On the assumption that poor people migrate to obtain better welfare benefits, the magnet hypothesis predicts that a state's poverty rate increases when its welfare benefit rises faster than benefits in surrounding states. The benefit competition hypothesis proposes that states lower welfare benefits to avoid attracting the poor from neighboring states. Previous investigations, which yield support for these propositions, suffer from weaknesses in model specification and methodology. We correct these deficiencies in a simultaneous equation model including a state's poverty rate and its benefit level for AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) as endogenous variables. We estimate the model using pooled annual data for the American states from 1960 to 1990, and find that a state's poverty rate does not jump significantly when its welfare payments outpace benefits in neighboring states. Neither is there any evidence of vigorous benefit competition among states. States respond to decreases in neighboring states.

In 2023, **** percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to *** percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was **** percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year are considered to be below the poverty line. Women and children are more likely to suffer from poverty, due to women staying home more often than men to take care of children, and women suffering from the gender wage gap. Not only are women and children more likely to be affected, racial minorities are as well due to the discrimination they face. Poverty data Despite being one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the United States had the third highest poverty rate out of all OECD countries in 2019. However, the United States' poverty rate has been fluctuating since 1990, but has been decreasing since 2014. The average median household income in the U.S. has remained somewhat consistent since 1990, but has recently increased since 2014 until a slight decrease in 2020, potentially due to the pandemic. The state that had the highest number of people living below the poverty line in 2020 was California.

This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. It was fielded January 11-15, 2001, just prior to the end of the Bill Clinton presidency. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President Bill Clinton and his handling of the economy, foreign affairs, race relations, the welfare system, crime, and the health care system. A series of questions focused on Clinton and his presidency, including whether Clinton was honest and trustworthy, possessed high personal moral and ethical standards, understood the problems of the American people, had kept the economy strong, had been a strong leader, how he would go down in history, whether the House of Representatives was right to impeach him, and whether he should be charged with a crime for giving false testimony in 1999 regarding his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Respondents were asked which of the following issues should be given the highest priority by incoming president George W. Bush and Congress: maintaining a strong economy, protecting the Social Security system, holding down the costs of health care/health insurance, keeping the federal budget balanced, reducing the use of illegal drugs, reforming campaign finance laws, reducing political partisanship in Washington, DC, raising pay and benefits for military personnel, improving opportunities for women and minorities, cutting taxes, improving education, expanding health care coverage, helping the elderly pay for prescription drugs, protecting the environment, upgrading military systems and equipment, banning partial-birth abortions, establishing uniform standards for presidential elections, and improving race relations. A series of questions focused on the incoming Bush administration. Respondent views were sought on Bush's nomination of John Ashcroft for attorney general, Bush's nomination of Gale Norton for secretary of the interior, whether Bush was legitimately elected as president, whether Bush had a mandate to carry out his campaign promises, what type of president Bush would be, and Bush's handling of the presidential transition. Those queried were also asked whether they thought Bush would work for or against the following interest groups: labor unions, large corporations, the poor, the wealthy, the middle class, women's rights groups, the military, environmental groups, religious conservatives, Blacks or African-Americans, Hispanics, other racial and ethnic minorities, and white males. A series of questions on the economy covered whether the economy was headed toward a recession, respondent stock investments, whether stock investments were safe, whether the market would go up or down next year, whether changes in the stock market personally affected the respondent, and what type of tax cut they would prefer. Additional topics covered respondent views on homosexuals serving in the military, gun control laws, abortion, school voucher programs, the construction of a missile defense system, drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, energy conservation vs. finding new energy sources, preferential treatment of minorities and women, tobacco companies, and mad cow disease. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, political party, political orientation, voter participation history, education, race, Hispanic origin, labor union membership, household income, and whether the respondent ate beef.

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.

Stata dataset and do file for all analysis tables and figures presented in manuscript, including appendices. (Appendix tables displaying descriptive statistics were created manually.)

