Social Welfare Policy Analysis - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Social Welfare Policy Analysis

Description:

18. SWP TRENDS (1) ... would like to see turned into a privatized pension plan. ... (and much else), just as the weak structure of our political ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:1258
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: david801
Learn more at: https://www.msu.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Social Welfare Policy Analysis


1
MODULE II SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY READINGS
PART I, 1,4 5/30 6/5
2
Module II Social Welfare Policy (SWP)
  • PART 1
  • What is social welfare policy (swp)? More
    particularly, what are its definitions, types,
    origins, trends? Why is it important for social
    workers to know about it?
  • PART 2
  • Why are institutional contexts and, especially,
    politics the keys to understanding swp? Who
    supports/opposes policies why?

I actually prefer to think of myself as an
egghead
Thats no guy---thats a prof!
See, I told you it was a guy!
3
PART 1
gtRelevance gtOverview gtDefinitionsgt TypesgtOriginsgtT
rends
4
WHY STUDY SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY? (1)
  • Because
  • It is the social in social work it is the
    major factor in shaping the practice
    environment.
  • More broadly still, swps both reflect and help to
    define the type of society we live in. For
    example, some of the most important distinctions
    between the US and Canada are reflected in the
    differing swps characteristic of the two nations.
  • American politics is largely about what should be
    the range and types of swps adopted by various
    levels of government.
  • Both the CSWE NASW codes require that swp and
    social justice be key features of social work
    education.

5
WHY STUDY SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY? (2)
  • SOCIAL WORKERS NEED TO HAVE
  • THEORETICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE SUCH
    POLICIES PLAY IN SOCIETY.
  • POLITICAL SAVVY TO GRASP WHY PARTICULAR GROUPS
    ADVOCATE PARTICULAR SWPs.
  • APPLIED KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTENTS AND IMPACTS OF
    SWPS.

6
RELEVANCE QUESTION (3)
  • WHERE DO SOCIAL WORKERS FIT INTO THESE PROCESSES?

7
RELEVANCE (4) ANSWER
  • EVERYWHERE!
  • Social Workers Are
  • Activists
  • Administrators
  • Advocates
  • Public and Agency
  • Officials

8
Overview SW Policy and Policy Making
  • EXPLANATIONS
  • Welfare State
  • Total stock of social
  • programs policies,
  • to which newly
  • enacted laws are added.
  • See module 3.
  • 2/3. Context politics

5. ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATION
4. The content of major social
welfare policies and programs is the principal
subject matter of this course, as will
become evident in later sessions. 5. Application
The level of greatest immediate concern to
social work practitioners. Covered in practice
courses and, to some extent, throughout this
course.
4. SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (LAWS))
2. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT (E.G., US CONGRESS)
3. POLITICS (BARGAINING)
1. WELFARE STATE (PROGRAMS/INSTITUTIONS)
9
Definitions (1) Policy, Social Policy, Social
Welfare Policy
A subset of social policies, in particular
programs/regulations designed to
satisfy individual and familial needs
inadequately met through the market system. See
slides 11/12 for a closer definition.
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)
Social policy is sometimes used as a synonym for
social welfare policy, but this is really
a misnomer, since the former is a far more
inclusive term encompassing all sorts of
domestic issues (e.g., education).
SOCIAL POLICIES
Policy generically refers to the goals, means,
and principles pursued by institutions, whether
public or private. The term is somewhat
confusing for that reason---i.e., it
encompasses both means and ends, but is
particularly associated with the notion of
principles, which are implicit/explicit
assumptions guiding specific actions in pursuit
of goals.
POLICIES
THE NEXT SLIDE PROVIDES ANOTHER
REPRESENTATION OF THESE CONCEPTS
10
Definitions (2) Policy, Social Policy, Social
Welfare Policy
PUBLIC POLICIES
SOCIAL POLICIES
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES
11
DEFINITIONS (3)
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)
  • Publicly financed and administered programs
    designed to meet basic needs inadequately met
    through the market system.
  • Program eligibility determined by citizenship,
    contributions, and/or means criteria.
  • Contents determined via the legislative process,
    as mediated by values, interests, and clout of
    the contending political actors and their
    supporters.

