Development of Social Policy First social policies were directed to benefit veterans Some people were entitled to government assistance based on eligibility requirements Benefits could be restricted to those who could prove their need for help Goal is to provide a social “safety net” The vast majority of social policies were enacted during and after the Great Depression Public assistance Welfare

Development of Social Policy New Deal (Roosevelt, take two) Social Security Aid to Families with Dependent Children disability and unemployment insurance Great Society (Johnson) Medicare Medicaid Food Stamps (SNAP) Head Start Housing Assistance Welfare Reform (Clinton) Replaced AFDC with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

Problems with Social Security Demographic shift Increased birth rate 1946—mid-1960’s “Baby Boomers” Decreased birth rate since then Increasing life expectancy especially due to medical improvements When these powers combine, Social Security’s future is questionable 1935 – 16 payers:1 recipient; 2013 – 3:1; (projected) 2020 – 2:1 Social Security Trust Fund (in surplus now) is diminishing; at some point, more will be going on than coming in Proposals Increase recipient age Test for needs of recipient Rude annual Cost of Living adjustment Reduce benefits Increase the amount of income subject to FICA taxes Privatizing portions of Social Security

Health Care Policy Mostly private health care system Traditional approach treats healthcare providers as service providers. Insurance pays these costs as a 3 rd party payer. Rising costs of health care led to the creation of Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) Federal Involvement with health care (prior to ACA) Medicare National health insurance program for the elderly Medicaid Provides medical benefits for low-income people Research

Problems with Health Care Rising costs Uninsured – working poor unable to afford insurance/young workers who choose not to pay for insurance “invincibles” High cost of malpractice insurance due to increased litigation Unnecessary procedures Endless paperwork from the federal government, insurance companies Lack of flexibility and choice with HMOs

Health Care Spending in the United States and Abroad, 2001

Health Care Policy Health care reform Early priority of the Clinton administration Produced various proposals Single payer (socialized medicine) “Managed competition” Requiring coverage from employers Abolishing employer provided coverage and requiring individually- provided insurance Became a campaign issue/early policy concern for Obama Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010) Coverage for pre-existing conditions, minimum standards for policies, individual mandate, subsidies for low-income people, health care exchanges, Medicaid and Medicare expansion, employer mandate

Education Policy Education is largely run by state and local gov’t, which is an impact of the 10 th Amendment Federal gov’t has involved itself by attaching “strings” to federal education grants to the state. States don’t have to take the money, but if they do, they must comply with those federal requirements. Important federal education legislation Head Start – program for disadvantaged preschool-age children Elementary and Secondary Education Act – funding for disadvantaged students Title IX of Education Amendments of 1972 – banned sex discrimination in federally funded education programs Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act – Addresses care and education of students with disabilities

Education Policy No Child Left Behind – institutes requirements for states to received federal funds for education. States must: Adopt subject matter standards Test all students in grades 3-8 on those standards Identify low-performing schools based upon that testing Require low-performing schools to develop improvement plans Allow parents of students in such schools that do not improve to transfer to other public schools ALL students must be proficient in state standards by 2014 Common Core State Standards Initiative 45 states have adopted common standards that implement rigorous Math and English Language Arts Supporters argue that the standards prepare high school graduates for the requirements of the working world Critics argue that it is a violation of the state’s role in education; “one- size-fits-all” approach