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/

The purpose of this study was to provide an appropriate theoretical and empirical approach to concepts, measures, and methods in the study of black Americans. The questionnaire was developed over two years with input from social scientists, students, and a national advisory panel of black scholars. The final instrument is comprehensive, encompassing several broad areas related to black American life. The study explores neighborhood-community integration, services, crime and community contact, the role of religion and the church, physical and mental health, and self-esteem. It examines employment, the effects of chronic unemployment, the effects of race on the job, and interaction with family and friends. The survey includes questions about racial attitudes, race identity, group stereotypes, and race ideology. Demographic variables include education, income, occupation, and political behavior and affiliation. The sample includes 2,107 black United States citizens, 18 years of age or older. A national multistage probability sample was selected. Therefore, the sample is self-weighting and every black American household in the continental United States had an equal probability of being selected. The Murray Research Archive has available numeric file data from the study. A subset of numeric file data comprised of 500 respondents and 152 variables created specifically for use in research methodology and statistics courses is also available. Additional waves of data for this study have been collected and are available through ICPSR.

Contact information of the Race Relations Unit, Home Affairs Department. The multiple file formats are available for dataset download in API.

Graph and download economic data for Income Before Taxes: Public Assistance, Supplemental Security Income, SNAP by Race: White and All Other Races, Not Including Black or African American (CXUWELFARELB0903M) from 2003 to 2023 about supplements, assistance, white, public, social assistance, SNAP, food stamps, tax, food, income, and USA.

The Child Welfare Outcomes Report data site presents the most current publicly available data from the annual Child Welfare Outcomes Report. This includes data on state performance on seven child welfare outcomes measures as well as data not currently available in the full Report, including additional context data, characteristics of child maltreatment victims, characteristics of children in foster care, and alternate categorical breakdowns for all race/ethnicity data. The site allows users to create customized outputs and compare data across time and states. Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.

As of 2019, approximately 18 million South Africans vulnerable to poverty or in need of state support received social grants, relief assistance or social relief paid by the government. The largest group that received social grants were Black and Coloured South Africans.

This statistic shows the share of United States citizens by their opinion on the welfare of animals in zoos in 2016, by ethnicity. During the survey, ** percent of Hispanic respondents stated that they think most zoo animals are treated very well.

The Child Welfare Outcomes Report data site

presents the most current publicly available data from the annual Child Welfare Outcomes Report. This includes data on state performance on seven child welfare outcomes measures as well as data not currently available in the full Report, including additional context data, characteristics of child maltreatment victims, characteristics of children in foster care, and alternate categorical breakdowns for all race/ethnicity data. The site allows users to create customized outputs and compare data across time and states.

Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.

Work and situation in life of the American population. Topics: Current employment; time worked each week; hourly wage; frequency of unemployment; attitude to women working, government responsibility for older people and amount of unemployment benefit; possibility of individual planning for the future; expectations of educational opportunities of the children; occupational mobility; achievement motivation; education difference between the spouses; family size; attitudes to the extended family; regional mobility; savings account; assessment of condition of health; party preference. Demography: party preference; age (classified); race; marital status; religious denomination; religiousness; school education; occupation; professional position; employment; head of household; economic area; housing situation; party inclination; party identification; city size; membership. Arbeits- und Lebenssituation der amerikanischen Bevölkerung. Themen: Derzeitige Beschäftigung; wöchentliche Arbeitszeit; Stundenlohn; Häufigkeit von Arbeitslosigkeit; Einstellung zur Frauenarbeit, zur staatlichen Verantwortung für ältere Menschen und zur Höhe der Arbeitslosenunterstützung; Möglichkeit der individuellen Zukunftsplanung; Erwartungen an die Ausbildungschancen der Kinder; Berufsmobilität; Leistungsmotivation; Bildungsdifferenz zwischen den Ehepartnern; Familiengröße; Einstellungen zur Großfamilie; regionale Mobilität; Sparguthaben; Einschätzung des Gesundheitszustands. Demographie: Parteipräferenz; Alter (klassiert); Rasse; Familienstand; Konfession; Religiosität; Schulbildung; Beruf; berufliche Position; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltungsvorstand; Wirtschaftsraum; Wohnsituation; Parteineigung; Parteiidentifikation; Ortsgröße; Mitgliedschaft. Multi-stage random sample with over-proportional sample Mehrstufige Zufallsauswahl mit überproportionaler Auswahl von Bevölkerungsschichten mit geringem Einkommen Oral survey with standardized questionnaire

Work and situation in life of the American population.