12
Social Welfare Policies Major Types
About 50 of all social welfare expenditure fall
into this category they are designed to
sustain income during unemployment or old age,
and require contributions from employees and/or
employers.
1. Contributory
Eligibility established by demonstrating
need, according to government mandated
criteria. This type of social welfare program
(e.g., SSI or TANF) accounts for 13 of all
expenditures.
2. Means - tested
Unlike welfare (2), these programs
are Targeted at the working poor (EITC) or
elderly seeking Medicaid assistance for for
long-term care. About 20 of all expenditures.
3. Benefits tied to earnings or savings
13
SWPs ORIGINS (1) (Mainstream version)
  • In the mainstream view, modern swps derive
    logically if not spontaneously from the very
    nature of modern society. Whatever its local
    variations, modernity everywhere involves
    urbanization, industrialization, and loss of
    family/local community economic support. Workers
    are consequently exposed to a variety of
    hazards----notably, illness, unemployment or
    injury on the job---previously perceived as
    family and community responsibilities. In the
    same vein, the life phases before and after
    market employment----i.e., youth and old
    age---also require protections as substitutes for
    the family/community goods and services available
    in simpler times.
  • The next slide diagrammatically profiles the
    varying attempts to
  • satisfy these new needs.

14
ORIGINS (2) VARYING RESPONSES TO MODERNIZATION
(Mainstream version)
Mutual Benefit Societies to protect members
thru insurance plans
Traditional American individualism and
self- Reliance
Trade unions to protect members by
winning benefits through collective bargaining
Government action, including swps,
in response to popular demands
URBANIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION
MODERNIZATION
15
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY ORIGINS (Radical
version)
  • Radicals contend that mainstreamers gloss over
    the issue of class struggle---i..e., the
    allegedly ineradicable conflicts in interests
    between workers and owners---that radicals view
    as the pivotal political element in capitalist
    society. The origins of modern swps---in Germany
    in the 1880s---is seen as a prime case in point.
    Then in an early phase of development, German
    capitalism was nevertheless already threatened by
    a comparably dynamic radical political labor
    movement demanding public ownership of the mines,
    factories, and railroads (the means of
    production). In reaction, Germanys Iron
    Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, acting on behalf
    of Germanys capitalist and aristocratic ruling
    class, instituted the first swps. The strategy
    worked by somewhat blunting working class demands
    for more basic change and, at least equally
    important, by classifying workers into various
    social insurance groupings, intentionally
    designed to fragment their capacity for common
    class solidarity. This divide and conquer
    policy deflected the (potentially) revolutionary
    ardor feared by German elites. While American swp
    followed its own distinctive pattern, their
    intent and results were similar.
  • The next slide reviews the American case
  • more closely from a radical perspective.

16
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES ORIGINS (Radical
version)
  • Liberals often view---or, better perhaps,
    venerate--- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) as
    the founding father of modern American social
    welfare policy. This is true in a technical
    sense---the Social Security Act (1935) and other
    important social and social welfare legislation
    were indeed enacted during the New Deal phase
    (1933-41) of FDRs long presidential tenure
    (1933-45). But radical historians argue that
    liberals underemphasize the pressures exerted on
    Roosevelt from both working class Left and,
    especially. capitalist Right, as well as
    Roosevelts own essentially conservative
    inclinations. Thus, radicals regard the Social
    Security Act itself---undoubtedly the most
    important
  • swp in US history---as basically prompted by
  • corporate Americas demands for public relief
  • from its Depression-era pension obligations.
  • Conservatives are equally negative about the New
  • Deal, as the next slide explains.

17
ORIGINAL SIN THE CONSERVATIVE EXPLANATION
  • THIS EDU-RAMA! CLIP IS ONLY 4 MINUTES LONG, BUT
    APTLY SUMMARIZES CONSERVATIVE DISTASTE FOR THE
    ROOSEVELT LEGACY. THE PRESENTER IS PROF. MILTON
    FRIEDMAN, OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, PERHAPS
    THE FOREMOST CONSERVATIVE OPPONENT OF THE WELFARE
    STATE.
  • HERE FRIEDMAN EXPLAINS HOW ROOSEVELTS
    DISCUSSIONS WITH LEADING INTELLECTUALS, WHILE FDR
    WAS STILL GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK STATE, SET THE
    STAGE FOR HIS NEW DEAL POLICIES AS PRESIDENT.

