Popular in Political Science

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Canadian Politics

Parties and Elections: An End to Canadian Exceptionalism?

St. Francis Xavier University James Bickerton

Asian Politics

The Politics of Knowledge in Development

University of Delhi Madhulika Banerjee

American Politics

Fifty years of declining confidence and increasing polarization in trust

University of California Berkeley Henry Brady

American Politics

The Opening Dilemma

Cornell University Richard Bensel

Political Economy

Wait and See?

University of Liverpool Mariaelisa Epifanio

Living Off the Government: Race, Gender, and the Politics of Welfare

View more insights in Books - Social Sciences - Political Science - American Politics

View more figures from Miami University

View the page of Anne Whitesell

Read the Study

Anne Whitesell discusses the ways welfare recipients lack adequate political representation.

Image courtesy of interviewee. September 5, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

The speaker describes their experience at the Urban Institute where they worked on a welfare rules database that compiles regulations from all states since the 1996 welfare reform. They observed significant variation in state welfare policies and the influence of special interest groups in policymaking. The speaker connects their background in welfare rules to their graduate studies, focusing on how various interest groups affect state welfare policies and the resulting stereotypes about welfare recipients.

They analyze the implications of policies, such as family caps, which restrict additional benefits for families with more children, arguing that such policies ultimately harm children and reflect misinformed beliefs about welfare recipients. The discussion extends to the racial biases embedded in welfare policies, the rigidity of eligibility requirements, and the ways business interests shape welfare to maintain a low-skilled workforce.

Moreover, the speaker critiques the broader narrative of personal responsibility in social welfare and warns against the potential dangers of policies that impose work requirements linked to benefits, underscoring the need for more forgiving welfare policies that promote stability for recipients. They urge awareness of the historical roots of stereotypes surrounding welfare reform and highlight the significant role interest groups play in shaping public policy outcomes—not always in favor of those needing support.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are five key points from the video:

1. **Welfare Rules Database**: The speaker worked at the Urban Institute, where they contributed to a database that tracks welfare rules across all U.S. states since the 1996 welfare reform. This database includes over a thousand rules on various policies like work requirements and asset limits, aimed at providing valuable information for researchers and policymakers.

2. **Variation Among States**: The speaker observed significant variation in welfare policies across different states and hypothesized a relationship between these policies and the influence of interest groups, noting that many welfare rules seem arbitrary and may not reflect the actual needs of welfare recipients.

3. **Impact of Interest Groups**: The researcher developed a large database of advocacy organizations, both those with financial lobbying capabilities and those without, to analyze how these groups influence welfare policy discussions, particularly in state committee meetings.

4. **Stereotypes and Racial Implications**: The speaker highlights that historical and racial stereotypes about welfare recipients persist in current discussions and policies, painting recipients, predominantly women, as less deserving of support. The shifting demographics of welfare caseloads have influenced these narratives, reinforcing negative perceptions related to race.

5. **Rigid Welfare Systems**: The welfare system is characterized by strict rules and benefit cliffs that leave little room for flexibility. The speaker argues that rather than setting up a supportive framework that helps individuals gain stability, current policies tend to be punitive, reinforcing a narrative of personal responsibility that fails to account for the complexities of poverty and individual circumstances.

Export as PDF
Here are some key quotes extracted from the video :

1. **On Background and Work Experience:**
- "I worked at the Urban Institute for a year right after I got out of undergraduate."
- "I worked on their welfare rules database... that collects all... welfare rules from all fifty states."

2. **On Variation in Welfare Policies:**
- "There was a lot of variation among the states and states have very different welfare policies."

3. **On the Influence of Special Interests:**
- "To me, there seemed like a pretty clear relationship here because if you look at some of the rules, they seem kind of arbitrary."
- "I had to collect a lot of information about interest groups in the United States."

4. **On Stereotypes and Public Perception:**
- "I was looking in particular for how they were talking about welfare recipients, and... what stereotypes they were perpetuating."
- "There are often these like benefit cliffs... and so it's very like all or nothing in the way this is done."

5. **On Changes in the Welfare System:**
- "We have kind of this poor social safety net and it's not really adequate, but it's what's left over for them."
- "...the current welfare system...there's also some undeserving this there because of race and stereotypes around, who is deserving of government help."

