NAME<\/p>\n
Short Answer Questions<\/p>\n
Answer 5 of 9 Questions (20 points each; 100 pts total)<\/p>\n
When you submit your answers BE SURE TO CLEARLY INDICATE WHICH QUESTIONS YOU ARE ANSWERING. Copy or paraphrase the question and question NUMBER into your answer document. Also: when submitting your essay answers, please use a WORD document, not a google (pages) document. <\/p>\n
After the election of Bill Clinton (who famously promised to \u201cend welfare as we know it\u201d) in 1992, the welfare reform debate heated up: with conservatives and liberals taking different positions on how AFDC should be changed. Looking at Appendix C, identify and briefly describe ONE reform proposal associated with each of the two dominant political orientations in America and briefly (in a few sentences) explain why it reflects the political orientation to which you assigned it.<\/p>\n
General Political Orientation<\/p>\n
Policy Idea<\/p>\n
(pick a label from App. C)<\/p>\n
Why this idea fits with this political orientation<\/p>\n
Liberals <\/p>\n
Conservatives<\/p>\n
In the Table in Appendix A, there is a category for \u201cstringency of eligibility\u201d (people sometimes also refer to this dimension of analysis as \u201caccessibility\u201d of a program). Address the following three questions about this category: <\/p>\n
What does \u201cstringency of eligibility\u201d mean? (Just the basics, no need for long answers)<\/p>\n
What sorts of things (aspects of a program\u2019s design) does stringency of eligibility refer to?<\/p>\n
Why do policy analysts and social workers care about stringency of eligibility? <\/p>\n
Looking at the table in Appendix A: Medicare is currently funded exclusively by the Federal Government and is administered also at the Federal level. If one were to propose a policy that shifted both funding and administration of the program to the STATES, would liberals likely be pleased or displeased by such a move. Please explain why they would be pleased\/displeased and what arguments they might make for\/against such a change. <\/p>\n
Again looking at the table in Appendix A: pick two programs to compare and contrast. One program should be a good model of a social insurance program; the other should be a good model of a public assistance program. Using at least three of the six dimensions of structural characteristics, explain how these programs differ from one another \u2013 and why you code one program a social insurance program and the other public assistance. <\/p>\n
*Note: public assistance programs are generally thought to reflect the philosophical tenets of the Residual welfare state model, whereas Social Insurance programs are generally thought to reflect the philosophical tenets of the Institutional model. <\/p>\n
Explain how the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (which ended AFDC and established TANF in its place) changed the old AFDC program. Give at least THREE examples of how this legislation changed AFDC. Pick ONE of these changes and explain how LIBERALS would have responded to it (favorably or unfavorably).<\/p>\n
*note that you are rewarded for answers that appreciate the nuances of policy viewpoints. Oftentimes in policy, it\u2019s not that one is automatically for or against a policy idea; it has to do with how a proposal is designed. <\/p>\n
Let\u2019s think back to the 1960\u2019s Great Society, and think about the establishment of MEDICARE and MEDICAID, in particular. Summarize how each of the three primary political ideologies felt about these programs. How would you characterize each group\u2019s reaction on a range from Favorable to Unfavorable? (appendix B might be helpful for this answer). <\/p>\n
Be sure to summarize the reaction of EACH ideological group: <\/p>\n
Conservatives: <\/p>\n
Liberals: <\/p>\n
Social Democrats: <\/p>\n
Describe the main features and\/or programs of the War on Poverty. What sort of perspective on poverty is reflected in these programs? How did these programs aim to reduce poverty in America?<\/p>\n
Would you say America leans more in the direction of a RESIDUAL welfare state, or an INSTITUTIONAL welfare state? Explain your answer with at least three reasons or examples. <\/p>\n
The primary accomplishment of the Roosevelt Administration\u2019s \u201cNew Deal\u201d legislative agenda was the enactment of the Social Security Act. From the perspective of Social Democrats who tend to prefer the establishment of an Institutional Welfare State, what element was missing? Why was that omission problematic in their eyes? Now think about the current political climate: what do you think the chances are that legislation creating this \u201cmissing pillar\u201d of the welfare state will be enacted in the next 4 years? Explain your assessment. <\/p>\n