EDU-RAMA
18
SWP TRENDS (1) RETREAT, HO!
  • Retreat from expansionary social welfare policies
    is one of the major political realities of our
    time, and one that has had especially important
    implications for both social workers and their
    traditional clientele---the poor.
  • While the beginnings of this trend predate the
    1980s, it was during that decade, and
    specifically during the Reagan years (1981-88),
    that the process really accelerated---indeed,
    Reagan was elected on an explicitly roll back
    the welfare state platform that constituted a
    wholesale rejection of the
  • New Deal tradition.
  • Whatever ones values, there is no doubt
  • that the era of big government is over and,
  • barring exceptional circumstances (most
  • obviously, a major economic downturn)
  • is unlikely to return any time soon.

19
SWP TRENDS (2) CAUSAL FACTORS
  • The reasons for this reversal are hotly debated,
    but its overall momentum remains indisputable.
    Conservatives point to popular disillusionment
    in President Nixons (1968 73) memorable
    phrase, voters allegedly became tired of
    throwing money at social problems, and so
    withdrew support from initiatives allegedly most
    beneficial to public sector bureaucrats rather
    than the ostensible recipients of services. As
    the Friedman video on FDR testifies, this is
    merely the latest version of the longstanding
    conservative claim that so-called big
    government doesnt work and therefore should be
    downsized to an absolute minimum.
  • Radicals, however, see the matter differently. In
    their view, swps have been undercut by increased
    corporate lobbying and the worldwide victory of
    free market economics.
  • For more on this controversy, see Part 2 of this
    module, module 3, and relevant assigned readings.

20
SWP TRENDS (3) STAGNATION REVERSALS
  • No new major social welfare reforms have been
    created since enactment of Medicare/Medicaid in
    1965. On the other hand, several major programs,
    notably public assistance and Supplemental
    Security Income (SSI) have, respectively, been
    transformed or radically reduced. Perhaps more
    importantly, almost no prominent political figure
    in either major party now advocates ambitious
    liberal swp initiatives.
  • The last major attempt at innovation was
    President Clintons ill-fated 1994 health care
    proposal (Module 5), which resulted in the single
    greatest domestic political defeat of his
    administration. While dissatisfaction with health
    care continues to simmer, Clintons attempt to
    reform the entire health care system was so
    disastrous as to discredit all further attempts
    at global change. Commenting at the time (1994)
    the inimitable Tom Tomorrow summed up the
    political mess, as follows

21
SWP TRENDS (4) A PLAGUE ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES
COMMENT ON THE CLINTON HEALTH BILL (1994)
22
SWP TRENDS (5) PRIVATIZATION
  • Privatization of public service programs is now a
    well-established American pattern. Many
    municipalities, for example, subcontract trash
    collection and some even have experimented with
    private police and fire services. However, the
    most prominent privatization experiments so far
    have been in education (so-called charter
    schools) and in the penal system, with a number
    of states experimenting with corporate run
    prisons.
  • Privatization has also dramatically expanded in
    the swp area, notably in administration of state
    welfare programs and reliance on for-profit HMOs
    in the Medicare and, especially, Medicaid
    programs.
  • More ambitious still are demands for the
    privatization of Social Security, the colossal
    enchilada among American swps, which some
    conservatives would like to see turned into a
    privatized pension plan.

23
SWP TRENDS (6) PRIVATIZATION PROS CONS
  • PRO
  • (CONSERVATIVE ARGUMENTS)
  • Privatization of public services and programs
    saves money because businesses must meet contract
    specifications or lose money. Because
    contractors have specific bottom line targets,
    they must conduct their operations with exemplary
    efficiency if they want to stay in business.
  • In privatizing services, government is avoiding
    long-term contractual commitments to
    employees---a huge cost saving over time.
  • Corporate employees are not covered by civil
    service protections, which promote retention of
    dead wood, and otherwise cost the taxpayer
    avoidable expenses.
  • CON
  • (LIBERAL/RADICAL ARGUMENTS)
  • Privatization is essentially a ruse (scam),
    whereby corporations connive with pliant
    politicians to usurp what are legitimately public
    functions. The conservative arguments are
    therefore really red herrings, i.e., designed
    to deflect attention away from the real aims
    underlying privatization.
  • Privatization is dangerous insofar as it subverts
    social solidarity, while providing corporations
    with undesirable entrée into all kinds of
    activities---e.g., education and public
    welfare---best left within the public domain.

