In this paper we explore the relationship between Americans’ attitudes toward immigrants and immigration and their attitudes toward welfare. Using data from the Cumulative American National Election Study (CANES) from 1992-2012, we find ample evidence of the influence of immigration attitudes on both individuals’ attitudes toward welfare recipients and their attitudes toward increased welfare spending. These immigration effects persist even in face of statistical controls for attitudes toward African Americans and attitudes toward the poor; indeed, in our models the magnitude of the effects of immigration attitudes surpasses the magnitude of effects of attitudes toward blacks. Further, our findings of immigration effects withstand a range of robustness tests. Our results point to the possible "immigrationalization" of Americans’ welfare attitudes and provide strong evidence that how Americans think about immigration and immigrants is a major factor in how they think about welfare.
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
What are the relative contributions of stereotypes about the race and deservingness of welfare recipients to Americans’ opinions on welfare? A recent study employing a conjoint-experimental method finds that Americans’ stereotypes of welfare recipients as undeserving drive negative attitudes towards welfare, while stereotypes of welfare recipients as Black have little effect. However, this finding may be produced by the measure of welfare attitudes that includes questions implicating deservingness. We implement a conceptual replication of that study using different measures of welfare policy opinions that directly ask respondents about spending, both on welfare generally and on specific welfare programs. We show that when support for welfare is measured using the spending questions, stereotypes about race are significantly associated with opposition to welfare. These results have important implications for the debate on Americans’ opposition to welfare programs, as well as for the measurement of policy opinions in surveys.
Occupation describes the kind of work a person does on the job. Occupation data were derived from answers to questions 45 and 46 in the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS). Question 45 asks: “What kind of work was this person doing?” Question 46 asks: “What were this person’s most important activities or duties?”
These questions were asked of all people 15 years old and over who had worked in the past 5 years. For employed people, the data refer to the person’s job during the previous week. For those who worked two or more jobs, the data refer to the job where the person worked the greatest number of hours. For unemployed people and people who are not currently employed but report having a job within the last five years, the data refer to their last job.
These questions describe the work activity and occupational experience of the American labor force. Data are used to formulate policy and programs for employment, career development, and training; to provide information on the occupational skills of the labor force in a given area to analyze career trends; and to measure compliance with antidiscrimination policies. Companies use these data to decide where to locate new plants, stores, or offices.
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
This map was updated in April of 2022. To see the archived version of this map, click here: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2e4c4c4cafcc49db80837f32912e66a5#overviewThis map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2020 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract and County levels. Small Areas are not on this map at this time (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - https://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
This map was updated in April of 2022. This is the archived version of this map. To see the new map, click here: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=501b02e45c0a47aa874ab4423d4c9f50#overviewThis map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - https://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
This study employs state-level panel data between 1978-2000 to explore the relationship between transparency, media market penetration, class bias in voter participation, and welfare effort in the United States. I present empirical evidence that the effect of transparency - operationalized as state fiscal transparency - on state welfare effort is conditional on class bias in voter participation. Specifically, I present evidence that in states where transparency and class bias increased over time, state welfare effort significantly declined. These results are robust to the inclusion of controls for other determinants of redistribution that traditionally vary with geography such as governor partisanship, legislator ideology, citizen ideology, gross state product (GSP), and state demographic characteristics and are robust across several alternate model specifications. My findings suggest that increased transparency does not automatically improve the condition of socio-economically disadvantaged citizens and that transparency may have welfare-reducing effects in societies with increasing participatory gulfs between the most and least advantaged citizens.
Latin American pension reforms during the 1990s dramatically increased the number of Latin Americans with a direct stake in the returns to financial capital. This paper asks: How, if at all, has this expansion affected Latin American politics? I focus particularly on popular attitudes towards neoliberalism. I argue that government-induced expansions of capital ownership do not affect public preferences about neoliberalism directly, but indirectly by shaping the information that people use to judge whether neoliberalism is welfare enhancing. In this view, participation in a reformed Latin American pension system should lead to acceptance of neoliberalism when pensions returns are high, but have the opposite effect when pension returns are low. I find support for this theory in analyses of multiple datasets of Latin American survey data.
The programs replicate tables and figures from "How Americans Respond to Idiosyncratic and Exogenous Changes in Household Wealth and Unearned Income", by Golosov, Graber, Mogstad, and Novgorodsky. Please see the README file for additional details.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
In this paper we explore the relationship between Americans’ attitudes toward immigrants and immigration and their attitudes toward welfare. Using data from the Cumulative American National Election Study (CANES) from 1992-2012, we find ample evidence of the influence of immigration attitudes on both individuals’ attitudes toward welfare recipients and their attitudes toward increased welfare spending. These immigration effects persist even in face of statistical controls for attitudes toward African Americans and attitudes toward the poor; indeed, in our models the magnitude of the effects of immigration attitudes surpasses the magnitude of effects of attitudes toward blacks. Further, our findings of immigration effects withstand a range of robustness tests. Our results point to the possible "immigrationalization" of Americans’ welfare attitudes and provide strong evidence that how Americans think about immigration and immigrants is a major factor in how they think about welfare.