6. **On the Concept of Personal Responsibility:**
- "This narrative of personal responsibility in the United States... if they just work hard enough, they'll be fine."
- "...that's setting us up for a dangerous system where you have people who... cannot work, right?"

7. **On Advocacy and Interest Groups:**
- "We have all these advocacy organizations, these special interests that are very much interested in policy."
- "It sometimes what an interest group wants is the same thing that you want... but it is important to be aware of the fact that there are interest groups out there that are pushing an agenda."

8. **On Stereotypes in Welfare Policy:**
- "These stereotypes that we see coming up in welfare policy... a lot of them have their roots like in slavery."
- "We often are making assumptions about people who are receiving public benefits... and that will lead to worse policy for them."

These quotes highlight the speaker's experiences and insights regarding welfare policies, the influence of special interests, public perception of welfare recipients, and systemic challenges faced by the welfare system in the United States.

Export as PDF
Based on the video you've , it appears to discuss welfare policy in the United States, the influence of special interest groups, and the impact of welfare reform on different populations, particularly women and minorities. Here are some similar articles that you might find relevant:

1. **"The Politics of Welfare Reform: The Role of Interest Groups"**
This article examines how different interest groups influence welfare policies and reforms at the state and national levels. It provides case studies and analyzes the intersection between lobbying efforts and policy outcomes.

2. **"Welfare Policy in the United States: Historical Convideo and Current Challenges"**
This article traces the history of welfare policy in the U.S. from its inception to contemporary reforms, discussing the persistence of stereotypes and biases in public perception of welfare recipients.

3. **"Client vs. Constituent: The Social Safety Net and Its Discontents"**
Investigates how welfare policies often reflect societal views on deservingness and the influence of various advocacy groups in shaping those views. It looks at the consequences of rigid welfare systems on vulnerable populations.

4. **"Racial Stereotypes in Welfare Policy: Analyzing the Impact on Minority Communities"**
Explores how racial stereotypes affect welfare policy formulation and the implications for minority welfare recipients, building on historical trends and shifting demographics.

5. **"Understanding the Impact of Work Requirements in Welfare Programs"**
This article critiques the implementation of work requirements in welfare programs, discussing the potential consequences for low-income individuals who may not be able to meet these requirements due to extenuating circumstances.

6. **"Social Safety Nets and Racial Inequality: The Case of Welfare Policy"**
Analyzes the relationship between welfare policy and racial inequality in the U.S., focusing on how policy decisions reinforce systemic inequalities that impact communities of color.

7. **"Interest Groups and Policy Change: The Case of Welfare Reform"**
Investigates how various interest groups have historically shaped the narrative around welfare, focusing on key legislative moments and advocacy efforts.

These articles would provide further insight into the themes presented in your video, particularly regarding the complexities of welfare policy, the role of advocacy, and the historical convideo of these issues.

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.245 --> 00:02.925
I worked at the Urban Institute for a year right

00:02.925 --> 00:04.485
after I got out of undergraduate.

00:05.265 --> 00:07.885
And, while I was working at the Urban Institute,

00:08.045 --> 00:10.125
I worked on their welfare rules database.

00:10.185 --> 00:14.125
And that's a database that collects all, well, yeah,

00:14.145 --> 00:16.365
all the welfare rules from all fair states.

00:17.145 --> 00:20.485
Uh, it goes back to when welfare reform was enacted in the

00:20.485 --> 00:22.045
United States in 1996.

00:22.745 --> 00:24.965
And every year they update the rules.

00:25.185 --> 00:28.565
So there are more than a thousand different rules across a

00:28.565 --> 00:32.005
variety of different policies, from work requirements

00:32.065 --> 00:33.845
to asset limits, all sorts of things.

00:34.545 --> 00:38.805
Uh, and they collect all this for use for researchers,

00:38.865 --> 00:39.965
for policymakers.

00:40.745 --> 00:41.965
So I did that for a year.

00:42.485 --> 00:46.485
I got really familiar with all of the different policies,

00:46.945 --> 00:50.565
in the states and noticed that there was a lot

00:50.565 --> 00:52.005
of variation among the states

00:52.225 --> 00:54.925
and states have very different welfare policies.