24
SWP TRENDS (7) DEVOLUTION
  • Devolution refers to the transfer of swps from
    one level of government responsibility to
    another---most recently, from the federal to the
    state and lower levels of government, as was most
    prominently done with public welfare, when it was
    transformed from AFDC to TANF (1996).
  • Like the other trends described in this section,
    devolution is a controversial issue. Its
    conservative supporters argue that it will help
    make swps more reflective of the popular will,
    because state governments are literally and
    figuratively closer to the people.
  • Liberals and radicals predictably dont see the
    matter in this way. They view devolution as
    simply one way of sloughing off the
    responsibility for swps by downsizing the size
    and power of the federal government---the only
    level of government that, historically, has been
    the most reliable and effective proponent of
    social welfare programs.

25
PART 2 SWP POLITICS
26
THE POLITICAL DIMENSION
  • SWPs are first and foremost the product of
    politics that is why it is impossible to engage
    in serious social work study without including
    significant attention to the professions
    political dimension. It is also why both CSWE and
    NASW readily acknowledge the importance of
    understanding politics in general, and the
    politics of social welfare in particular, as
    vital to the future of the profession.
  • This second part of Module 2, and associated
    readings, provide a compressed review, of both
    these themes. But doing so is not easy, not least
    because, as we shall see, even defining what
    politics is about is itself controversial,
    depending as it does on whether one accepts a
    mainstream or radical perspective on that
    subject.
  • Well focus on this controversy, and its
    implications for social work and social welfare
    policy, but first briefly make note of the
    institutional context within which all political
    activity takes place and the actors who make
    that activity actually happen.

27
Institutions
  • All swps are hammered out within certain
    institutional rules and procedures that regulate
    each stage of the policy making process. This may
    occur at the local, state, or federal levels,
    although, historically, the most important
    legislation has been enacted at the federal
    level.
  • The way in which institutions are organized, and
    their relationship to one another, can have a big
    impact on swp legislation. Indeed, the so-called
    institutional school of policy analysts believe
    that that impact is decisive in accounting for
    social policy outcomes. These analysts argue that
    the American systems division of powers makes it
    possible to obstruct passage of sw legislation
    (and much else), just as the weak structure of
    our political parties tends to have the same
    effect it is very difficult for party leaders to
    rally the troops when each soldier (read
    legislator) is primarily answerable to his
    local constituents. Finally, older, more
    conservative legislators have often exercised
    extraordinary power simply because, as
    legislative veterans, they have more
    institutional experience and have occupied key
    institutional positions.

28
Institutions and Politics
  • Institutional arrangements, of the type
    summarized in the last slide, undoubtedly have
    played a significant role in determining social
    welfare policy. Indeed, when civic texts refer to
    the policy making process, their primary
    emphasis is usually on explaining the rules of
    the game, as it is played in the various
    institutional contexts from which swps emerge.
    Yet it is important to remember that these are
    POLITICAL as well as INSTITUTIONAL contexts i.e.
    that institutional rules have been established in
    order to constrain and discipline the struggle
    for power that we call politics. Therefore,
    while granting that the institutional school
    has its points, most analysts still regard
    politics and political interests as the keys to
    understanding why we get the types of social
    welfare policies we do.
  • For that reason, it is important to focus on the
    key questions relating to politics and social
    welfare policy, beginning with the primary one.

29
POLITICAL ACTORS SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY
  • Political actors determine the contents and
    disposition of swps.
  • The clout of particular political actors in
    turn depends on their resources (1) lobbyists,
    their financial resources (2) politicians, their
    political skills (3) the public, its degree of
    active political mobilization. Generally, (1) is
    the decisive factor, but (2) (3) can also be
    very important, depending on the particular
    issue.
  • Policy outcomes are thus often difficult to
    predict
  • due to the complex interaction of these
  • factors on any given issue
  • The next slide provides a diagrammatic
    representation of the relationships among
    political actors.

30
(No Transcript)
31
INSERT THE GREATEST POLITICAL ACTOR OF THEM ALL?
  • Students of modern American history often rate
    Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) the most highly
    skilled political leader since FDR. Indeed, LBJ
    was an FDR protégé in his command of
    institutional forms (he was Senate majority
    leader for many years), interpersonal skills (the
    famous LBJ treatment could reportedly
    persuade even the most independently-minded),
    and determined commitment to social justice.
    Using these extraordinary assets, Johnson enacted
    numerous civil rights, education, and social
    welfare laws, including Medicare and Medicaid,
    which are the most important swp legacies of his
    administration (1963 1968). Yet despite these
    extraordinary achievements, Johnsons presidency
    was politically destroyed by the Vietnam war,
    which drained resources from his War on Poverty
    and helped discredit the liberal activism Johnson
    exemplified and championed. Click on Edu-Rama!
    to watch a capsule LBJ bio, which begins with his
    statement following assassination of his
    predecessor, J.F. Kennedy.

