Reforming welfare: The next policy debates
The author summarizes the debate over welfare reform that preceded the passage of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). In general, liberals focused on eradicating poverty, arguing that the well-being of welfare recipients should be the top priority....
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Society (New Brunswick) 2001-01, Vol.38 (2), p.16-20 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 20 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 16 |
| container_title | Society (New Brunswick) |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Weicher, John C |
| description | The author summarizes the debate over welfare reform that preceded the passage of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). In general, liberals focused on eradicating poverty, arguing that the well-being of welfare recipients should be the top priority. Meanwhile, conservatives were more concerned with welfare dependency & how to move recipients off the welfare rolls. Nevertheless, the two sides found enough common ground to fashion a compromise on welfare reform. Thus far, efforts to evaluate PRWORA's effectiveness have raised more questions than they have answered. It is simply too soon to draw any definitive conclusions about PRWORA's impact, but the early research indicates that a significant number of former welfare recipients will become permanent members of the working poor. If that happens, the ideological fault line between liberals & conservatives will reemerge in future debates over welfare reform. A. Funderburg |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12115-001-1035-4 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60139430</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>65712923</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-dbfcb9fa76d0a7798d88f90d35c350675f75533f4f77f191d3cbe7a2de0a95b03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1LxDAURYMoOI7-AHfFhQsh-l5e0rTuRPyCAUHGdUjbRDt02jHpoPPvzTCu3Ojd3M3h8S6HsVOESwTQVxEFouIAyBFIcbnHJlhSzqUWap9NAKXmAhAP2VGMC0gRQk7YxYvzQ1i2_Vv26Tpvg7vO5u8u693XmK2Grq03WeMqO7p4zA687aI7-ekpe72_m98-8tnzw9PtzYzXQuqRN5Wvq9JbnTdgtS6Lpih8CQ2pmhTkWnmtFJGXXmuPJTZUV05b0TiwpaqApux8d3cVho-1i6NZtrF2XWd7N6yjyQGplPQfEAokkn-CVAjKda4SePYLXAzr0Ke1RqTX0z4SCcIdVIchxuC8WYV2acPGIJitDLOTYZIMs5VhJH0DAKN6Ig</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>206724732</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reforming welfare: The next policy debates</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Weicher, John C</creator><creatorcontrib>Weicher, John C</creatorcontrib><description>The author summarizes the debate over welfare reform that preceded the passage of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). In general, liberals focused on eradicating poverty, arguing that the well-being of welfare recipients should be the top priority. Meanwhile, conservatives were more concerned with welfare dependency & how to move recipients off the welfare rolls. Nevertheless, the two sides found enough common ground to fashion a compromise on welfare reform. Thus far, efforts to evaluate PRWORA's effectiveness have raised more questions than they have answered. It is simply too soon to draw any definitive conclusions about PRWORA's impact, but the early research indicates that a significant number of former welfare recipients will become permanent members of the working poor. If that happens, the ideological fault line between liberals & conservatives will reemerge in future debates over welfare reform. A. Funderburg</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-2011</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1936-4725</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12115-001-1035-4</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SOCYA6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Child care ; Conservatism ; Education ; Effectiveness ; Employment ; Family ; Family (Sociological Unit) ; Job Applicants ; Job Training ; Legislation ; Liberalism ; Policy making ; Political Ideologies ; Poverty ; Pregnancy ; Public Service Occupations ; Sanctions ; Seminars ; Social conditions & trends ; Social Impact Assessment ; Social policy ; Social research ; Tax Rates ; Training ; U.S.A ; War ; Welfare ; Welfare Policy ; Welfare Recipients ; Welfare Reform ; Welfare Services ; Well Being ; Workforce ; Youth</subject><ispartof>Society (New Brunswick), 2001-01, Vol.38 (2), p.16-20</ispartof><rights>Copyright Transaction Publishers Jan/Feb 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,12824,27321,27901,27902,33751,33752</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Weicher, John C</creatorcontrib><title>Reforming welfare: The next policy debates</title><title>Society (New Brunswick)</title><description>The author summarizes the debate over welfare reform that preceded the passage of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). In general, liberals focused on eradicating poverty, arguing that the well-being of welfare recipients should be the top priority. Meanwhile, conservatives were more concerned with welfare dependency & how to move recipients off the welfare rolls. Nevertheless, the two sides found enough common ground to fashion a compromise on welfare reform. Thus far, efforts to evaluate PRWORA's effectiveness have raised more questions than they have answered. It is simply too soon to draw any definitive conclusions about PRWORA's impact, but the early research indicates that a significant number of former welfare recipients will become permanent members of the working poor. If that happens, the ideological fault line between liberals & conservatives will reemerge in future debates over welfare reform. A. Funderburg</description><subject>Child