site of contestation over women's entitlement to state benefits” (66).


2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 564-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Jongbloed ◽  
Ashley Pullman

1985 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Ingham

What follows here is an essay—a rather one-sided viewpoint that is both tentative and, within the limits of a journal article, incomplete. I attempt to understand how our recent preoccupation with our bodies is being mobilized as one solution to the fiscal crisis of the welfare state. The deep-rooted assumptions of voluntarism that characterize liberal ideology, I claim, are surfacing again in the debate over lifestyle. And lifestyle, it appears, has become an ideological construction which diverts attention from the structural impediments to well-being by framing health issues in terms of personal, moral responsibilities—a “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” alternative to state intervention in health care. Some implications of the lifestyle ideology for physical educationists are presented.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document