EDU-RAMA!
32
WHAT IS POLITICS, ANYWAY?
ITS WHAT CLINTON DOES IN OVAL OFFICE
ITS A FIGHT FOR LOVE AND GLORY
DARNED IF I KNOW !
There is no single authoritative definition of
politics. In fact, as the following 3 slides
explain, its meaning very much depends on
whether you are an mainstreamer or radical.
33
THE MAINSTREAM VIEW OF POLITICS
  • As one would anticipate, mainstreamers see
    politics basically as an arena of ideas in
    which individuals and groups seek to promote and
    act into law plans and values they regard as of
    paramount social importance.
  • In the mainstream conception, civics is not
    simply an add on, but close to the core of what
    education should be about. That is, the schools,
    especially at the higher levels, should teach how
    to evaluate the objective merit of ideas by
    equipping students with a knowledge of those
    subjects---history, philosophy, and
    economics---most germane to the evaluative task.
  • Democracy works to the extent that citizen-voters
    have acquired and are able to exercise this
    analytical capability. Thus, it is possible to
    have a democratic institutional format without
    the democratic commitment to public-spirited
    debate and circulation of ideas. Indeed, many
    mainstreamers worry that this is the current
    American situation.

34
THE MAINSTREAM VIEW LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES
  • Usually seen as opposing political viewpoints,
    liberals and conservatives actually share key
    underlying assumptions.
  • Specifically, both view politics in terms of
    dialogue and debate their objective is to put
    before the public ideas and proposals they claim
    serve the common interest, rather than specific
    class interests. That liberals and conservatives
    share this view is at least as important as their
    political differences.
  • That said, conservatives believe that it is
    necessary to promote corporate goals because
    society will flourish only if business does.
  • Liberals do not disagree with this proposition,
    but urge that all people be given an equal chance
    to compete and that government helps those who,
    for whatever reason, fail to compete
    successfully. Liberals also believe that certain
    common social programs should be adopted when the
    private sector proves incapable of furnishing the
    needed goods or services---medical care for the
    aged.
  • The following two slides look at these
    differences more closely.

35
LIBERAL VIEWS
  • Commitment to basic living standards beneath
    which no one should be allowed to fall.
  • Equality of opportunity actively promoted by
    government
  • Belief in the benign efficacy of government, as
    led by the liberal elite
  • Belief that capitalisms rough edges can and
    should be reformed for the benefit of society as
    a whole.
  • Democratic process as the way to effect all
    political changes.

36
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS
  • People are, or at least should be, responsible
    for their own lives swp safety nets only
    cushion the lazy and encourage the improvident.
    They should accordingly be minimized or
    eliminated altogether.
  • Equality of opportunity, but primary emphasis on
    individual initiative
  • Belief in the inherent incapacity of government
    to effectively address social problems. Led by
    well-meaning but naïve liberals, governments can
    be transformed into bureaucratized colossi, which
    threaten individual freedom, even when they
    remain nominally democratic in form.
  • There is no such thing as a free lunch
  • Democratic process as the way to effect all
    political change.

37
THE RADICAL VIEW OF POLITICS
  • Radicals see politics as essentially a struggle
    for power, in which specific groups, individuals,
    and, especially, social classes pursue their
    specific interests by appealing to certain common
    ideas and ideals. In this view, in order to
    understand politics, you must first understand
    what an individual, class, or group is trying to
    achieve in terms of their advantage and then
    relate their political ideas to this objective.
    Ideas flow from interests, not the other way
    around, as mainstreamers believe.
  • Expert political understanding, like expert
    therapeutic practice, thus consists in being able
    to distinguish between what political actors mean
    as opposed to what they say. What they say is
    probably designed to convince others (and perhaps
    themselves as well) that passage of legislation
    they are supporting contributes to the community,
    when in fact it is quite partisan in its
    intentions.

