What Does Existing Research Say About Impacts on Support for Welfare?

             Attitudes toward welfare vary in several different aspects and usually change over time. A huge indication of how the public will feel about government spending on welfare programs is how the economy is doing at that time. When the economy is down and the common middle-class is struggling, it is unlikely for those people to be in favor of government providing assistance to the needy. Kluegel (1987) studied the recurring behaviors of the public and their responses to welfare programs during times of recession during the 1970’s. His studies show how welfare backlash becomes apparent when the nation is in a prolonged financial deficit and how these opinions help shape public policies (Kluegel, 1987).  Public opinion of welfare programs can fluctuate as the economy fluctuates.

            When addressing the issue of poverty and welfare programs, it is important to understand the public opinions of who should be assisted. People may be supportive of welfare considering the circumstance, or just against welfare in general, but studying their attitudes toward welfare in regards to which side they stand on is essential. Research completed by Goren (2008) observes the focus of the public’s support of welfare programs considering the reasons behind the need for government assistance. The public unanimously supports welfare assistance for those whose economic stress is due to forces out of their control, but the same support is not given for those who have found themselves where they are due to laziness or lack of drive (Goren, 2008). Goren (2008) found differences of opinion among social class and race. Differences of attitudes towards poverty vary among races and classes, and considering the circumstances of people in poverty is important when understanding public support.

However, gender has a great impact on the attitudes toward welfare programs and recipients as well. When addressing attitudes of welfare support in the aspect of gender, attitudes of liberalism and feminism intersect to form the opinion. Reingold and Smith (2012) take an intersectional and additive approach to look at the relationship between how race and gender affect attitudes toward benefit programs. Only gender is looked at in the additive approach. Because most of the people receiving welfare benefits are women, it was thought to be a women’s problem. In this article the authors suggest that time after time surveys have proven that women tend to be more liberal when it comes to social welfare programs (Reingold & Smith, 2012). Because welfare affects women more heavily, they are more likely to support it (Reingold & Smith, 2012). Also, the gender gap could impact differing views on welfare programs.  Cook and Wilcox (1991) discover that because women are more nurturing, they feel more sympathy for the disadvantaged.  Could this mean that because welfare programs are framed to primarily help the disadvantaged rather than society as a whole that women will be more supportive than men of welfare programs? These feelings are possibly awakened in the process of becoming a feminist; this points to a gendered attitudes issue presenting itself as feminists versus non- feminists rather than men versus women. There are limited differences in gender values but there is an apparent contrast in feminist women values versus all men values (Cook & Wilcox, 1991). Feminist values were found to strongly correlate with liberal values and policy preferences. The research points to the fact that the gendered attitudes of feminists support liberal programs such as welfare (Cook & Wilcox, 1991).

Gender schemas show a great impact on attitudes due to gender. Winter (2008) writes that we understand race and gender through cognitive structures called schemas. The schemas contain information of race and gender, as well as knowledge of common social stereotypes (Winter, 2008). The schemas contain emotional reactions and evaluations of race and gender (Winter, 2008). Gender can affect the attitude toward a policy due to the information that is contained in a schema causing emotional reactions to that gender idea. Gender difference creates beliefs about appropriate roles and activities for men and women (Winter, 2008).  Winter (2008) states that people use these schemas to understand political issues when the issue is framed to fit the gender schema, even when those issues have nothing to do with gender. These gender schemas give rise to attitudes toward welfare programs and recipients.

Alternatively, society has implemented systems in the past that have caused gendered circumstances among the welfare process. For example, the purpose of breadwinner regulations was to help make sure that poor families stayed off of welfare programs. The bread winning regulations focused on men being the main source of income rather than women (Willrich, 2000). This forced the responsibility on the male rather than the government. These regulations were put in place to help women that were struggling financially as single income earners. Women showed more support for these programs because this would help them and all women (Willrich, 2000). As beneficial as this seemed, it only generated gendered perspectives for the welfare system and in turn, society. This can also be seen in Sommestad’s (1997) research on the male breadwinning system. The male breadwinning system relies women as caretakers. In countries where this system takes place there is less help for women from welfare programs (Sommestad, 1997). In Sweden, where women are seen as caretakers and a vital part of the workforce, welfare programs are equally utilized which in turn shows equal support (Sommestad, 1997). Sommestad (1997) claims that the roles of reproduction have shaped the state attitudes toward the male breadwinning system. If this is true, then gender has a direct impact on state attitudes of welfare programs, which will impact how the state frames welfare programs.

Gender has affected welfare programs and policies in the past and continues to affect it still. Regardless of those few men who do support feminist ideals and programs, there are men who support the opposite; there have been alternative welfare ideas created in opposition of women. Thomas’s (1998) article showcases this occurrence. Thomas (1998) looks at welfare reform more from a race and gender perspective. People in power, particularly men, believe that women take advantage of welfare programs and are a burden to have to maintain through these programs. The idea that women were “making money” off of welfare programs while continuing to have more children caused concern for welfare reform. One of these reforms was a benefit cap; this meant women could not have a child while they were benefitting from a welfare program (Thomas, 1998). While Thomas (1998) mainly looks at how welfare forms the perspective of men, but also points to the support of women. Sterilization and benefit cap legislation was created by powerful men as a solution to poverty and was not intended to specifically help women, and was therefore not supported by women. With this correlation of gender and welfare, we formulated our hypothesis around the idea that gender attitudes will impact welfare attitudes.