The Battle for Welfare Rights chronicles an American war on poverty fought first and foremost by poor people themselves. It tells the fascinating story of the National Welfare Rights Organization, the largest membership organization of low-income people in U.S. history. It sets that story in the context of its turbulent times, the 1960s and early 1970s, and shows how closely tied that story was to changes in mainstream politics, both nationally and locally in New York City.Welfare was one of the most hotly contested issues in postwar America. Bolstered by the accomplishments of the civil rights movement, NWRO members succeeded in focusing national attention on the needs of welfare recipients, especially single mothers. At its height, the NWRO had over 20,000 members, most of whom were African American women and Latinas, organized into more than 500 local chapters. These women transformed the agenda of the civil rights movement and forged new coalitions with middleclass and white allies. To press their case for reform, they used tactics that ranged from demonstrations, sit-ins, and other forms of civil disobedience to legislative lobbying and lawsuits against government officials.Historian Felicia Kornbluh illuminates the ideas of poor women and men as well as their actions. One of the primary goals of the NWRO was a guaranteed income for every adult American. In part because of their advocacy, this idea had a surprising range of supporters, from conservative economist Milton Friedman to liberal presidential candidate George McGovern. However, by the middle 1970s, as Kornbluh shows, Republicans and conservative Democrats had turned the proposal and its proponents into laughingstocks.The Battle for Welfare Rights offers new insight into women's activism, poverty policy, civil rights, urban politics, law, consumerism, social work, and the rise of modern conservatism. It tells, for the first time, the complete story of a movement that profoundly affected the meaning of citizenship and the social contract in the United States.

First published in 2005. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Publisher Description

Mary Jo Bane and David T. Ellwood examine the welfare system - its recipients, its providers and the many policy ideas surrounding it. Focusing on the AFDC Programme (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), they identify three models that have been used to explain welfare dependency and test them against an accumulating body of evidence, offering suggestions for identifying potential long-term recipients so that resources can be targeted to encourage self-sufficiency. Finally, they review policy options.

Racial divisions in the US have fractured the potential for a unified populist movement that supports expanded social welfare benefits.

"Saletan's Bearing Right is as subtle and intelligent a study of abortion politics as has ever been written. You may not agree with the conclusions, but no one concerned about this issue can afford to miss this brilliant analysis."—Charles Krauthammer, syndicated columnist and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary "Saletan destroys the myth that there's nothing new to say about America's abortion debate. His argument that the pro-choice movement has preserved abortion rights by co-opting conservative rhetoric will make activists on both sides of the debate uncomfortable, which is an achievement in and of itself. There's no smarter political commentator in Washington today."—Peter Beinart, editor, The New Republic "Will Saletan is one of America's shrewdest political writers. He brings clarity and intelligence to the roiling abortion debate, in a challenging and illuminating work of contemporary history. If you care about the issue of abortion, you must read this book."—Rich Lowry, editor, National Review "A unique assessment of recent abortion politics. Saletan uncovers political and institutional strategies with lucidity and verve. This book makes a raft of challenging arguments--a must-read, especially now."—Rickie Solinger, author of Beggars and Choosers: How the Politics of Choice Shapes Adoption, Abortion, and Welfare in the U.S. "Will Saletan is a great political journalist with a strong moral sense. He also has an unusually shrewd understanding of what happens when ethics and values meet elections and the legislative process. So partisans on every side of the abortion debate--Saletan shows convincingly there are more than two--will be challenged by his book, at times upset, and always enlightened. Based on exceptional reporting and fiercely independent analysis, Bearing Right is eloquent, important, and surprising." --E.J. Dionne, Jr., syndicated columnist and author of Why Americans Hate Politics "A unique assessment of recent abortion politics. Saletan uncovers political and institutional strategies with lucidity and verve. This book makes a raft of challenging arguments—a must-read, especially now."—Rickie Solinger, author of Beggars and Choosers: How the Politics of Choice Shapes Adoption, Abortion, and Welfare in the U.S.

“With Supreme Inequality, Adam Cohen has built, brick by brick, an airtight case against the Supreme Court of the last half-century...Cohen’s book is a closing statement in the case against an institution tasked with protecting the vulnerable, which has emboldened the rich and powerful instead.” —Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor, Slate A revelatory examination of the conservative direction of the Supreme Court over the last fifty years. In Supreme Inequality, bestselling author Adam Cohen surveys the most significant Supreme Court rulings since the Nixon era and exposes how, contrary to what Americans like to believe, the Supreme Court does little to protect the rights of the poor and disadvantaged; in fact, it has not been on their side for fifty years. Cohen proves beyond doubt that the modern Court has been one of the leading forces behind the nation’s soaring level of economic inequality, and that an institution revered as a source of fairness has been systematically making America less fair. A triumph of American legal, political, and social history, Supreme Inequality holds to account the highest court in the land and shows how much damage it has done to America’s ideals of equality, democracy, and justice for all.

Why did the War on Poverty give way to the war on welfare? Many in the United States saw the welfare reforms of 1996 as the inevitable result of twelve years of conservative retrenchment in American social policy, but there is evidence that the seeds of this change were sown long before the Reagan Revolution—and not necessarily by the Right. The War on Welfare: Family, Poverty, and Politics in Modern America traces what Bill Clinton famously called "the end of welfare as we know it" to the grassroots of the War on Poverty thirty years earlier. Marshaling a broad variety of sources, historian Marisa Chappell provides a fresh look at the national debate about poverty, welfare, and economic rights from the 1960s through the mid-1990s. In Chappell's telling, we experience the debate over welfare from multiple perspectives, including those of conservatives of several types, liberal antipoverty experts, national liberal organizations, labor, government officials, feminists of various persuasions, and poor women themselves. During the Johnson and Nixon administrations, deindustrialization, stagnating wages, and widening economic inequality pushed growing numbers of wives and mothers into the workforce. Yet labor unions, antipoverty activists, and moderate liberal groups fought to extend the fading promise of the family wage to poor African Americans families through massive federal investment in full employment and income support for male breadwinners. In doing so, however, these organizations condemned programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) for supposedly discouraging marriage and breaking up families. Ironically their arguments paved the way for increasingly successful right-wing attacks on both "welfare" and the War on Poverty itself.

The Poverty of Privacy Rights makes a simple, controversial argument: Poor mothers in America have been deprived of the right to privacy. The U.S. Constitution is supposed to bestow rights equally. Yet the poor are subject to invasions of privacy that can be perceived as gross demonstrations of governmental power without limits. Courts have routinely upheld the constitutionality of privacy invasions on the poor, and legal scholars typically understand marginalized populations to have "weak versions" of the privacy rights everyone else enjoys. Khiara M. Bridges investigates poor mothers' experiences with the state—both when they receive public assistance and when they do not. Presenting a holistic view of just how the state intervenes in all facets of poor mothers' privacy, Bridges shows how the Constitution has not been interpreted to bestow these women with family, informational, and reproductive privacy rights. Bridges seeks to turn popular thinking on its head: Poor mothers' lack of privacy is not a function of their reliance on government assistance—rather it is a function of their not bearing any privacy rights in the first place. Until we disrupt the cultural narratives that equate poverty with immorality, poor mothers will continue to be denied this right.

This book extends what we know about the development of civil rights and the role of the NAACP in American politics. Through a sweeping archival analysis of the NAACP's battle against lynching and mob violence from 1909 to 1923, this book examines how the NAACP raised public awareness, won over American presidents, secured the support of Congress, and won a landmark criminal procedure case in front of the Supreme Court.