Appendix A: Structural Characteristics of U.S. Federal Government Social Welfare Programs<\/p>\n
Policies<\/p>\n
Entitlement vs. Non-Entitlement<\/p>\n
Categor-ical or Universal?<\/p>\n
Benefit Type<\/p>\n
Cash v. In-Kind<\/p>\n
Stringency of Eligibility<\/p>\n
Hi v. Medium v. Low<\/p>\n
Funding Source<\/p>\n
Fed v. State v. Shared <\/p>\n
Admin-istration<\/p>\n
Federal v. State\/Local<\/p>\n
Soc Insurance <\/p>\n
OR Public Assistance?<\/p>\n
AFDC<\/p>\n
Med<\/p>\n
Shared<\/p>\n
TANF<\/p>\n
Categorical<\/p>\n
High<\/p>\n
State (w min Fed guidelines)<\/p>\n
SSI<\/p>\n
OASDI<\/p>\n
Federal<\/p>\n
Unemployment Insurance<\/p>\n
Cash<\/p>\n
Shared<\/p>\n
Medicaid<\/p>\n
Medicare<\/p>\n
Entitlement<\/p>\n
Food Stamps (SNAP)<\/p>\n
Categorical (Means tested)<\/p>\n
Federal<\/p>\n
PS: Yes, it is intentional that this table is partially filled out. <\/p>\n
PPS: Two other things you might want to consider when comparing and contrasting programs is a) their BENEFIT LEVELS and b) whether or not the population associated with the program (by the general public) is deemed \u2013 whether fairly or not \u2013 to be \u201cdeserving\u201d or \u201cundeserving\u201d. <\/p>\n
Appendix B: Views on social policy and other \u201cpublic issues\u201d by conservative, liberal and social democratic political orientations<\/p>\n
Views of\u2026 <\/p>\n
General Political Orientations<\/p>\n
Conservative<\/p>\n
Liberal<\/p>\n
Social Democratic<\/p>\n
Social Justice <\/p>\n
Individualistic<\/p>\n
Redistributive<\/p>\n
Solidaristic \/ Communal<\/p>\n
The Welfare State <\/p>\n
Keep it small and residual<\/p>\n
Leans Institutional, but not like those crazy social democrats! They like government, but don\u2019t want it too big. <\/p>\n
Faith in Government <\/p>\n
Low<\/p>\n
High (unless gov\u2019t itself is \u201ccaptured\u2019 by big business and the wealthy<\/p>\n
Poverty & Inequality <\/p>\n
Culture of Poverty <\/p>\n
The general size and scope of social welfare programs <\/p>\n
Should be reduced so that we move closer to the ideal of the \u201cresidual\u201d welfare state.<\/p>\n
More universal benefits: like health care and day care!<\/p>\n
The Old AFDC welfare system<\/p>\n
.<\/p>\n
What should \u201cwelfare reform\u201d do<\/p>\n
Appendix C<\/p>\n
Trade Adjustment or JOB RETRAINING<\/p>\n
Trade Adjustment or JOB RETRAINING<\/p>\n
Day Care Subsidies<\/p>\n
Day Care Subsidies<\/p>\n
TEEN PARENT assistance In-home only<\/p>\n
TEEN PARENT assistance In-home only<\/p>\n
OLD FASHIONED Public Service Jobs <\/p>\n
OLD FASHIONED Public Service Jobs <\/p>\n
Personal Counseling and Family Therapy<\/p>\n
Personal Counseling and Family Therapy<\/p>\n
Job Search and other \u201cDIVERSION\u201d assistance<\/p>\n
Job Search and other \u201cDIVERSION\u201d assistance<\/p>\n
JOB SEARCH <\/p>\n
JOB SEARCH <\/p>\n
Parenting Skills Programs<\/p>\n
Parenting Skills Programs<\/p>\n
Community Work Experience Jobs<\/p>\n
Community Work Experience JobsIt\u2019s a Smorgasbord of Policy ideas! <\/p>\n
Medicaid Extension<\/p>\n
Medicaid Extension(Mostly TANF oriented)<\/p>\n
Raise Min Wage!<\/p>\n
Raise Min Wage!<\/p>\n
END ALL CASH ASSISTANCE<\/p>\n
END ALL CASH ASSISTANCE<\/p>\n
Transportation Assistance<\/p>\n
Transportation Assistance<\/p>\n
Pro Labor Trade Policies<\/p>\n
Pro Labor Trade Policies <\/p>\n
National Health Care<\/p>\n
National Health Care<\/p>\n
TIME LIMITS<\/p>\n
TIME LIMITS<\/p>\n
Increased and Tougher Sanctions<\/p>\n
Increased and Tougher Sanctions<\/p>\n
\u201cMarriage Incentives\u201d <\/p>\n
\u201cMarriage Incentives\u201d <\/p>\n
Family CAPS<\/p>\n
Family CAPS<\/p>\n
Basic Work Training, OJT, for welfare recipients<\/p>\n
Basic Work Training, OJT, for welfare recipients<\/p>\n
BLOCK GRANTS! <\/p>\n
BLOCK GRANTS! <\/p>\n
Adult Education Grants (basic Ed) <\/p>\n
Adult Education Grants (basic Ed) <\/p>\n
HARD Work Requirement <\/p>\n
HARD Work Requirement <\/p>\n
Reduced Work Exemptions <\/p>\n
Reduced Work Exemptions <\/p>\n
Brief Details of Policy Proposals that were advanced during the \u201cwelfare reform\u201d debates of mid-1990\u2019s that eventually led to passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA) of 1996). <\/p>\n
Proposals<\/p>\n
Brief Description<\/p>\n
Effect on Overall Program Budget<\/p>\n