00:55.505 --> 00:59.005
And so then when I went to graduate school,

00:59.845 --> 01:03.525
I had the opportunity to kind of connect that information

01:03.525 --> 01:07.285
that I had, with, you know, these theories about

01:07.705 --> 01:11.725
how policy gets made, particularly about the influence

01:11.825 --> 01:14.045
of special, special interests, right?

01:14.045 --> 01:15.285
About interest groups

01:15.745 --> 01:18.685
and the influence of lobbying, the influence of

01:19.205 --> 01:20.845
advocacy in policymaking.

01:21.225 --> 01:24.205
And to me, there seemed like a pretty clear relationship

01:24.235 --> 01:26.525
here because if you look at some of the rules,

01:26.555 --> 01:28.045
they seem kind of arbitrary.

01:28.475 --> 01:32.245
They don't seem to really reflect what you might think are,

01:33.185 --> 01:35.245
you know, obvious, things

01:35.245 --> 01:37.205
that welfare recipients might need

01:37.345 --> 01:40.685
or what might work in the benefit of welfare recipients.

01:41.025 --> 01:44.485
And so I decided to kind of further examine

01:44.515 --> 01:47.565
that relationship and see how the special interests

01:48.365 --> 01:50.245
actually do influence all the

01:50.525 --> 01:51.645
policies that we see in the states.

01:51.915 --> 01:55.125
They, you know, had this background in the welfare rules.

01:55.145 --> 01:59.405
So I had all this quantitative work that I,

02:00.355 --> 02:02.165
used and that kind

02:02.165 --> 02:04.165
of helped me establish the relationships, right?

02:04.225 --> 02:08.565
So I, I knew there was a relationship between, you know,

02:08.565 --> 02:12.885
states and, their like political environment

02:13.545 --> 02:14.965
and their welfare rules.

02:15.515 --> 02:16.525
That was pretty easy.

02:16.945 --> 02:18.485
And there's been a lot of political

02:18.485 --> 02:19.805
science research done on that.

02:20.725 --> 02:23.085
I had to collect a lot of information about

02:23.685 --> 02:24.965
interest groups in the United States.

02:25.545 --> 02:29.245
So I went through online databases

02:29.385 --> 02:32.805
and collected information about, local

02:32.865 --> 02:34.805
and state advocacy organizations.

02:35.345 --> 02:39.165
Uh, I wanted to collect information not just from

02:39.755 --> 02:41.925
organizations that actively lobby,

02:42.195 --> 02:45.965
because those interests inherently have money to lobby,

02:46.185 --> 02:50.245
but also from those who may not have money to lobby,

02:50.345 --> 02:52.925
but may send people, representatives

02:52.925 --> 02:54.445
who are not official lobbyists,

02:54.945 --> 02:57.445
but do, have opinions on policy.

02:57.665 --> 02:58.925
So I kind of created this

02:59.435 --> 03:01.645
Huge database of interest groups.

03:02.455 --> 03:04.235
And then I was really interested in seeing

03:04.895 --> 03:08.595
how these organizations actually talk about welfare policy.

03:08.895 --> 03:13.235
So I selected, several states from across the country

03:13.935 --> 03:17.675
and looked at their transcripts of their,

03:17.675 --> 03:22.155
state committee meetings about, welfare policy.

03:22.495 --> 03:25.715
So sometimes it was their social services,

03:25.905 --> 03:27.075
legislative committees,

03:27.075 --> 03:29.555
sometimes it was like a labor committee.

03:30.215 --> 03:35.115
Uh, and what I did was coded those, committee

03:35.905 --> 03:39.835
transcripts for mentions of welfare policy,

03:40.015 --> 03:41.915
and was looking in particular for

03:42.375 --> 03:45.555
how they were talking about welfare recipients,

03:45.775 --> 03:49.555
and, you know, what stereotypes they were perpetuating

03:49.575 --> 03:51.595
or what stereotypes they were pushing against.

03:51.935 --> 03:54.635
You can look at the history of the United States

03:54.655 --> 03:56.995
and welfare policy, and you can see kind of

03:58.225 --> 04:00.485
as we've gone along in our history,

04:00.755 --> 04:02.725
certain groups can get broken off

04:02.745 --> 04:06.575
and put into separate, programs, right?

