Redefining compassion to reform welfare: How supporters of 1990s US federal welfare reform aimed for the moral high ground

Robin S Stryker, Pamela Wald

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We use historical and content/discourse analyses to examine how the abstract, general value of compassion shaped debate over the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), ending entitlement to need-based public assistance in the United States. We find that a taken-for-granted compassionate American identity institutionalized as a social safety net helped constrain debate over ending entitlement, even as women's labor force participation and neo-liberal discourses were rising. But in the mid-1990s, Republican supporters of radical reform converted constraint into opportunity, redefining compassion to make it a positive resource for ending entitlement. Compassion so redefined conjoined with perversity rhetoric and negative attributions about welfare recipients to construct a moral map and logically coherent symbolic package promoting entitlement's end. "Conservative" US welfare reform, like "liberal" US affirmative action, is a case of policy and institutional change promoted through value redefinition. Multiple perspectives on the role of ideas, including background and foreground, and instrumental and constitutive, combine to explain why Republican leaders perceived the need to redefine compassion, and to account for the content and pattern of frames invoking compassion by Democrats and Republicans in Congressional debates over the PRWORA.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)519-557
Number of pages39
JournalSocial Politics
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2009

Fingerprint

reconciliation
welfare
act
welfare recipient
reform
responsibility
discourse
labor force participation
affirmative action
institutional change
attribution
Values
rhetoric
assistance
leader
resources

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Gender Studies

Cite this

Redefining compassion to reform welfare : How supporters of 1990s US federal welfare reform aimed for the moral high ground. / Stryker, Robin S; Wald, Pamela.

In: Social Politics, Vol. 16, No. 4, 11.2009, p. 519-557.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{491cb79aa03545dba60836206fa7f425,
title = "Redefining compassion to reform welfare: How supporters of 1990s US federal welfare reform aimed for the moral high ground",
abstract = "We use historical and content/discourse analyses to examine how the abstract, general value of compassion shaped debate over the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), ending entitlement to need-based public assistance in the United States. We find that a taken-for-granted compassionate American identity institutionalized as a social safety net helped constrain debate over ending entitlement, even as women's labor force participation and neo-liberal discourses were rising. But in the mid-1990s, Republican supporters of radical reform converted constraint into opportunity, redefining compassion to make it a positive resource for ending entitlement. Compassion so redefined conjoined with perversity rhetoric and negative attributions about welfare recipients to construct a moral map and logically coherent symbolic package promoting entitlement's end. {"}Conservative{"} US welfare reform, like {"}liberal{"} US affirmative action, is a case of policy and institutional change promoted through value redefinition. Multiple perspectives on the role of ideas, including background and foreground, and instrumental and constitutive, combine to explain why Republican leaders perceived the need to redefine compassion, and to account for the content and pattern of frames invoking compassion by Democrats and Republicans in Congressional debates over the PRWORA.",
author = "Stryker, {Robin S} and Pamela Wald",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1093/sp/jxp022",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "519--557",
journal = "Social Politics",
issn = "1072-4745",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Redefining compassion to reform welfare

T2 - How supporters of 1990s US federal welfare reform aimed for the moral high ground

AU - Stryker, Robin S

AU - Wald, Pamela

PY - 2009/11

Y1 - 2009/11

N2 - We use historical and content/discourse analyses to examine how the abstract, general value of compassion shaped debate over the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), ending entitlement to need-based public assistance in the United States. We find that a taken-for-granted compassionate American identity institutionalized as a social safety net helped constrain debate over ending entitlement, even as women's labor force participation and neo-liberal discourses were rising. But in the mid-1990s, Republican supporters of radical reform converted constraint into opportunity, redefining compassion to make it a positive resource for ending entitlement. Compassion so redefined conjoined with perversity rhetoric and negative attributions about welfare recipients to construct a moral map and logically coherent symbolic package promoting entitlement's end. "Conservative" US welfare reform, like "liberal" US affirmative action, is a case of policy and institutional change promoted through value redefinition. Multiple perspectives on the role of ideas, including background and foreground, and instrumental and constitutive, combine to explain why Republican leaders perceived the need to redefine compassion, and to account for the content and pattern of frames invoking compassion by Democrats and Republicans in Congressional debates over the PRWORA.

AB - We use historical and content/discourse analyses to examine how the abstract, general value of compassion shaped debate over the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), ending entitlement to need-based public assistance in the United States. We find that a taken-for-granted compassionate American identity institutionalized as a social safety net helped constrain debate over ending entitlement, even as women's labor force participation and neo-liberal discourses were rising. But in the mid-1990s, Republican supporters of radical reform converted constraint into opportunity, redefining compassion to make it a positive resource for ending entitlement. Compassion so redefined conjoined with perversity rhetoric and negative attributions about welfare recipients to construct a moral map and logically coherent symbolic package promoting entitlement's end. "Conservative" US welfare reform, like "liberal" US affirmative action, is a case of policy and institutional change promoted through value redefinition. Multiple perspectives on the role of ideas, including background and foreground, and instrumental and constitutive, combine to explain why Republican leaders perceived the need to redefine compassion, and to account for the content and pattern of frames invoking compassion by Democrats and Republicans in Congressional debates over the PRWORA.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=72749086040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=72749086040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/sp/jxp022

DO - 10.1093/sp/jxp022

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:72749086040

VL - 16

SP - 519

EP - 557

JO - Social Politics

JF - Social Politics

SN - 1072-4745

IS - 4

ER -