END all Federal Cash Assistance<\/p>\n
End the Federal Grant; states may continue to fund their portion of cash grants. The objective: to cut benefit levels by at least 50% in most states. This policy would also effectively grant states complete control over welfare administration, meaning that conservative states would be able to reduce welfare benefits, make eligibility much more stringent and impose more conditions on recipients. <\/p>\n
REDUCES A LOT!!!!<\/p>\n
BLOCK GRANT!<\/p>\n
Change AFDC from an open ended commitment to cover all eligible cases & give STATES a single once a year lump sum from the fed govt to fund their welfare programs<\/p>\n
This entails\u2026<\/p>\n
End AFDC\u2019s entitlement status<\/p>\n
Cap the federal contribution to state cash welfare program at 1996 levels [$16B in 1996 dollars; that\u2019s = to about $24B in 2014 dollars)<\/p>\n
Allow States to spend Block Grant funds within BROAD guidelines \u2013 i.e. give them maximum administrative flexibility in how to spend federal funds, and how to design their own welfare programs. <\/p>\n
MODERATE REDUCTION <\/p>\n
No immediate savings but over time \u201ccap\u201d on spending = significant savings b\/c Fed contribution doesn\u2019t adjust for inflation.<\/p>\n
Time Limits <\/p>\n
Two versions: a tougher option (top) and less extreme version (bottom)<\/p>\n
Hard Limit: Limit total time a family head can be on welfare to 5 years. After that ALL cash assistance to household stops. <\/p>\n
MODERATE REDUCTION <\/p>\n
lowers welfare expenditures over time (esp the hard limit version) as people hit their 5 yr lifetime limits.<\/p>\n
Lite Limit: Limit amount of time on welfare that recipients can receive aide without working to no more than 2 years; after which family head must comply with work requirements (see above) or face sanctions \u2013 up to grant termination. <\/p>\n
HARD Work Requirement: All welfare recipients will be required to engage in job search and job placement activities as a condition for receiving welfare<\/p>\n
Force Welfare Applicants to undergo 2 mos of job search in first 2 mo on welfare \u2013 and to take a job if one is identified. <\/p>\n
More funds to states to bulk up welfare office\u2019s capacity to locate market based jobs, as well as businesses willing to create \u201csupported\u201d transitional jobs. <\/p>\n
Most welfare recipients will be compelled to take any job that caseworkers can identify and place them into. <\/p>\n
For some extreme cases, public \u201ccommunity service\u201d jobs will be created and subsidized by the state. But! Only 20% of caseload can qualify for this option. <\/p>\n
NO MAJOR EFFECT<\/p>\n
Remember! We\u2019re not creating a bunch of \u201ctraining and education\u201d programs. No Way! This is tough love! The only extra costs will be to hire social workers to arrange job slots w local private businesses and local govt for recipients <\/p>\n
LITE Work Requirement<\/p>\n
Community \u201cwork experience\u201d Jobs<\/p>\n
Proposals vary, but this one is requires some % of recipients to either take a job the state welfare office finds, or accept a 20hr\/wk \u201ccommunity service\u201d job, created by state. CS jobs are not \u201cpaid\u201d; one simply is working for the same benefit grant they\u2019d have normally gotten under old system. A sort of mini version of the \u201cpublic jobs\u201d proposals. These are short term \u201csupported\u201d jobs designed to teach basic work skills.<\/p>\n
MODERATE TO HIGH INCREASE <\/p>\n
Depends on % of recipients that each state mandates to work. And depends on what sort of Community Work Experience jobs the State creates. <\/p>\n
Family Caps<\/p>\n
If recipient has additional child(ren) while on welfare, welfare grant is not upwardly adjusted to new family size. If you enter welfare as a family of three, you only get benefits for 3 person household, it doesn\u2019t go up if\/when a recipient has an additional child while on welfare. <\/p>\n
SMALL DECREASE <\/p>\n
Saves small amount by not increasing grants (But this is rare anyway\u2026)<\/p>\n
Marriage Incentives<\/p>\n
Allow recipients to get 6 mo transitional grant extension upon marriage. Promote state programs to encourage marriage (counseling etc)<\/p>\n
VERY SMALL INCREASE<\/p>\n
Teen Parent Restrictions<\/p>\n
Teens must live at home to receive welfare check UNLESS they can demonstrate to a judge that their home is an abusive environment. <\/p>\n
NEUTRAL<\/p>\n
Parenting Skills programs<\/p>\n