04:06.595 --> 04:09.815
So we have programs specifically for veterans, right?

04:09.815 --> 04:13.215
We have programs specifically for like the widows

04:13.235 --> 04:14.455
of veterans, right?

04:14.775 --> 04:15.975
Survivor benefits for example.

04:16.635 --> 04:20.175
And so what has developed is then welfare

04:21.235 --> 04:25.555
is kind of for women who, typically women,

04:25.665 --> 04:28.835
it's still the adult recipients are still typically women,

04:29.695 --> 04:32.275
who are either unmarried

04:32.975 --> 04:37.695
or, we're divorced, maybe never married,

04:37.695 --> 04:38.935
and have children, right?

04:38.935 --> 04:41.855
And so those are kind of seen as, again, kind

04:41.855 --> 04:43.255
of the leftovers almost, right?

04:43.255 --> 04:44.655
They're seen as less deserving

04:45.035 --> 04:47.375
of being in a separate government program.

04:48.155 --> 04:51.415
Uh, and we have kind of this

04:52.165 --> 04:55.735
poor social safety net and it's not really adequate,

04:55.795 --> 04:57.895
but it's what's left over for them.

04:57.955 --> 05:00.175
And there's a lot of kinda embedded racial

05:00.325 --> 05:01.615
stereotypes in there as well.

05:01.805 --> 05:06.095
Over the years we see the, the caseload shift from,

05:06.415 --> 05:10.135
majority white caseload to a majority black caseload.

05:10.915 --> 05:14.495
And that kind of feeds into this narrative

05:14.645 --> 05:16.975
that there's also some undeserving this there

05:16.975 --> 05:21.455
because of race and stereotypes around, who is deserving

05:21.455 --> 05:22.855
of government help in the United States,

05:23.355 --> 05:24.455
in the current welfare system,

05:24.455 --> 05:28.005
there are often these like benefit cliffs, right?

05:28.345 --> 05:30.565
And we can think about it in terms of like the,

05:30.945 --> 05:32.365
the amount of money you get.

05:33.365 --> 05:35.265
If you make a dollar more than that,

05:35.265 --> 05:36.745
then you get nothing, right?

05:36.885 --> 05:40.385
Or there's eclipse in terms of like the,

05:40.775 --> 05:42.985
work requirements or the time limits, right?

05:42.985 --> 05:44.305
If you're like just above it

05:44.725 --> 05:46.905
or just below it, you get nothing.

05:46.965 --> 05:48.345
And so it's very like all

05:48.345 --> 05:50.465
or nothing in the way this is done

05:50.915 --> 05:54.425
where if you don't meet the exact requirements as set out

05:54.425 --> 05:56.425
by the state and it varies by state,

05:56.905 --> 05:59.785
and then again you get nothing.

06:00.405 --> 06:04.425
And so there is no kind of leeway allowed

06:04.645 --> 06:08.505
or discretion allowed for people who, you know, maybe

06:09.095 --> 06:12.065
because of a particular circumstance you couldn't work

06:12.065 --> 06:13.305
as much this month

06:13.605 --> 06:18.505
or, you know, have extra savings from, you know, some other,

06:19.365 --> 06:21.265
you know, thing that they made money from.

06:21.605 --> 06:25.465
And there's just no compromise in that system.

06:25.885 --> 06:28.185
And so it doesn't allow people to like forgiveness

06:28.255 --> 06:30.045
that we might kind

06:30.045 --> 06:32.925
of allow people in the middle class or in the upper class.

06:33.075 --> 06:34.765
It's just very rigid.

06:35.105 --> 06:36.205
In the book I explained

06:36.205 --> 06:38.925
that there is several different types of interest groups.

06:39.225 --> 06:42.445
And the idea here is that interest groups, you know,

06:42.635 --> 06:44.325
have their own priorities.

06:44.875 --> 06:49.165
Sometimes those priorities align well with what, you know,

06:49.165 --> 06:51.365
a welfare recipient might want and sometimes they don't.

06:52.265 --> 06:57.085
So you can look at a policy like the family cap, which,

06:57.515 --> 06:59.725
when a state puts a family cap in place, that means

06:59.755 --> 07:02.085
that if the family has additional children,

07:02.235 --> 07:04.605
they don't get any additional funds in welfare.

