Abstract
There is evidence that women are more likely to live in poverty than men. Given the fact that the poor are more likely to use welfare, it becomes useful to consider welfare usage among women. A-priori welfare programs are set up in such a way that welfare usage should be based primarily on economic needs and health concerns. However, it is possible that an individual’s experiences could affect their perception and inclination for using government assistance. In this scenario, differences in welfare usage will exist for individuals with similar characteristics but different experiences. We explore this possibility among women and investigate if race/ethnicity and birthplace still have a role to play in the decision to use welfare even after controlling for income, health and other demographic factors like employment and household size, which are typical predictors of welfare usage. We find that race does not matter for welfare usage among comparable women. In addition, we do not find significant differences in welfare usage among women based on birthplace—suggesting that comparable naturalized and native born women share similar inclination for welfare.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Women born in U.S. territories are citizens at birth. However we separate individuals born in U.S territory from those born in any state in the U.S because of difference in experience. Throughout this paper, when we refer to U.S born we mean those born in the U.S 50 states.
Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2010.
We choose a probit model for our analysis. However, our results do not change if we assume a logit or linear probability model.
by traditional factors we imply, economic and demographic factors that have been used to predict welfare usage.
We are assuming that preference for marriage, employment and number of children are distributed similarly across race and do not proxy for welfare preference.
Here we focus on if being a Hispanic or Black women makes you more inclined to welfare. We do not focus on Asian women because we previously show they share similar preference as White women. We also do not focus on native American Women as this ethnicity cannot be found in significant numbers anywhere else but the U.S.
References
Bitler M, Gelbach J, Hoynes H (2002) The impact of welfare reform on marriage and divorce. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Working Paper 2002–9.
Blau F. The use of transfer payments by immigrants. Ind Labor Relat Rev. 1984;37(2):222–39.
Borjas G. The economics of immigration. J Econ Lit. 1994;32(4):1667–717.
Borjas G. Immigration and welfare magnets. J Labor Econ. 1999;17(4):607–37.
Borjas G, Hilton L. Immigration and the welfare state: immigrant participation in means-tested entitlement programs. Q J Econ. 1996;111(2):575–604.
Carnochan S, Ketch V, De Marco A, Taylor S, Abrahamson A, Austin JM. Assessing the impact of welfare reform: a Synthesis of research studies (1998–2002). Soc Pol J. 2005;4(1):3–31.
Davis L, Hagen J. Stereotypes and Stigma: What’s changed for welfare mothers. Affilia. 1996;11:319–37.
Gilens M. Why Americans hate welfare: race, media, and the politics of antipoverty policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1999.
Gilens, M. How the poor became Black: The racialization of American poverty in the mass media. In: Schram SF, Soss J, Fording RC, editors. Race and the politics of welfare reform. University of Michigan Press; 2003. p. 101–130.
Greenwell L, Leibowitz A, Klerman J. Welfare background, attitudes, and employment among new mothers. J Marriage Fam. 1998;60:175–93.
Hansen J, Lofstrom M. Immigrant assimilation and welfare participation: do immigrants assimilate into or out of welfare? J Hum Resour. 2003;XXXVIII(1):74–98.
Hunt M. The individual, society, or both? A comparison of Black, Latino, and White beliefs about the causes of poverty. Social Forces. 1996;75:293–322.
Kellstedt PM. The mass media and the dynamics of American racial attitudes. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003.
Lower-Basch, Elizabeth. 2000. TANF “Leavers”, Applicants, and Caseload Studies: Preliminary Analysis of Racial Differences in Caseload Trends and Leaver Outcomes. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Heath and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, December: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/leavers99/race.htm.
Oyelere R, Oyolola M. Do immigrants differ in welfare usage? Evidence from the U.S. Atl Econ J. 2011;39(3):231–47.
Smith K, Stone L. Rags, riches, and bootstraps: beliefs about the causes of wealth and poverty. Sociol Q. 1989;30:93–107.
Soss J, Schram S (2006) Coloring the terms of membership: Reinventing the Divided Citizenry in an Era of Neoliberal Paternalism. National Poverty Center, Working paper #06–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Oyelere, R.U., Oyolola, M. The Role of Race and Birth Place in Welfare Usage among Comparable Women: Evidence from the U.S.. Rev Black Polit Econ 39, 285–297 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12114-011-9122-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12114-011-9122-2