This chapter focuses on U.S. social welfare policies. It examines the government’s role in the provision of social welfare, while exploring issues of welfare costs and benefits. The chapter argues that the welfare system is inevitably a mess, since it is the arena in which nearly all the contending forces of American politics collide. These are the main points of this chapter:

The United States has a complex social welfare system of multiple programs addressing specific welfare needs. Each program applies only to those individuals who quality for benefits by meeting the specific eligibility criteria. In general, these criteria are designed to reward and promote self-reliance or, when help is necessary, to ensure that laziness is not rewarded or fostered—in short, to limit benefits to those individuals who truly cannot help themselves. This approach to social welfare reflects Americans’ traditional belief in individualism.

Poverty is a large and persistent problem in America. About one in seven falls below the government-defined poverty line, and they include a disproportionate number of children, female-headed families, minority group members, and rural and inner-city dwellers. The ranks of the poor are increased by economic recessions and reduced through government welfare programs.

Welfare policy has been a partisan issue, with Democrats taking the lead on government programs to alleviate economic insecurity. Changes in social welfare have usually occurred through presidential leadership in the context of majority support for the change. Welfare policy has been worked out through programs to provide jobs and job training, education programs, income measures, and, especially, transfer payments through individual-benefit programs.

Individual-benefit programs fall into two broad categories: social insurance and public assistance. The former includes such programs as social security for retired workers and Medicare for the elderly. Social insurance programs are funded by payroll taxes on potential recipients, who thus, in a sense, earn the benefits they later receive. Because of this arrangement, social insurance programs have broad public support. Public assistance programs, in contrast, are funded by general tax revenues and are targeted toward needy individuals and families. These programs are not controversial in principle: most Americans believe that government should assist the truly needy. However, because of a widespread belief that most welfare recipients could get along without assistance if they tried, these programs do not have universal public support, are only modestly funded, and are politically vulnerable.

The American acceptance of "equality of opportunity" has led to a different attitude toward social welfare programs, especially when compared to European democracies. This acceptance has also influenced the preference of Americans for freedom over equality and the nation’s broad-based educational system.

The social welfare system in the United States is criticized in all quarters, but reform efforts have been largely unsuccessful. A major reason is that opposing sides disagree fundamentally on the nature of the problem. In one view, social welfare is too costly and assists too many people who could help themselves; another view holds that social welfare is not broad enough and that too many poor and disadvantaged Americans live in poverty. In light of these irreconcilable differences, in combination with federalism and the widely shared view that welfare programs should target specific problems, the existing system of multiple programs, despite its administrative complexity and inefficiency, has been the only politically feasible alternative. Yet it results in social spending that is not fully targeted toward the people most in need of help.

The 1994 Republican takeover of Congress led to a series of welfare reforms designed to reduce welfare dependency, promote individualism, and give more flexibility to the states. The full effects of these reforms have yet to be determined.