07:05.955 --> 07:08.655
So there are some organizations that are very much in favor

07:08.655 --> 07:12.975
of the family cap if they say that this helps,

07:13.725 --> 07:17.015
promote responsible parenting, responsible family planning.

07:17.655 --> 07:21.015
I, but what it actually does is it ends up hurting children

07:21.155 --> 07:22.575
who are born into these families

07:22.575 --> 07:24.395
because it just means

07:24.395 --> 07:26.355
that these children have less resources

07:26.735 --> 07:28.555
and there's not really good evidence

07:28.745 --> 07:32.155
that welfare recipients are making strategic choices

07:32.335 --> 07:34.435
and saying, okay, I'm gonna have an extra kid

07:34.455 --> 07:36.915
so I can get an extra if $50 a month.

07:36.915 --> 07:39.715
Right? That's just not really how people think about it.

07:41.295 --> 07:43.955
On the other hand, you have organizations

07:43.955 --> 07:45.955
that are against the family cap, right?

07:45.955 --> 07:48.355
But they may not be against the family cap

07:48.545 --> 07:51.115
because they think it's the best interest

07:51.115 --> 07:52.995
of the welfare recipients, but

07:52.995 --> 07:56.395
because they think promoting a family cap

07:57.365 --> 07:59.075
might push people to get abortions

07:59.075 --> 08:00.355
and they're against abortion.

08:00.735 --> 08:03.035
And so the Catholic church is a good example of this.

08:03.735 --> 08:05.875
The Catholic church is very much against abortion.

08:05.875 --> 08:07.275
There are lots of pro-life groups

08:07.305 --> 08:09.195
that are against abortion, right?

08:09.215 --> 08:11.275
And so they're against a family cap

08:11.275 --> 08:13.835
because their fear is that if you have a family cap

08:14.375 --> 08:16.875
rather than having an additional child in their family,

08:17.095 --> 08:18.355
the woman will have an abortion

08:18.415 --> 08:19.515
and they don't want that, right?

08:19.545 --> 08:21.395
That is above kind of

08:21.395 --> 08:23.755
what they think is good welfare policy, right?

08:23.755 --> 08:24.755
So that's one example.

08:24.755 --> 08:29.635
Another example is like the interests of businesses

08:29.735 --> 08:32.255
and industry groups and business

08:32.255 --> 08:35.855
and industry groups in states benefit from having low

08:35.855 --> 08:36.975
skilled workers,

08:37.515 --> 08:41.895
and particularly in industries like agriculture, retail,

08:41.895 --> 08:43.215
the food and beverage industry.

08:43.875 --> 08:48.055
And so when we set up welfare rules that require recipients

08:48.115 --> 08:51.295
to work for a certain number of hours every week,

08:51.955 --> 08:54.095
and it doesn't matter kind of what job it is

08:54.565 --> 08:55.925
that helps those industries

08:56.165 --> 08:58.765
'cause it gives them a steady supply of workers.

08:59.225 --> 09:00.805
It, we could set up a system

09:00.975 --> 09:03.405
where we incentivize welfare recipients

09:03.405 --> 09:04.885
to go get a college degree

09:05.305 --> 09:07.285
and then they could get like higher scale

09:07.355 --> 09:08.925
jobs, but we don't do that.

09:09.345 --> 09:10.485
We incentivize them

09:10.485 --> 09:13.685
to just get whatever low wage job they can find,

09:13.695 --> 09:16.085
which again, benefits industry.

09:16.405 --> 09:20.805
I think one of the things that is, concerning to me is

09:20.805 --> 09:25.165
that a lot of the kind of principles that were prevalent

09:25.225 --> 09:29.645
during the passage of welfare reform in the early 1990s,

09:30.155 --> 09:32.285
keep popping up in other forms

09:32.625 --> 09:34.885
of social welfare programs in the United States.

09:35.305 --> 09:36.685
And so we have this narrative

09:36.685 --> 09:39.125
of personal responsibility in the United States

09:39.835 --> 09:41.805
that everyone should just like pick themselves up

09:41.805 --> 09:42.805
by their bootstraps

09:43.065 --> 09:44.725
and you know, if they just work hard

09:44.725 --> 09:45.805
enough, they'll be fine.

