The submerged state has been growing in recent history and has resulted in negative implications to American society. The “submerged state” is a term coined by Suzanne Mettler which describes federal policies that, by design, aren’t very visible to citizens. When the submerged state is referenced, it usually deals with social welfare policies. These social welfare policies are designed to reduce economic insecurity and inequality generated by capitalist markets and exist not only to provide assistance and services to the neediest individuals and families, but also to provide temporary assistance from job loss or injury, and to assure economic security in old age (Heerwig, 10/6). Some examples of social welfare policies are food stamps, veterans’ benefits, Medicare and Medicaid. Not all social welfare policies are submerged, but many are. Some examples of submerged social welfare policies consist of the home-mortgage interest deduction and exemption from taxes on employer-provided health and retirement benefits (Shannon, 1:54). …show more content…
Due to rising economic inequality in America, there are poor people who can’t afford the essentials in order to live a stable life.
Many social welfare policies exist to support such people and allow them to continue being productive members of society. These social welfare policies help keep the economy going and money circulating by incentivising people to go out and spend their money on things such as homes, as they know that they have the government supporting them. Without said policies, the country would be in a very different place and many people would be in a much more dangerous position. However, submerged social welfare policies, even if they have good intentions, often times miss the mark and end up being
ineffective. Too often is the case that people don’t know that they are benefitting from a submerged social welfare policy. For example, 53.3% of people with student loans, which is a submerged social welfare policy, were not aware that they are indeed benefiting from a government social program (Mettler, 809). This leaves Americans in an unfavorable predicament. If people don’t know that some submerged social welfare programs exist, they can’t properly take advantage of them. Furthermore, if people don’t understand why some social welfare policies exist, they are much more likely not to want their tax dollars spent on them. The lack of knowledge about these submerged welfare policies simply leads to people not taking full advantage of such policies or people not understanding the social policies enough to know why exist to begin with. The problems with submerged social welfare programs extend even further, as there are many cases of policies that are ineffective at aiding the people who need them the most. Furthermore, people who aren’t aware of bad social welfare policies aren’t in a position to fight for the removal of such policies. For example, the home-mortgage interest deduction is ineffective because it costs the government over 100 billion dollars a year to maintain, yet it benefits the wealthy much more than it benefits the poor (McCabe, 10/8). This is unfortunately not an outlier when it comes to submerged social welfare policies, as due to the way that many of these submerged policies are written, many of them benefit the rich much more than they benefit the poor. Mettler says, “Most of the submerged state benefits high income people the most, even if a lot of middle income people receive some benefits from these same policies” (Shannon, 5:19). In other words, these policies aren’t benefitting the people who need them the most, and are instead benefitting the affluent who really could live without them. This means that many of these submerged social welfare policies aren’t targeting the people who they are meant to target, and that they are often a waste of tax dollars. There is hope in resolving the issues surrounding these submerged policies, and some politicians are focused on doing so. As Mettler points out, “Obama’s policy objectives involved primarily attempts to reconstitute the submerged state—policies that lay beneath the surface of the US market institutions and within the federal tax system” (Mettler, 804). Obama has largely been successful at doing so, but there is still much to be done. As Suzanne Mettler points out in an interview, many social welfare policies are submerged because “over the past 30 years, it’s been the way that we create and expand policies. . .it’s become more politically challenging to expand direct social government benefits, those that are more visible” (Shannon, 3:40). In other words, in order to have many, if not all social welfare policies to be properly visible to the public, changes must be made in order to allow easy adaptations to visible policies. Mettler goes on by saying, “Now, if the Obama administration can successfully reveal the remaining aspects of the submerged state to citizens through new features of policy delivery, it may help enable them to participate in a more meaningful way” (Mettler, 820). Although Obama’s time in office is coming to a close, future presidents and politicians must band together to help surface these social welfare policies.
When speaking about Welfare we try to avoid it, turning welfare into an unacceptable word. In the Article “One Nation On Welfare. Living Your Life On The Dole” by Michael Grunwald, his point is to not just only show but prove to the readers that the word Welfare is not unacceptable or to avoid it but embrace it and take advantage of it. After reading this essay Americans will see the true way of effectively understanding the word welfare, by absorbing his personal experiences, Facts and Statistics, and the repetition Grunwald conveys.
These people are looking for help to pay for their living expenses such as their property costs, mortgages, and utilities. Welfare was meant to be a short term solution that would provide people with a helping hand that would allow them to take control of their life and once again be productive and able to provide for themselves and their families. At that time many families were forced to rely on government funding in order to pay their utilities, mortgage or rent, provide food and clothing for their families. While welfare is meant to be a short term solution to helping people while they find work, many people are requiring it for longer periods. Each state has their own set of rules for which people
O?Beirne, Kate. ?The State of Welfare: An old and tricky question resurfaces.? National Review 54.2 (February 11, 2002): 1--2. Online. Information Access Expanded
The historical fictional novel, Salt to the Sea, by Ruta Sepetys, takes four main characters, Florian, Joana, Alfred, and Emilia, on one shocking adventure to get onto the ship, the Wilhelm Gustloff, to escape the war that’s hunting them throughout Germany. They encounter death, happiness, and tragedy, which brings them closer. Their lives intervene as they learn to forget their past and get a fresh start. One theme that is learned by the characters is that honesty bonds people together and builds trust, while lies ruin that trust.
