Federalism, Entitlement, and Punishment across the U.S. Social Welfare State

Holes in the Safety Net: Federalism and Poverty Law, Ezra Rosser, ed., 2019

University of Tennessee Legal Studies Research Paper No. 391

26 Pages Posted: 7 Apr 2020 Last revised: 11 Jun 2020

See all articles by Wendy A. Bach

Wendy A. Bach

University of Tennessee College of Law

Date Written: January 1, 2019

Abstract

In a 2018 letter the Trump Administration announced that it was open to proposals to include work requirements and other changes in state Medicaid programs. These proposals came in the form of administrative waiver requests that would allow particular states the flexibility to change the rules of Medicaid eligibility in their state. They were seeking permission to condition the receipt of Medicaid on compliance with work requirements and to “align” the Medicaid program with programs like Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. The Obama administration had consistently rejected such requests on the grounds that work requirements did not further the aims of the Medicaid program, but the Trump administration felt no such qualms, likening Medicaid to Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (colloquially welfare) and arguing that, just like welfare recipients, Medicaid recipients needed to be incentivized to work in order to “build” their dignity. This contest, like many others in the field of social welfare policy, plays out on the terrain of federalism. It is, on the surface, a battle over control among levels of government and over the appropriate rules and structures for particular programs. This chapter argues that these controversies over legal structures, legal rules, and the location of governance, are better understood as arguments about both deservingness and control played out through controversies about administrative structure. In short, programs are called “welfare,” or are urged by some to be more like “welfare,” when what is really meant is that we wish to use the administrative mechanisms of federalism to control, stigmatize, punish, and deter recipients. In contrast, when we perceive recipients as entitled, these mechanisms fall away to be replaced by federally-controlled, far less visible and far more inviting, administrative structures. To make this process visible, this chapter describes the administrative tools of benefit programs as well as the corresponding cultural assumptions tied to each program and then contextualizes a debate like the one over Medicaid work rules using this context.

Suggested Citation

Bach, Wendy, Federalism, Entitlement, and Punishment across the U.S. Social Welfare State (January 1, 2019). Holes in the Safety Net: Federalism and Poverty Law, Ezra Rosser, ed., 2019, University of Tennessee Legal Studies Research Paper No. 391, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3550159

Wendy Bach (Contact Author)

University of Tennessee College of Law ( email )

1505 West Cumberland Avenue
Knoxville, TN 37996
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
26
Abstract Views
160
PlumX Metrics