In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Helen Ingram Chapter 12 Poverty, Policy, and the Social Construction of Target Groups Poverty, policy, and the shape of American democracy are related in many, often unexpected , ways. More than forty years after the nation declared a "war on poverty" and passed a multitude of policies aimed at its eradication, poverty persists and has become more intractable. Public policy itself is a significant part of the poverty problem. Not only are these public policies counterproductive, they also distance and alienate the poor from the very political processes that are supposed to remedy social and economic problems. The first of the two major accomplishments of this book is to direct attention to the political consequences of policies that reduce government's role as a source of opportunity and security for the poor while expanding the scope and size of benefits for the well off. Rather than alleviating poverty, such policies of government are powerful perpetrators of inequality and creators of an "underclass." Part of the poverty story, as explained by the editors of this book (chapter 1, this volume), is rising inequality, where 1 percent of the population controls a substantial and growing portion of the nation's wealth. At the same time earnings of the middle- and lower-income families are stagnant or falling. There is growing insecurity among Americans as larger numbers spend some of the years of their lifetime in poverty. Poverty is perpetuated and deepened by many forces, including structural problems with capitalism, global markets, transition of the United States to a service economy, racial and gender prejudices, change in the family structure, and a deep-seated culture of individualism that honors self-reliance and abhors dependence. To be sure, poverty has many causes, but current public policy animates, reflects, and carries poverty forward. I have long been persuaded that the historic and contemporary designs of socialwelfare policy contribute importantly to perpetuating poverty (Lieberman 1995; Ingram and Schneider 1995), and most of the chapters in this book have reinforced that view. Democratic theory suggests that citizens who are affected by policy in ways they do not like are able to take corrective action. They can form themselves into interest groups that can bring pressure for change. Yet, as the chapters in this book have demonstrated, public policies have thwarted the operation of accountability and responsiveness mechanisms that are supposed to correct for failing policies. Rather than mobilizing their great numbers to reverse hurtful policies, the poor are mainly quiescent and surprisingly accepting . The tools embedded in policy designs deny the poor necessary capacity to challenge prevailing policies and discourage political mobilization to confront the systemic causes of poverty. For example, poor African American youths, a constituency I discuss in this chapter, are incarcerated in astounding numbers and thus cannot use the tools of political participation to help themselves. The failure of others disadvantaged by policy, such 246 RemakingAmerica as the medically uninsured, to fight back politically has a much more subtle explanation discussed in many chapters of this book, and I intend to pursue this subject further here, as well. The second major achievement of this book is to advance the "policy-centered perspective " in examining the linkage between democratic citizenship, patterns of politics, and public policy. For the editors and authors in this volume, public policy is treated as the "fulcrum" connecting changes in American politics to trends in inequality and insecurity . Some political scientists and public policy scholars have pursued a policy-centric approach since Harold Lasswell (1936), a pioneer in the field of policy sciences, first asserted that the study of politics should serve the public welfare (Ingram and Smith 1993; Schneider and Ingram 1997; Goodin, Rein, and Moran 2006). In general, however, an active examination of the content and consequences of public policy has been sidelined in political science in favor of a better understanding of political behavior and institutions, and in policy science by utilitarian mean-ends analysis (deLeon 1997). The editors and authors in this volume see public policies as strategies for achieving political goals, structures shaping political exchanges, and symbolic objects conveying status and identity. Paul Pierson and I both celebrate the policy-centric approach of this volume, but we respond to the book differently. I stress what this book has to offer toward unraveling the symbols or social constructions embedded in public policy. I will argue that these constructions not only constitute very significant burdens on the poor and underserved but also undercut their inclinations toward political participation. Whereas...

Share