"Welfare Magnets" and Benefit Decline: Symbolic Problems and Substantive Consequences

In: Publius: the journal of federalism, Band 24, Heft 4, S. 61-82

Abstract

In response to concern about "welfare migration," some states have frozen benefit levels & are trying to institute lower benefits for newly arrived out-of-state applicants. There is also evidence that rising welfare rolls lead states not to raise benefits. Yet, a review of relevant literature & published statistics shows that interstate variation in welfare benefits has narrowed over the last two decades. There is also evidence that while comparison of benefit levels may discourage high-benefit states from raising benefits, states look more at themselves then at each other. The most significant factor affecting AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) benefit levels appears to lie in the intergovernmental arrangements for financing public assistance (ie, some states allow Food Stamps & Medicaid to substitute for AFDC). In addition, the migration of poor female-headed families is patterned after the migration of the population in general; they move to where there is job growth. A major political consequence of stressing welfare migration may be its symbolic value in reinforcing prejudices against welfare recipients. 5 Tables, 2 Figures. Adapted from the source document.