Three Key Feature of US welfare policy Public attitude- who deserves to benefit Timing of the Welfare state Federalism

Patterns of Policy-Making Majoritarian; entitlement every benefits, everyone pays No means test Social Security, Medicare Client based few benefit, almost everyone pays Means tested Medicaid, Food Stamps, AFDC Political Implications

Social Security Previous system FDR Plan Insurance for unemployed and elderly AFDC assistance for blind, dependents Different administration and eligibility standards

AFDC: Erosion of Consensus Increased federal requirements increase costs to states Public opinion sours Changing composition of AFDC recipients

Client Politics benefits of proposal go to a relatively small group, but the public at large pays Initially uncontroversial Politics depends on legitimacy of recipients AFDC recipients lose legitimacy

Majoritarian Politics Requires popular and elite views Once passed, becomes politically invulnerable Save social security and medicare remain good politics unless costs to voters exceed their benefits

1996 Welfare Reform Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act Block grants Time limits Work requirements

Interpreting Welfare Reform Balancing the budget Not much saving Poor bear brunt for budget cuts; are 24% of non defense spending, but 53% of reductions Shredding the safety net? State benefits varied under AFDC Federal spending on poor not ended

Conclusion Popular approval for social welfare programs is a function of benefits and costs SS widely distributed benefits and costs, creates majoritarian politics AFDC- narrowly distributed benefits; depends on public’s perception of worthiness/deserving of recipients Save SS; End Welfare as we know it

Implications Is bad policy good politics Means testing social security Assistance for college Middle Class entitlements Politically more attractive, also more expensive