09:46.295 --> 09:51.005
Right? We see that getting perpetuated when it comes

09:51.065 --> 09:53.685
to things like Medicaid, when it comes

09:53.785 --> 09:55.605
to food assistance programs.

09:56.425 --> 10:00.805
And so you see lawmakers, kind

10:00.805 --> 10:04.565
of promote the same principles in reforming

10:04.565 --> 10:05.685
those programs as well.

10:05.865 --> 10:07.085
So the idea

10:07.155 --> 10:10.005
that we should have like work requirements for Medicaid.

10:10.025 --> 10:13.485
So if you want health insurance, you need to be working

10:13.665 --> 10:17.285
for a certain number of hours per week to do that, right?

10:18.265 --> 10:22.035
That to me is kind of setting us up for a dangerous system

10:22.245 --> 10:23.875
where you have people who, you know,

10:23.875 --> 10:28.075
potentially have chronic illnesses and cannot work, right?

10:28.135 --> 10:30.075
And then they can't get access to health insurance

10:30.105 --> 10:32.595
because they have to work in order

10:32.615 --> 10:34.035
to receive health insurance.

10:34.495 --> 10:38.415
And so this like dangerous, you know, trap that we fall into

10:38.485 --> 10:41.415
that like, well, if everyone just works hard enough, right?

10:41.515 --> 10:43.935
We can, you know, get ourselves out

10:43.935 --> 10:45.975
of like this poverty trap, right?

10:46.175 --> 10:50.445
I think we need to realize that.

10:50.445 --> 10:53.085
Like that's not always the easy answer, right?

10:53.145 --> 10:55.005
And often what we need

10:55.005 --> 10:57.245
to do is have these more forgiving policies, right?

10:57.245 --> 10:58.325
Where we allow people

10:58.865 --> 11:02.605
to maybe stay on programs longer than maybe we would

11:02.605 --> 11:03.805
ideally like, right?

11:03.805 --> 11:07.485
But allow them to get stability in their lives, right?

11:07.485 --> 11:10.685
And then that will lead to kind of long lasting change.

11:11.045 --> 11:14.325
I think one of the things to remember is that like these

11:15.715 --> 11:19.805
stereotypes that we see coming up in welfare policy, first

11:19.805 --> 11:21.125
of all, they're not new, so they're

11:21.125 --> 11:22.325
rooted in American history.

11:22.925 --> 11:25.685
A lot of them have their roots like in slavery.

11:26.505 --> 11:30.885
Uh, and so I think it's important for readers to recognize

11:30.885 --> 11:34.765
that you might be actually perpetuating these stereotypes

11:34.785 --> 11:37.405
or you might be kind of falling, susceptible to this type

11:37.405 --> 11:38.965
of thinking without even realizing it.

11:39.545 --> 11:41.165
Uh, and to realize how

11:41.165 --> 11:43.925
that is playing out in our public policy, right?

11:43.925 --> 11:46.925
That we often are making assumptions about people

11:47.105 --> 11:49.765
who are receiving public benefits

11:50.065 --> 11:53.085
or are part of any other public program, right?

11:53.225 --> 11:56.685
And then that, you know, will lead to worse policy for them

11:56.685 --> 11:58.205
because again, we're, you know,

11:58.205 --> 11:59.805
making assumptions about their lives,

12:00.015 --> 12:01.965
about their, character.

12:02.825 --> 12:04.605
And when we really, you know,

12:04.605 --> 12:07.845
we don't have all the information, on top of that,

12:07.885 --> 12:10.845
I think it's important for us to recognize that they're all,

12:11.215 --> 12:16.125
there are these forces in public policy that are not just,

12:16.425 --> 12:18.685
you know, policy makers and constituents, right?

12:18.685 --> 12:21.405
But we have all these advocacy organizations,

12:21.405 --> 12:22.565
these special interests

12:22.565 --> 12:24.965
that are very much interested in policy

12:25.465 --> 12:27.245
and sometimes that works to our benefit.

12:27.505 --> 12:31.245
It sometimes what an interest group wants is

12:31.245 --> 12:32.365
the same thing that you want.

