A Sociological Inquiry into the Growth of Punitive U.S. Welfare Policies and Criminalization of Poverty
A Paper for Sociology 606: Inequality and Social Policy taught by Dr. Marina Adler | March 6, 2022
When veteran Stephen Papa returned from Iraq, he was poor and homeless. Even though he was able to secure employment, he faced hardship after one night of being drunk, leading to a conviction for property destruction and resisting arrest. Faced with fines and court fees of $2,600, he was ordered to pay off the first $50, but fell short of $25. He was then jailed for 22 days and lost his job. Instead of being allowed to continue working to pay the fine, he was sent to jail for being poor (Dolan & Carr). By understanding how social policy is legitimized by dominant ideologies, it becomes clear how the criminalization of poverty is caused by the U.S, focus on punitive welfare policies.
Neoliberalism is an ideology that justifies economic globalization: rather than promoting a return to laissez-faire economics, it urges for a change in the role of government when working with market principles (Schram et al. 2014:379). The welfare strategy of neoliberalism uses incentives and penalties to enforce economic market logic through governmental bodies, agencies, and clients. These welfare policies instruct recipients of welfare on how to think, act, and plan with their money. The policies are designed to encourage welfare recipients to stop being dependent on public assistance and instead take jobs in low-wage labor markets like in the gig-economy (Schram et al. 2014:379). Considering the social policy frameworks identified by Spicker (2014), neoliberalism would be linked to the framework of selectivity. Selective policies are one that select which people are going to receive a service. This forces clients to be compliant to economic logic and certain market behaviors. The usage of filing forms, showing up for interviews, and providing information puts the burden of administration on the client and thus structurally encourages them to stop being dependent on public assistance (Spicker 2014).
Capitalism asserts the idea that there need to be balanced budgets per year and debt must be reduced (Spicker 2014). The ideology assumes people respond rationally to incentives and disincentives (Spicker 2014). Capitalism assumes higher wages lead to unemployment due to businesses being unable to maintain employees at higher pay (Spicker 2014). The social policy framework of residualism is legitimized by capitalism. At the core, there is the belief that people can sustain on their own or on other people’s resources. The safety net is considered as only needed when someone falls out of economic and social power. In turn, the benefits in a residual model of welfare and social policy are designed to reduce material deprivation without requiring a comprehensive system of support (Spicker 2014).
On the other hand, socialism is an ideology with multiple concepts in mind: a movement for improvement of society through collective action, methods and approaches associated with collective action like mutual aid and social welfare services, a model of society based on cooperation and equality, and a range of values including collectivism, freedom and empowerment, and egalitarianism (Spicker 2014). The framework of social protection and solidarity is legitimized by socialism because the framework focuses on promoting welfare through the provision of security when circumstances change (Spicker 2014). Additionally, the framework focuses on reducing the hardship and risks that are associated with poorer economies that have been caused by unrestrained growth and social inequality (Spicker 2014).
Now, it becomes clear why and how power elites were able to keep U.S. capitalism alive even in a time crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. The United States could have provided free healthcare to every individual and distributed medical resources based on the greatest need; subsidized payrolls to prevent immense unemployment; and implemented a basic monthly income to empower people to be able to pay for necessities until the pandemic ended (Nolan). Instead, the U.S. chose to encourage consumer demand through unemployment benefits instead of keeping workers on existing payrolls; maintain the healthcare industry in private hands, and neglect to implement a national suspension on rent (Nolan).
The decisions the U.S. made, which focused on protecting capital instead of humanity, are due to the rise and establishment of neoliberalism alongside the persistence of capitalism. This is best seen through the three distinctive features of the contemporary political economy of the United States: dominance by large corporations, rise of finance capitalism, and pattern of boom and bust (Blau, 102). Large corporations, like Walmart, employ 1% of the U.S. labor force (Blau 2014:102). And considering that less than 18,000 firms have more than 500 workers, surpassing the 5.9 million companies that employ fewer than 500 workers, these large businesses have the scale of enterprise beyond the borders of a country and have leverage over its workforce (Blau 2014:102). Thus, communities have little power over corporations’ decisions and workers are dependent upon the good will of corporations to retain employment and receive decent wages (Blau 2014:102).
Additionally, the rise of finance capitalism allows companies to have immense global impact, enabling speculation of stocks and currencies around the world and transfer of billions of dollars in mere seconds (Blau 2014:103). Unfortunately, once again, not prioritizing U.S. capitalism would mean trillions and trillions more dollars lost, damaging the power and wealth of the country to meet the pressing demands of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, the pattern of boom and bust in the U.S economy has historically left the economy to be quite volatile, creating a growth of a few wealthy people to garner the most wealth and power at the cost of safety nets through social welfare programs (Blau 2014:105). With low taxes, spending cuts, and deregulation designed to lower the cost of labor and angle the will of the government towards the dominating large corporations and financial institutions, the United States is at the will of these entities to protect capital over humanity (Blau 2014:105).
