 |
Welfare Queens and the Deserving Poor: Public Support for Welfare Spending
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Abstract
Americans overwhelmingly support government spending on the abstract concept
of helping poor people, but are much less supportive of government spending on “welfare”. Some suggest that the difference in levels of support is due to negative associations related to the word “welfare” itself. Martin Gilens’ (1999) research demonstrates that because welfare recipients are commonly thought to be African-Americans, white America’s racism drives hostility towards welfare spending. These explanations are helpful, but they may be missing a key factor in understanding the relatively low levels of support for welfare: recipient gender.
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) is the program generally
known as “welfare.” TANF serves poor single parents and their children. In certain circumstances men can receive welfare assistance, but an overwhelming majority of all welfare enrollees are single mothers. Are people less supportive of “welfare recipients” than “the poor” because welfare serves poor women, not poor people? More specifically, is the public hostile towards welfare recipients because they are (almost entirely) poor women with children and no husbands—women who are morally suspect? This theory, that welfare is unpopular because it serves morally suspect women, is well documented in feminist and welfare literature (Abramovitz 1996). But the theory has yet to be empirically tested with public opinion research.
I utilize data from the American National Elections Survey (ANES), which
queries respondents about their opinions on both spending for the poor and welfare spending. In addition, the ANES questions respondents on numerous issues related to women’s appropriate roles in society. I will also utilize data from “Poverty in America,” a survey conducted by National Public Radio, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Kennedy School of Government in 2001. Careful examination of the data collected from these public opinion surveys will allow me to test the theory that disdain for single mothers contributes to relatively low level of support for welfare spending.
Abramovitz, Mimi. 1996. Regulating Women’s Lives: Social Welfare Policy from
Colonial Times to the Present. Boston: South End Press
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the
Politics of Antipoverty Policy. University of Chicago Press.
|
| | Authors: Hayden Foster, Carly. |
|
| |
|
|
Abstract
Americans overwhelmingly support government spending on the abstract concept
of helping poor people, but are much less supportive of government spending on
“welfare”. Some suggest that the difference in levels of support is due to negative
associations related to the word “welfare” itself. Martin Gilens’ (1999) research
demonstrates that because welfare recipients are commonly thought to be African-
Americans, white America’s racism drives hostility towards welfare spending. These
explanations are helpful, but they may be missing a key factor in understanding the
relatively low levels of support for welfare: recipient gender.
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) is the program generally
known as “welfare.” TANF serves poor single parents and their children. In certain
circumstances men can receive welfare assistance, but an overwhelming majority of all
welfare enrollees are single mothers. Are people less supportive of “welfare recipients”
than “the poor” because welfare serves poor women, not poor people? More specifically,
is the public hostile towards welfare recipients because they are (almost entirely) poor
women with children and no husbands—women who are morally suspect? This theory,
that welfare is unpopular because it serves morally suspect women, is well documented in
feminist and welfare literature (Abramovitz 1996). But the theory has yet to be
empirically tested with public opinion research.
I utilize data from the American National Elections Survey (ANES), which
queries respondents about their opinions on both spending for the poor and welfare
spending. In addition, the ANES questions respondents on numerous issues related to
women’s appropriate roles in society. I will also utilize data from “Poverty in America,”
a survey conducted by National Public Radio, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the
Kennedy School of Government in 2001. Careful examination of the data collected from
these public opinion surveys will allow me to test the theory that disdain for single
mothers contributes to relatively low level of support for welfare spending.
Abramovitz, Mimi. 1996. Regulating Women’s Lives: Social Welfare Policy from
Colonial Times to the Present. Boston: South End Press
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the
Politics of Antipoverty Policy. University of Chicago Press.
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