care</subject><subject>Conservatism</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Family</subject><subject>Family (Sociological Unit)</subject><subject>Job Applicants</subject><subject>Job Training</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Liberalism</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Political Ideologies</subject><subject>Poverty</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Public Service Occupations</subject><subject>Sanctions</subject><subject>Seminars</subject><subject>Social conditions & trends</subject><subject>Social Impact Assessment</subject><subject>Social policy</subject><subject>Social research</subject><subject>Tax Rates</subject><subject>Training</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>War</subject><subject>Welfare</subject><subject>Welfare Policy</subject><subject>Welfare Recipients</subject><subject>Welfare Reform</subject><subject>Welfare Services</subject><subject>Well Being</subject><subject>Workforce</subject><subject>Youth</subject><issn>0147-2011</issn><issn>1936-4725</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1LxDAURYMoOI7-AHfFhQsh-l5e0rTuRPyCAUHGdUjbRDt02jHpoPPvzTCu3Ojd3M3h8S6HsVOESwTQVxEFouIAyBFIcbnHJlhSzqUWap9NAKXmAhAP2VGMC0gRQk7YxYvzQ1i2_Vv26Tpvg7vO5u8u693XmK2Grq03WeMqO7p4zA687aI7-ekpe72_m98-8tnzw9PtzYzXQuqRN5Wvq9JbnTdgtS6Lpih8CQ2pmhTkWnmtFJGXXmuPJTZUV05b0TiwpaqApux8d3cVho-1i6NZtrF2XWd7N6yjyQGplPQfEAokkn-CVAjKda4SePYLXAzr0Ke1RqTX0z4SCcIdVIchxuC8WYV2acPGIJitDLOTYZIMs5VhJH0DAKN6Ig</recordid><startdate>20010101</startdate><enddate>20010101</enddate><creator>Weicher, John C</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010101</creationdate><title>Reforming welfare: The next policy debates</title><author>Weicher, John C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-dbfcb9fa76d0a7798d88f90d35c350675f75533f4f77f191d3cbe7a2de0a95b03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Child care</topic><topic>Conservatism</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Family</topic><topic>Family (Sociological Unit)</topic><topic>Job Applicants</topic><topic>Job Training</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Liberalism</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Political Ideologies</topic><topic>Poverty</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Public Service Occupations</topic><topic>Sanctions</topic><topic>Seminars</topic><topic>Social conditions & trends</topic><topic>Social Impact Assessment</topic><topic>Social policy</topic><topic>Social research</topic><topic>Tax Rates</topic><topic>Training</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>War</topic><topic>Welfare</topic><topic>Welfare Policy</topic><topic>Welfare Recipients</topic><topic>Welfare Reform</topic><topic>Welfare Services</topic><topic>Well Being</topic><topic>Workforce</topic><topic>Youth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Weicher, John C</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Society (New Brunswick)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Weicher, John C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reforming welfare: The next policy debates</atitle><jtitle>Society (New Brunswick)</jtitle><date>2001-01-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>16</spage><epage>20</epage><pages>16-20</pages><issn>0147-2011</issn><eissn>1936-4725</eissn><coden>SOCYA6</coden><abstract>The author summarizes the debate over welfare reform that preceded the passage of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). In general, liberals focused on eradicating poverty, arguing that the well-being of welfare recipients should be the top priority. Meanwhile, conservatives were more concerned with welfare dependency & how to move recipients off the welfare rolls. Nevertheless, the two sides found enough common ground to fashion a compromise on welfare reform. Thus far, efforts to evaluate PRWORA's effectiveness have raised more questions than they have answered. It is simply too soon to draw any definitive conclusions about PRWORA's impact, but the early research indicates that a significant number of former welfare recipients will become permanent members of the working poor. If that happens, the ideological fault line between liberals & conservatives will reemerge in future debates over welfare reform. A. Funderburg</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><doi>10.1007/s12115-001-1035-4</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0147-2011 |
| ispartof | Society (New Brunswick), 2001-01, Vol.38 (2), p.16-20 |
| issn | 0147-2011 1936-4725 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60139430 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts |
| subjects | Child care Conservatism Education Effectiveness Employment Family Family (Sociological Unit) Job Applicants Job Training Legislation Liberalism Policy making Political Ideologies Poverty Pregnancy Public Service Occupations Sanctions Seminars Social conditions & trends Social Impact Assessment Social policy Social research Tax Rates Training U.S.A War Welfare Welfare Policy Welfare Recipients Welfare Reform Welfare Services Well Being Workforce Youth |
| title | Reforming welfare: The next policy debates |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T09%3A50%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reforming%20welfare:%20The%20next%20policy%20debates&rft.jtitle=Society%20(New%20Brunswick)&rft.au=Weicher,%20John%20C&rft.date=2001-01-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=16&rft.epage=20&rft.pages=16-20&rft.issn=0147-2011&rft.eissn=1936-4725&rft.coden=SOCYA6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12115-001-1035-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E65712923%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=206724732&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |