1. Week Twelve: Viewing IGRs through the Welfare State

2. Objectives for Class Discuss the importance of welfare states Discuss the importance of welfare states Consider the American experience Consider the American experience Evolution of IGRs and federalism Evolution of IGRs and federalism From AFDC to Welfare Reform From AFDC to Welfare Reform Housing and Social Services Case Study Housing and Social Services Case Study

3. Emergence of the American Welfare State Responsiveness of the American federal system Responsiveness of the American federal system Highlights intergovernmental competition Highlights intergovernmental competition Diffusion and innovation Diffusion and innovation Citizenship rights Citizenship rights Path dependency Path dependency “I don’t study welfare, why should I care?” “I don’t study welfare, why should I care?”

4. Social Welfare Policy Context in Early 20 th Century Dual federalism Dual federalism Weak governmental institutions, few resources Weak governmental institutions, few resources Heavy reliance upon local private charities Heavy reliance upon local private charities Outdoor relief v. cash assistance Outdoor relief v. cash assistance Moral concerns about public assistance Moral concerns about public assistance Emphasis on economic development Emphasis on economic development Grass roots reform movement → White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children in 1909 Grass roots reform movement → White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children in 1909

6. Responsiveness of System Expanding the scope of conflict Expanding the scope of conflict Multiple access points Multiple access points Laboratories of experimentation Laboratories of experimentation Informal cooperation in dual federalism system Informal cooperation in dual federalism system

7. Intergovernmental Competition Neighbors’ decisions to adopt Neighbors’ decisions to adopt Neighbors’ decisions to set benefit levels Neighbors’ decisions to set benefit levels Neighbors’ decisions about residency requirements Neighbors’ decisions about residency requirements Why not an immediate “race-to-the-bottom?” Why not an immediate “race-to-the-bottom?”

9. 1934 (in $2000)N National Mean39.68 (13.47) 509.91 (173.03) 33 North Central45.47 (12.47) 584.29 (160.28) 11 Northeast41.58 (19.38) 534.34 (249.09) 4 West40.22 (13.66) 516.86 (175.58) 9 South31.22 (8.63) 401.21 (110.87) 9 Mothers’ Aid Benefit Levels in 1934

10. Mean (Years) Northeast3.25 South1.93 North Central1.60 West1.90 Length of Residency Requirements by Region

11. Mothers’ Aid Benefit Variation, 1919 & 1934 Region (RR’s) Benefit in 1919 (in $1990) Benefit in 1934 (in $1990) Northeast (3.25)192.65405.58 South (1.93)185.79304.53 North Central (1.60)251.77443.50 West (1.90)264.31392.32 National Mean230.01387.04

12. Citizenship and Program Benefits Political v. civil v. social citizenship Political v. civil v. social citizenship Unidirectional v. reciprocal? Unidirectional v. reciprocal? Program benefits deemed inadequate Program benefits deemed inadequate Program benefits did expand in generosity Program benefits did expand in generosity Program adoption v. program structure Program adoption v. program structure

14. Path Dependency Inertial quality of public organizations Inertial quality of public organizations Regional and interstate variation present immediately Regional and interstate variation present immediately Variation in program structure persists into modern era Variation in program structure persists into modern era Importance of initial institutional arrangements Importance of initial institutional arrangements

16. Aid to Dependent Children Component of Social Security Act of 1935 Component of Social Security Act of 1935 Federal match, mandatory participation, residency requirements Federal match, mandatory participation, residency requirements States and localities still retained much discretion States and localities still retained much discretion Needs standards, benefit levels, administration, “suitable home” Needs standards, benefit levels, administration, “suitable home” Between 1950s-70s – states became more constrained as ADC evolved into AFDC Between 1950s-70s – states became more constrained as ADC evolved into AFDC

17. ADC Program Variation, 1939-59 Region Change in Caseload Change in Per Family Spending North +11,877 (+208%) +$248.80 (+67%) South +14,605 (+704%) +$174.24 (+100%) North Central +9,618 (+236%) +$367.23 (+177%) West +9,246 (+536%) +$366.31 (+133%) National Mean +11,628 (+363%) +$267.12 (+111%)