Incentives to states to focus more services on parenting classes, counseling on balancing work & family<\/p>\n
VERY SMALL INCREASE<\/p>\n
Increase Therapeutic Services <\/p>\n
Additional funds for individual therapy<\/p>\n
Additional funds for substance abuse treatment. <\/p>\n
Additional funds for parenting classes, family treatment<\/p>\n
MODERATE INCREASE<\/p>\n
Transitional Assistance <\/p>\n
Various supports to recipients who leave welfare for a job in private sector that help ease the transition (recall that under AFDC & other public assistance programs\u2019 eligibility rules the \u201ceffective tax\u201d on wages of first job was very high b\/c with higher income folks often saw Medicaid get cut, housing subsidies cut, Food Stamps cut. <\/p>\n
Extend Medicaid 2 yrs beyond leaving <\/p>\n
Extend Food Stamps (now \u201cSNAP\u201d) 2 yrs after leaving<\/p>\n
Give 1 yr of subsidized child care <\/p>\n
Transportation assistance<\/p>\n
SMALL to MODERATE INCREASE<\/p>\n
Increase Training & education<\/p>\n
Increased funding for Vocational Training <\/p>\n
Increased funding for remedial education (GED, Associates Degree programs, ESL classes)<\/p>\n
MODERATE INCREASE<\/p>\n
Expand DAY CARE <\/p>\n
Expand AFDC day care subsidies all the way to Universal Day Care<\/p>\n
Increase AFDC expenditures for childcare for welfare recipients who take mandated work requirement jobs <\/p>\n
MODERATE TO VERY LARGE INCREASE<\/p>\n
(double the budget?)<\/p>\n
Raise the Minimum Wage and \/ or increase the EITC<\/p>\n
EITC = Earned Income Tax Credit<\/p>\n
Both proposals are attempts to \u201cmake work pay\u201d by increasing the effective wage of low wage jobs. <\/p>\n
Neither proposal is specifically a change in the AFDC program itself, but they would affect the program by making work more attractive. <\/p>\n
Both also have costs associated. EITC increases are direct expenditures by government <\/p>\n
NEUTRAL<\/p>\n
Raising min wage doesn\u2019t affect the welfare budget at all. It\u2019s a regulatory action by government. <\/p>\n
Public Jobs<\/p>\n
Create a system of public jobs (paying a bit above min wage) for welfare recipients (or their unemployed spouses or non-custodial parents) much akin to New Deal-era programs like the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Target: about 50% of welfare family heads (2-3million)<\/p>\n
LARGE INCREASE <\/p>\n
Probably requires a whole new program outside of TANF<\/p>\n
UNIVERSAL DAY CARE <\/p>\n
Some version of universal or near-universal day care. Everyone who is working and has dependent children 5 yrs old and younger will have access to free (or at least very well subsidized) quality child care. <\/p>\n
NEUTRAL<\/p>\n
Because it would be entirely outside of TANF budget, but make no mistake it would cost taxpayers a LOT of $$$<\/p>\n
UNIVERSAL CHILD ALLOWANCE<\/p>\n
(..to substantially replace AFDC\u2026)<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s be like Sweden! Instead of supporting only very poor single moms, US gov\u2019t should establish a social security-type Universal Child Allowance that gives supporting parents roughly $5000\/yr for ($400\/mo) each child for their first 2 or first 5 years of life (depends on how many years you want the subsidy to last. <\/p>\n
NEUTRAL <\/p>\n
Because it would be entirely outside of TANF budget, but make no mistake it would cost taxpayers a LOT of $$$<\/p>\n
NOTE: We are GREATLY simplifying proposals for the purpose of this exercise. <\/p>\n
1<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
NAME Short Answer Questions Answer 5 of 9 Questions (20 points each; 100 pts total) When you submit your answers BE SURE TO CLEARLY INDICATE WHICH QUESTIONS YOU ARE ANSWERING. Copy or paraphrase the question and question NUMBER into your answer document. Also: when submitting your essay answers, please use a WORD document, not a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[10],"class_list":["post-107053","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-research-paper-writing","tag-writing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107053","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=107053"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107053\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=107053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=107053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/papersspot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=107053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}