12:32.465 --> 12:35.205
And so it's fine if they win,

12:35.305 --> 12:39.605
but it is important to be aware of the fact that there are

12:40.645 --> 12:43.245
interest groups out there that are pushing an agenda

12:43.345 --> 12:44.845
and it may not always align with yours.

12:44.845 --> 12:47.805
And you need to consider how much power they have.

00:00 - I worked at the Urban Institute for a year right after I got out of undergraduate. And, while I was working at the Urban Institute, I worked on their welfare rules database. And that's a database that collects all, well, yeah, all the welfare rules from all fair states.

00:17 - it goes back to when welfare reform was enacted in the United States in 1996. And every year they update the rules. So there are more than a thousand different rules across a variety of different policies, from work requirements to asset limits, all sorts of things. and they collect all this for use for researchers, for policymakers. So I did that for a year. I got really familiar with all of the different policies,

00:46 - in the states and noticed that there was a lot of variation among the states and states have very different welfare policies. And so then when I went to graduate school, I had the opportunity to kind of connect that information that I had, with, you know, these theories about how policy gets made, particularly about the influence of special, special interests, right? About interest groups and the influence of lobbying, the influence of

01:19 - advocacy in policymaking. And to me, there seemed like a pretty clear relationship here because if you look at some of the rules, they seem kind of arbitrary. They don't seem to really reflect what you might think are, you know, obvious, things that welfare recipients might need or what might work in the benefit of welfare recipients. And so I decided to kind of further examine that relationship and see how the special interests

01:48 - actually do influence all the policies that we see in the states. They, you know, had this background in the welfare rules. So I had all this quantitative work that I, used and that kind of helped me establish the relationships, right? So I, I knew there was a relationship between, you know, states and, their like political environment and their welfare rules. That was pretty easy.

02:16 - And there's been a lot of political science research done on that. I had to collect a lot of information about interest groups in the United States. So I went through online databases and collected information about, local and state advocacy organizations. I wanted to collect information not just from organizations that actively lobby, because those interests inherently have money to lobby,

02:46 - but also from those who may not have money to lobby, but may send people, representatives who are not official lobbyists, but do, have opinions on policy. So I kind of created this Huge database of interest groups. And then I was really interested in seeing how these organizations actually talk about welfare policy. So I selected, several states from across the country and looked at their transcripts of their,

03:17 - state committee meetings about, welfare policy. So sometimes it was their social services, legislative committees, sometimes it was like a labor committee. and what I did was coded those, committee transcripts for mentions of welfare policy, and was looking in particular for how they were talking about welfare recipients, and, you know, what stereotypes they were perpetuating or what stereotypes they were pushing against.

03:51 - You can look at the history of the United States and welfare policy, and you can see kind of as we've gone along in our history, certain groups can get broken off and put into separate, programs, right? So we have programs specifically for veterans, right? We have programs specifically for like the widows of veterans, right? Survivor benefits for example. And so what has developed is then welfare

04:21 - is kind of for women who, typically women, it's still the adult recipients are still typically women, who are either unmarried or, we're divorced, maybe never married, and have children, right? And so those are kind of seen as, again, kind of the leftovers almost, right? They're seen as less deserving of being in a separate government program. and we have kind of this

04:52 - poor social safety net and it's not really adequate, but it's what's left over for them. And there's a lot of kinda embedded racial stereotypes in there as well. Over the years we see the, the caseload shift from, majority white caseload to a majority black caseload. And that kind of feeds into this narrative that there's also some undeserving this there because of race and stereotypes around, who is deserving of government help in the United States,

05:23 - in the current welfare system, there are often these like benefit cliffs, right? And we can think about it in terms of like the, the amount of money you get. If you make a dollar more than that, then you get nothing, right? Or there's eclipse in terms of like the, work requirements or the time limits, right? If you're like just above it or just below it, you get nothing.

05:46 - And so it's very like all or nothing in the way this is done where if you don't meet the exact requirements as set out by the state and it varies by state, and then again you get nothing. And so there is no kind of leeway allowed or discretion allowed for people who, you know, maybe because of a particular circumstance you couldn't work as much this month or, you know, have extra savings from, you know, some other,

06:19 - you know, thing that they made money from. And there's just no compromise in that system. And so it doesn't allow people to like forgiveness that we might kind of allow people in the middle class or in the upper class. It's just very rigid. In the book I explained that there is several different types of interest groups. And the idea here is that interest groups, you know, have their own priorities.