The prospect of the welfare state in America appears to be bleak and almost useless for many citizens who live below the poverty line. Katz’s description of the welfare state as a system that is “partly public, partly private, partly mixed; incomplete and still not universal; defeating its own objectives” whereas has demonstrates how it has become this way by outlining the history of the welfare state which is shown that it has been produced in layers. The recent outcomes that Katz writes about is the Clinton reform in 1996 where benefits are limited to a period of two years and no one is allowed to collect for more than five years in their lifetime unless they are exempted. A person may only receive an exemption on the grounds of hardship in which states are limited to granting a maximum of 20% of the recipient population. The logic behind this drastic measure was to ensure that recipients would not become dependent upon relief and would encourage them to seek out any form of employment as quickly as possible. State officials have laid claim to this innovation as a strategy that would “save millions of children from poverty.” However, state officials predict otherwise such as an increase in homelessness, a flooding of low-waged workers in the labour market, and decreased purchasing power which means less income from tax collections. The outcomes of this reform appear to be bleak for many Americans who reside below the poverty line. How does a wealthy country like America have such weak welfare system? Drawing upon Katz, I argue that the development of the semi-welfare state is a result of the state taking measures to ensure that the people do not perceive relief as a right and to avoid exploiting the shortfalls of capitalism ...
Jeff Grogger, Lynn A. Karoly, Jeff Grogger. Welfare Reform: Effects of a Decade of Change. New York: Harvard University Press, 2005.
Blau, J. (2004). The dynamics of social welfare policy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.
This mini-paper will discuss the social welfare system. The mini-paper includes a discussion of welfare Policy, residual and institutional approach, and what is Social Welfare and Social Security. Midgely, (2009), pointed out that social welfare systems deliver services that facilitate and empower our society, especially to those persons who require assistance in meeting their basic human needs. The goal of social welfare is to provide social services to citizens from diverse cultures, and examples include Medicare, Medicaid, and food benefits. Midgley,( 2009).
It is a commonly known fact that a large percentage of Americans are living on and relying on welfare, which is a government program that provides financial aid to individuals or groups of people who cannot support themselves. Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. There are several types of assistance offered by the government, which include healthcare, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance. The type of welfare and amounts given depend on the individual, and how many children they have. There are many people who honestly need the government assistance, but there are also many who abuse the privilege.
The United States is sometimes described as a “reluctant welfare state.” I agree with this statement. Too often there are programs created by our government that, although may be lined with good intentions, end up failing in their main purpose. The government may, and hopefully does, seek to help its citizens. However, by applying unreasonable qualifying or maintenance criteria, or too many restrictions that bar people from even receiving aid at all, they end up with many more problems than solutions. Three examples of policies that do this are: Medicare, No Child Left Behind, and TANF, or the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
Welfare can be defined as health, happiness, and good fortune; well-being; Prosperity; and Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need (Merriam-Webster, 2014). It can be very beneficial to people in need of it. Tim Prenzler stated that, “Welfare systems are often seen as providing a ‘safety net’ that prevents citizens falling below a minimum standard of living (2012, p2). Everyone is able to use is if they are in need of it. People have successfully used welfare to get out of their slum, and started to support themselves. Others have decided to not try to get out of that slum, and live off that welfare. They decided that they didn’t have to try, and let the government support them. Welfare is a good tool for people to get back on their feet, but shouldn’t be that persons steady income.
The reality that exists for these individuals is different than that which is assumed by many. People assume that recipients are lazy and that they do not want to work, or that they are very promiscuous women who have children in order to continue receiving help from the government. The realities for these...
Welfare has been a safety net for many Americans, when the alternative for them is going without food and shelter. Over the years, the government has provided income for the unemployed, food assistance for the hungry, and health care for the poor. The federal government in the nineteenth century started to provide minimal benefits for the poor. During the twentieth century the United States federal government established a more substantial welfare system to help Americans when they most needed it. In 1996, welfare reform occurred under President Bill Clinton and it significantly changed the structure of welfare. Social Security has gone through significant change from FDR’s signing of the program into law to President George W. Bush’s proposal of privatized accounts.
I have concluded that there are five major problems within our American government assistance system. One, the welfare system is too generous. There is evidence of this within the article because it states that government assistance spending has more than doubled since 2008. It also states that in poor countries people only have the choice to work or starve. They choose to work long hours and we choose to not work and receive benefits. There is definitely a problem with our assistance system if a single mother could receive more money in benefits than a secretary who works. Two, the welfare system becomes a crutch and acts as a government safety net. It creates idleness and comfort with people who rather receive a generous amount of benefits than work. Three, one-third of people claim disability are actually able to work. Four, states have significantly differen...
Welfare programs are an important part of American society. Without any type of American welfare, people will starve, children will not receive the proper education, and people will not receive any medical help simply because they do not have the resources available to them. Each of the three aspects of the American welfare system are unique in their own ways because they are funded differently and the benefits are given to different people. While support for these welfare systems has declined in the more recent years, the support for it when it was created was strong.