18. National AFDC Caseloads, 1939-59 (April)

19. National AFDC Spending, 1939-59 (April)

20. % Changes in AFDC Caseloads, 1939-59

21. % Change in AFDC Spending, 1939-59

24. Rising Social Welfare Spending in late-20 th Century Between 1970-90, state social service budgets soared – mostly on care for the elderly Between 1970-90, state social service budgets soared – mostly on care for the elderly Manipulate benefit levels Manipulate benefit levels Cannot remove eligible people or deny eligible people benefits Cannot remove eligible people or deny eligible people benefits What other levers/strategies are available? What other levers/strategies are available? Berkowitz: Berkowitz: Story of reform in this period of history echoes the story of reform today Story of reform in this period of history echoes the story of reform today Expanded federal presence in SSI and Food Stamps Expanded federal presence in SSI and Food Stamps Devolution is the one missing ingredient Devolution is the one missing ingredient

25. Welfare Reform and Devolution: How Did We Get There?

26. 1980-96: Rise of Welfare as an Issue and Expanding State Autonomy Prior to 1993 -- record caseloads, bad economy, and struggling state budgets Prior to 1993 -- record caseloads, bad economy, and struggling state budgets Family Support Act of 1988 Family Support Act of 1988 Growing capacity of states Growing capacity of states Waiver program Waiver program Clinton “end welfare as we know it” Clinton “end welfare as we know it” Favorable climate for reform Favorable climate for reform Momentum for devolution Momentum for devolution

27. PRWORA of 1996 Greater state gov’t discretion Greater state gov’t discretion Work requirements Work requirements Time Limits Time Limits Cost savings Cost savings End entitlement to cash assistance End entitlement to cash assistance Immigrant bans Immigrant bans Maintenance of effort and contingency fund Maintenance of effort and contingency fund

28. What Were The Anticipated and/or Feared Outcomes of Welfare Reform?

29. PRWORA – What’s Happened? Some immigrant provisions amended Some immigrant provisions amended No dramatic race-to-the-bottom No dramatic race-to-the-bottom Changing environment for implementation Changing environment for implementation Shortage of workers and caseload decline Shortage of workers and caseload decline Edelman’s fears realized? Edelman’s fears realized?

30. Cash Assistance Benefits, 1934 & 1998 Region ADC Benefit in 1934 (in $1990) TANF Benefit in 1998 (in $1990) Northeast Northeast405.58461.05 South South304.53232.30 North Central North Central443.50378.61 West West392.32380.33 National Mean 387.04343.38

31. Caseload Change in Detroit, 1992- 2000 Caseloads declined by 75 percent – welfare receipt still concentrated in central city Caseloads declined by 75 percent – welfare receipt still concentrated in central city In 2000, half of recipients were new or returning to welfare In 2000, half of recipients were new or returning to welfare Caseload was comprised of older heads of household and larger families Caseload was comprised of older heads of household and larger families Those closest to jobs were more likely to work and leave welfare – all things being equal Those closest to jobs were more likely to work and leave welfare – all things being equal

32. Issues to Consider as Re-authorization Approaches Programs supporting marriage Programs supporting marriage Barriers to employment Barriers to employment Transportation issues Transportation issues Exemptions and time limits Exemptions and time limits Grant levels, maintenance of effort, and contingency funds Grant levels, maintenance of effort, and contingency funds State discretion over work activities State discretion over work activities

33. HASCO Case Study Integrated program with case manager that coordinated services – local organizations would participate to help their clients receive Section 8 vouchers Integrated program with case manager that coordinated services – local organizations would participate to help their clients receive Section 8 vouchers Changes in HUD policy Changes in HUD policy Undermined partnerships, eliminated caseworker Undermined partnerships, eliminated caseworker Reduced # of participants, changed selection criteria Reduced # of participants, changed selection criteria

34. Questions to Answer in Groups Why was the local program so successful? Why was the local program so successful? Are there clear boundaries for “housing-related” services? Are there clear boundaries for “housing-related” services? How should Holt respond to HUD’s directives? Choices? Tradeoffs? How should Holt respond to HUD’s directives? Choices? Tradeoffs? How can you preserve the program? How can you preserve the program? What kinds of sacrifices can you be prepared to make? What kinds of sacrifices can you be prepared to make? Who should you seek out for assistance? Who should you seek out for assistance?

35. Readings for Next Week Chapter Thirteen, Politics in the American States, Gray et al. (pp. 474-505) Chapter Thirteen, Politics in the American States, Gray et al. (pp. 474-505) “The Politics of Bread and Circuses,” Peter Eisinger “The Politics of Bread and Circuses,” Peter Eisinger