38
THE RADICAL VIEW OF POLITICS
  • Radicals are divided into various
    sub-classifications---notably, communists,
    socialists and social democrats. However, all are
    more or less committed to viewing politics as
    essentially a struggle for power, in which the
    vast majority of people share common interests in
    world peace and economic security, and would
    accordingly benefit from a high degree of
    cooperation for the common good. That is what is
    in their interests.
  • However, these commonalities are obscured
    because a small, property owning
    minority---essentially, the capitalist class---is
    able to exercise decisive political influence in
    pursuit of its narrow ends. (See Module 1, slides
    30 59 for details.)
  • The following slide looks more closely at radical
    views.

39
RADICAL VALUES
  • Commitment to a decent standard of living for all
    citizens as a fundamental legal and human right
  • Full equality of opportunity and partial
    opportunity of result i.e. everyone should enjoy
    roughly the same life chances, but in any case,
    social and economic differences among people
    should be drastically narrowed.
  • Activist government working on behalf of those
    most in need of representation.
  • Mixed economy
  • Democratic process but without current
    inequalities of media or political access

40
POLITICS AND SOCIAL WELFARE POLITICS
  • The remainder of this module is devoted to
    applying Part 2 concepts to the politics of
    social welfare.

41
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICYPolitical Supporters and
Opponents
  • Actors and, more generally, swp supporters and
    opponents, differ in both their economic
    interests and political values
  • Most Americans identify themselves as either
    liberals (not liberalists) and conservatives.
    Radicals are a small minority without effective
    political representation or access to major
    media outlets for dissemination of their views.
  • Radicals, like liberals, support popular swps,
    but want to see them extended as part of an
    overall effort to reduce inequality.

42
SWP SUPPORTERS ECONOMIC INTERESTS (1)
  • Generous swps are generally supported by the poor
    and working class, as represented by trade
    unions, and by others (e.g., handicappers)
    seeking protection from the unrestrained
    capitalist market.
  • Such programs are also selectively supported by
    middle class Americans insofar as universal
    social insurance programs benefit
    them---Medicare, Medicaid (nursing homes), and
    Social Security.
  • To the extent that that Americans perceive that
    they have common interests in protecting
    programs, they are likely to become political
    actors.
  • The following slides examine these alignments
    more closely.

43
SUPPORTERS ECONOMIC INTERESTS (2)
  • Blue collar workers are more vulnerable to lay
    off and hence more interested in safety net
    social welfare protections for themselves and
    their families
  • Trade union power is increased to the extent that
    workers have a fall back position in
    negotiations with owners the stronger the swp
    safety net, the more assertive unions are able
    to be in their negotiations with management

Solidarity Forever!
44
OPPONENTS ECONOMIC INTERESTS
  • Swps increase taxes and are resented by the rich,
    who can afford to buy protections through the
    market---e.g., health care and retirement
    investments. Their lives are in any case much
    more materially secure than those of ordinary
    Americans.
  • The welfare state increases the bargaining power
    of labor, as noted, so that its size and
    coverages are very important considerations for
    employers seeking to restrain wages and benefits.
  • Owners want consumers to have maximum private
    resources so that, ideally, even necessities are
    purchased through the market rather than
    collectively through the political process.
    (What I want as an individual consumer, as
    opposed to What we want as a political
    community. ) See Module III discussion of
    decommodification for more on this point.

SOAK THE RICH, WHY DONT YOU!
TAX CUTS NOW!
45
ECONOMIC INTERESTS AND POLITICAL BELIEFS A
FINAL COMMENT
  • While peoples ideas and interests are ideally in
    harmony---in principle you should be aware of and
    favor those policies that are in your individual
    and class interests----there is often a
    discrepancy between the two i.e., in reality, we
    often believe things that are not in our
    interest.
  • Radicals attribute such discordance to false
    consciousness, i.e. what was termed in Module I
    capitalist control over the means of mental
    production and the resultant political ideas and
    proposals that deflect ordinary people from their
    real interests.

46
Part 2 Questions
  • As emphasized in this module, politics is the
    driving force behind
  • development and enactment of social welfare
    policy. Which political
  • position do you identify with---liberal,
    conservative, or radical---and
  • on what grounds?
  • 2. Does the concept of false consciousness make
    sense to you? If so,
  • apply it to a given political situation with
    which you are familiar. If
  • not, explain why you think the concept is faulty.
  • 3. Imagine that you are a political decision
    maker charged with
  • development of new social welfare policies. To
    which policies would
  • you give priority? Why do you think these are so
    important?
  • 4. Having reviewed the module and associated
    readings, discuss the
  • importance of social welfare policy for social
    workers.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com