The political economy of state level welfare benefits

Sander, William; Giertz, J. Fred

doi:10.1007/bf00125999

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, states with larger percentages of African Americans had smaller average AFDC benefits. However, unlike in prior research (Sander and Giertz 1986), the effect of Hispanic is not significant. The persistent effect of African‐American presence across all of our models extends the historical work on race and welfare (Quadagno 1994) and is consistent with Gilens's (1999) claims on race and welfare attitudes.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…African American and Hispanic measures the percent of the state's total population that is African American and Hispanic, respectively. Research indicates that AFDC benefit levels are lower in areas with larger populations of African Americans and Hispanics (Sander and Giertz 1986). As such, we expect each of these variables to negatively affect social spending.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Uneven Patterning of Welfare Benefits at the Twilight of AFDC: Assessing the Influence of Institutions, Race, and Citizen Preferences

Kail

Dixon

2011

The Sociological Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars have been slow to test welfare state theories on the extensive subnational variation in the United States during the recent period of retrenchment. We assess institutional politics theories, literature on race and social policy, and public opinion arguments relative to levels of support in states' Aid to Families Dependent Children programs from 1982 until its elimination in 1996. Pooled time-series results demonstrate that the determinants of spending during retrenchment are mostly similar to those driving development and expansion. Pro-spending actors and professionalized state institutions limit benefit curtailment, while jurisdictions with larger African- American populations have lower benefits. Additionally, liberal citizens positively impact support and strengthen the effects of state institutions, but this effect is attenuated in states with larger African-American populations.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Uneven Patterning of Welfare Benefits at the Twilight of AFDC: Assessing the Influence of Institutions, Race, and Citizen Preferences

Kail

Dixon

2011

The Sociological Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior research that has examined the factors associated with variation in state AFDC generosity (Plotnick and Winters 1985;Sander and Giertz 1986;Peterson and Rom 1990) provide some insights. A state's s adoption of time-limited benefits is likely to be related to the median voter's ability and willingness to pay, as given by the social and economic landscape and by the political process itself.…”

Section: Factors Associated With States' Experimentation With Timementioning

confidence: 97%

“…Either story suggests that the maximum AFDC benefit should be included as a right-hand side variable. However, from an econometric standpoint, one problem in doing so is that the maximum AFDC benefit itself has been identified as a function of a number of the included variables, including per capita income (Sander and Giertz 1986). Thus, one might instead argue for including the exogenous determinants of the maximum AFDC benefit only, rather than the variable itself.…”

Section: Factors Associated With States' Experimentation With Timementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The empirical analysis closely follows earlier related work by Plotnick and Winters (1985), Sander and Giertz (1986), and Peterson and Rom (1990), which examined factors associated with cross-state variation in AFDC program generosity.' From a policy perspective, the results obtained here regarding states' adoption of time-limited benefits under the federal waivers should provide insights into the factors likely to distinguish one state's welfare plan from another, as states assume much greater control and responsibility than in the past for meeting the needs of poor families.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State Experimentation With Time-Limited AFDC Benefits: What Differentiates Reform-Minded States From Others?

Winkler¹

1998

Public Finance Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines states' experimentation with time-limited Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits prior to the passage of the 1996 welfare reform legislation. The data reveal substantial variation in states' definitions of time-limited benefits adopted under the federal waivers. Some states adopted a "2 years and you're out" policy (i.e., AFDC cash benefits would be cut off), whereas others interpreted time limits much more leniently. Next, this study examines the economic, social, and political characteristics of states most likely associated with their adoption of this policy, both broadly and narrowly defined. The findings suggest that ability to pay, willingness to pay and political climate are among the factors that distinguish "reform-minded" states from others. These same factors are likely to be importantfollowing the 1996 legislation, as states assume much greater control than in the past m designing their welfare plans.

show abstract

Out of many, one? U.S. sub-national political-economies in the post-welfare reform era

Bjorklund

2017

Socio-Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite increased research on social policy variation among U.S. states, few have examined U.S. state-level political-economies in the wake of welfare reform. This is problematic given the ability of state-level political-economies to solidify patterns of stratification. I address this by analyzing four dimensions of U.S. state-level political-economies in the welfare reform era: labor policy, family/social policy, tax policy, and state imposed fiscal constraint. From this analysis I delineate five state-level political-economic types: (1) progressive; (2) contested progressive; (3) boilerplate; (4) frontier conservative; and (5) Southern conservative. Four determinants of type membership are also evaluated: Democratic Party control, unionization, racial fractionalization and income per capita. While my results demonstrate these as meaningful determinants, patterns of association vary by type, thus suggesting a revision to the assumed progressive/conservative continuum of U.S. social policy and political-economies. I conclude by elaborating how my analysis expands our understanding of U.S., and cross-national, political-economies.

show abstract

The political economy of state level welfare benefits

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

The Uneven Patterning of Welfare Benefits at the Twilight of AFDC: Assessing the Influence of Institutions, Race, and Citizen Preferences

The Uneven Patterning of Welfare Benefits at the Twilight of AFDC: Assessing the Influence of Institutions, Race, and Citizen Preferences

State Experimentation With Time-Limited AFDC Benefits: What Differentiates Reform-Minded States From Others?

Out of many, one? U.S. sub-national political-economies in the post-welfare reform era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About