The immense power of power elites to maintain U.S. capitalism alive has left social welfare policy to act as a cushion to the effects of poverty (Blau 2014:112). Take for instance Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Cash Assistance. The program enables families to meet basic needs, stabilizing families during a crisis, promote racial equity, and help children succeed (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities). However, TANF’s reach has declined significantly over time, reaching only 23 of every 100 families in 2019 compared to reaching 68 of every 100 families in 1996 (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities). Likewise, despite the fact that Social Security provides the absolute essential social and economic functions, it maintains people in poverty or rarely provides an escape from poverty (Blau 2014:113). Majority of Social Security recipients are on the edge of the official poverty line, approximating $23,000 for a household of four people in 2012 (Blau 2014:112). But in larger and more expensive regions like Chicago or New York, the amount does not allow families to meet their basic human needs (Blau 2014:113).
The punitive nature of U.S. welfare policies alludes to the criminalization of poverty. For instance, if someone cannot pay for a ticket, they can be charged an additional $10 with $35 per month for being placed on probation by a private for-profit company (Brave New Films 2015). These companies like JCS target impoverished communities where the debt of probation prolongs for long periods of time, translating to large profits for the private businesses, while risking incarceration for individuals falling behind on growing payments (Brave New Films 2015). In turn, incarceration deepens social inequality in America. The invisible and cumulative nature of incarceration segregates economic opportunities and social mobility for the incarcerated, cutting time out of the labor force, and thus leaving them with significantly reduced earnings and employment (Grusky & Hill 2018:166–168). Unlike countries like Italy and France, which consider welfare as an essential for all its citizens, the U.S. frames welfare as a service for the poor (Moore, Michael 2015). With the framework rooted in social class essentialism, a person of higher social class is likely to believe that if an individual is doing well, the success comes to those who ‘deserve it’ and those with lower social class do not deserve it (Hutson 2014). Hence, framing welfare as a service to the poor functions to remind people in poverty that they do not deserve greater resources or opportunities and discourages people in poverty from seeking welfare.
In conclusion, the U.S. can prioritize human well-being over capital by adopting unemployment benefits and health policies similar to ones implemented in other countries (McHugh 2020). While the U.S. has unemployment benefits ranging from $215 (Mississippi) to $534 (Hawaii), the benefits only last up to 6 months and emergency legislation during the COVID-19 pandemic added only 13 weeks (McHugh 2020). The U.S. should consider a model similar to that of France, where the government covers up to 75% of previous average daily wage for two years, averaging to $1320 a month. Likewise, half of Americans gain health insurance through employers, while 34% receive benefits through Medicare and Medicaid, 6% insured individually, & 9% have no insurance in 2018 (McHugh 2020). Whereas in Europe, the national healthcare system and a good portion of medical services are provided free of charge by doctors who are employed by the government, leaving some room for private insurance companies to operate (McHugh 2020). And like France, the U.S. should adopt maternity benefits where mothers are entitled to at least 16 weeks paid leave for their first child and daily maternity leave provides parents with a daily allowance of at least $94.50 (McHugh 2020).
Reference List
Blau, Joel. 2014. “The political economy of U.S. social policy.” Pp.101–123 in Social Policy and Social Justice, edited by in M. Reisch. Los Angeles: Cognella Academic Publishing.
Brave New Films. 2015. “To Prison for Poverty.” Produced by Brave New Films. February 19, 2015. Accessed April 15, 2022. Video. http://www.upworthy.com/being-poor-has-never-been-a-crime-in-our-country-until-now?c=ufb1
Dolan K. & Carr, J. 2015. “The Poor Get Prison.” Institute for Policy Studies. Retrieved April 15, 2022. https://ips-dc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IPS-The-Poor-Get-Prison-Final.pdf.
Grusky, D. & Hill, J. 2018. Inequality In the 21st Century. New York: Routledge.
Hutson, Matthew. 2014. “Social Darwinism Isn’t Dead.” SLATE. Retrieved April 15, 2022,
McHugh, David. 2020. “Not all safety nets protect the same. Pandemic exposes how US, Europe care for their own.” Associated Press. Retrieved April 15, 2022, http://digitaledition.baltimoresun.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=40f7f222-c90e-4279-ba28-4dd1cb7a39be
Moore, Michael. 2015. Where to Invade Next. Ridus-TWC. Accessed April 15, 2022.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q62P_z6cXyg
Nolan, Hamilton. 2020. “The Plan is to Save Capital and Let the People Die.” Common Dreams. Retrieved April 15, 2022. https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/04/09/plan-save-capital-and-let-people-die?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=referral&u
Schram, S., Soss, J., & Fording, R. 2014. “Welfare and welfare reform in the age of neoliberal paternalism.” Pp. 377–403 in Social Policy and Social Justice, edited by M. Reisch. Los Angeles: Cognella Academic Publishing.
Spicker, Paul. 2014. Social Policy. Bristol: The Policy Press.