06:44 - Sometimes those priorities align well with what, you know, a welfare recipient might want and sometimes they don't. So you can look at a policy like the family cap, which, when a state puts a family cap in place, that means that if the family has additional children, they don't get any additional funds in welfare. So there are some organizations that are very much in favor of the family cap if they say that this helps, promote responsible parenting, responsible family planning. I, but what it actually does is it ends up hurting children

07:21 - who are born into these families because it just means that these children have less resources and there's not really good evidence that welfare recipients are making strategic choices and saying, okay, I'm gonna have an extra kid so I can get an extra if $50 a month. Right? That's just not really how people think about it. On the other hand, you have organizations that are against the family cap, right?

07:45 - But they may not be against the family cap because they think it's the best interest of the welfare recipients, but because they think promoting a family cap might push people to get abortions and they're against abortion. And so the Catholic church is a good example of this. The Catholic church is very much against abortion. There are lots of pro-life groups that are against abortion, right?

08:09 - And so they're against a family cap because their fear is that if you have a family cap rather than having an additional child in their family, the woman will have an abortion and they don't want that, right? That is above kind of what they think is good welfare policy, right? So that's one example. Another example is like the interests of businesses and industry groups and business

08:32 - and industry groups in states benefit from having low skilled workers, and particularly in industries like agriculture, retail, the food and beverage industry. And so when we set up welfare rules that require recipients to work for a certain number of hours every week, and it doesn't matter kind of what job it is that helps those industries 'cause it gives them a steady supply of workers. It, we could set up a system

09:00 - where we incentivize welfare recipients to go get a college degree and then they could get like higher scale jobs, but we don't do that. We incentivize them to just get whatever low wage job they can find, which again, benefits industry. I think one of the things that is, concerning to me is that a lot of the kind of principles that were prevalent during the passage of welfare reform in the early 1990s,

09:30 - keep popping up in other forms of social welfare programs in the United States. And so we have this narrative of personal responsibility in the United States that everyone should just like pick themselves up by their bootstraps and you know, if they just work hard enough, they'll be fine. Right? We see that getting perpetuated when it comes to things like Medicaid, when it comes

09:53 - to food assistance programs. And so you see lawmakers, kind of promote the same principles in reforming those programs as well. So the idea that we should have like work requirements for Medicaid. So if you want health insurance, you need to be working for a certain number of hours per week to do that, right? That to me is kind of setting us up for a dangerous system where you have people who, you know,

10:23 - potentially have chronic illnesses and cannot work, right? And then they can't get access to health insurance because they have to work in order to receive health insurance. And so this like dangerous, you know, trap that we fall into that like, well, if everyone just works hard enough, right? We can, you know, get ourselves out of like this poverty trap, right? I think we need to realize that. Like that's not always the easy answer, right?

10:53 - And often what we need to do is have these more forgiving policies, right? Where we allow people to maybe stay on programs longer than maybe we would ideally like, right? But allow them to get stability in their lives, right? And then that will lead to kind of long lasting change. I think one of the things to remember is that like these stereotypes that we see coming up in welfare policy, first of all, they're not new, so they're

11:21 - rooted in American history. A lot of them have their roots like in slavery. and so I think it's important for readers to recognize that you might be actually perpetuating these stereotypes or you might be kind of falling, susceptible to this type of thinking without even realizing it. and to realize how that is playing out in our public policy, right? That we often are making assumptions about people who are receiving public benefits

11:50 - or are part of any other public program, right? And then that, you know, will lead to worse policy for them because again, we're, you know, making assumptions about their lives, about their, character. And when we really, you know, we don't have all the information, on top of that, I think it's important for us to recognize that they're all, there are these forces in public policy that are not just, you know, policy makers and constituents, right?

12:18 - But we have all these advocacy organizations, these special interests that are very much interested in policy and sometimes that works to our benefit. It sometimes what an interest group wants is the same thing that you want. And so it's fine if they win, but it is important to be aware of the fact that there are interest groups out there that are pushing an agenda and it may not always align with yours.

12:44 - And you need to consider how much power they have.

Faculti AI can make mistakes