Topics: Current employment; time worked each week; hourly wage; frequency of unemployment; attitude to women working, government responsibility for older people and amount of unemployment benefit; possibility of individual planning for the future; expectations of educational opportunities of the children; occupational mobility; achievement motivation; education difference between the spouses; family size; attitudes to the extended family; regional mobility; savings account; assessment of condition of health; party preference.

Demography: party preference; age (classified); race; marital status; religious denomination; religiousness; school education; occupation; professional position; employment; head of household; economic area; housing situation; party inclination; party identification; city size; membership.

This survey collected responses from California residents on various issues. These include ratings of elected officials, party and registration status, opinions of possible candidates, proposed ballot initiatives, bond issues, welfare, state budget and tax laws, performance of Congress, and demographic data. These include age, education, political ideology, party affiliation, religious preference, income, ethnicity, race, and sex.

Number of children under age 21 in foster care as of July 1 of each year, by race/ethnicity. This is a point-in-time, unduplicated count of children under the supervision of county welfare departments and excludes cases under the supervision of county probation departments, out-of-state agencies, state adoptions district offices, and Indian child welfare departments. The total by race/ethnicity may not add up to total number of children in foster care due to missing values. U.S. totals reflect children in foster care as of Sept. 30 each year. N/A means that data are not available. Data Source: As cited on kidsdata.org, Needell, B., et al. (May 2014). Child Welfare Services Reports forCalifornia, U.C. Berkeley Center for Social Services Research; U.S. data come from Child Trends analysis of Adoption and Foster CareAnalysis and Reporting System data available through the National DataArchive on Child Abuse & Neglect, as cited on KIDS COUNT (May 2014). Retrieved on May 31, 2015.

This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked for their opinions of President Bill Clinton and his handling of the presidency, foreign policy, and the economy, as well as their opinions of Bob Dole, Lamar Alexander, Pat Buchanan, Steve Forbes, Phil Gramm, and Ross Perot. Those queried were also asked to rate the economy and to provide their opinions on the Bosnia situation -- specifically, whether the United States should send ground troops to Bosnia in a variety of situations. Other topics covered Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, tax cuts, and the federal budget debate. Background information on respondents includes voter registration status, political party, political orientation, education, age, sex, race, and family income.

By employing American state-level data from 1999 to 2008, this paper explores how the recent immigrant influx has influenced public welfare spending in the American states. By integrating the race/ethnicity and globalization compensation theory, I hypothesize that immigration will increase welfare spending in states with a bleak job market and exclusive state immigrant welfare policy; in contrast, immigration will decrease welfare spending in states with a good job market and inclusive state immigrant welfare policy. Empirical tests show evidence for both hypotheses, suggesting that the applicability of general political science theories depends on a combination of state policy and economic contexts.

This dataset includes the race of applicants for Insurance Affordability Programs (IAPs) who reported their race as American Indian and/or Alaska Native, Asian Indian, Black or African American, Chinese, Cambodian, Filipino, Guamanian or Chamorro, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Mixed Race, Native Hawaiian, Other, Other Asian, Other Pacific Islander, Samoan, Vietnamese, or White by reporting period. The race data is from the California Healthcare Eligibility, Enrollment and Retention System (CalHEERS) and includes data from applications submitted directly to CalHEERS, to Covered California, and to County Human Services Agencies through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (SAWS) eHIT interface. Please note the reporting category Other Asian option on the CalHEERS application was removed in September 2017. This dataset is part of public reporting requirements set forth by the California Welfare and Institutions Code 14102.5.