Impacts of Intergovernmental Financial Incentives on State Welfare Policymaking and Interstate Equity

Welfare policy in the United States is strongly influenced byintergovernmental factors. This analysis traces the effectsof federal financial incentives on state welfare policy decisionsacross programs and examines how changes in federal incentivesaffect state policy choices over time. The data indicate thathigher levels of federal participation are associated with substantialreductions in variance of welfare grants among the states andwith higher levels of interstate equity. These findings implythat significant shifts in welfare outputs would result froma devolution of responsibility for welfare to the states.     

Immigrants,welfare reform,and the economy

The welfare reform bill adopted in the United States in 1996 limited the eligibility of immigrants for several government assistance programs, and early projections estimated that nearly half of the savings associated with the reforms would come from these immigrant restrictions. Several studies have found that subsequent program participation declined more for immigrants relative to natives, seemingly verifying the early projections. However, many of these restrictions were either rescinded by the federal government or superceded by state and local policies. In this paper, we first reproduce earlier findings that show the relative declines in program use among immigrants. We then show that much, but not all, of the relative decline in program use among immigrants can be explained by changing macroeconomic conditions. © 2004 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Likely effects of devolution on the redistributive character of policy agendas

This article assesses two competing views of the effects federal devolution may have on the future of health, education and welfare programs in the United States. One school of thought argues that devolution of social policy to the state and local level will have negative consequences for the less affluent. A contrasting view maintains that devolution will spur innovations at the state and local level, which in turn will lead to more effective and efficient social programs. Dileo analyzes presidential and gubernatorial speeches over a period of 5 years to assess the state of U.S. social policy. He concludes that the federal government is generally more supportive of redistributive policies than are the states.     

State policies and programs to preserve federally assisted low‐income housing

Abstract

Preservation of the existing assisted housing stock is likely to be a major housing issue throughout the 1990s and into the twenty‐first century. Federal legislation—the Emergency Low‐Income Housing Preservation Act and the Low‐Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act—addresses the first wave of preservation needs and provides critically needed programs to maintain eligible units as assisted housing for the next 50 years.

This paper presents a brief review of federal preservation requirements and argues for state participation in the implementation of preservation programs. Seven areas are identified for state action, and leading state preservation programs are reviewed. Each state needs to ensure that a foundation is established to preserve these units over their useful life as decent, affordable housing. What the states learn from participating in the implementation of the federal preservation program will help them address future preservation needs and develop the capacity to manage the interdependent provision of assisted housing by the public, for‐profit, and nonprofit sectors.     

The budgetary implications of welfare reform: Lessons from four state initiatives

Required work and training, a major component of recent “welfare reform” proposals, is intended to increase the self-sufficiency of welfare recipients and thereby produce savings for government treasuries as well as more income for the recipients themselves. This analysis focuses explicitly on the budgetary effects of such activities, estimating the cost savings and new revenues generated by welfare employment programs started in four states since 1981. It suggests that when a broad range of effects are taken into account over a sufficiently long period, the overall budgetary implications of the programs are usually positive at the federal, state, and local levels of government. The costs and gains, however, are shared unevenly by the three levels, which encourages disparities in the programs states and localities choose to implement.     

Conflict and Collaboration in Wildfire Management: The Role of Mission Alignment

Responding to large wildfires requires actors from multiple jurisdictions and multiple levels of government to work collaboratively. The missions and objectives of federal agencies often differ from those of state land management agencies as well as local wildfire response agencies regarding land use and wildfire management. As wildfire size and intensity increase over time and associated annual suppression costs range between $2 billion and $3 billion, learning more about the existence and management of perceived agency differences becomes imperative within the academic and practitioner communities. This article examines the extent to which perceived mission misalignment exists among federal, state, and local actors and how well those differences are managed. Findings provide quantitative evidence that mission misalignment is greater within intergovernmental relationships than within intragovernmental relationships. Additionally, findings speak to the larger conversation around intergovernmental relationships within the federal structure and perceptions of the presence and management of potential interagency conflict.

Practitioner Points

• Potential conflict between the missions of federal and state land agencies presents a challenge for disaster management, and differing governmental levels and land‐use mandates may highlight relationships where tensions are likely greater.
• Wildfire managers may need to more proactively address relationships among federal agencies and state and local partners rather than relationships among multiple federal agencies.
• Wildfire management may benefit from increased awareness of—and discussion around—partner agencies’ stated land management philosophies and legal mandates, as structural frameworks, such as the Incident Command Structure, may not alone lead to conflict‐free collaboration.

     

The Family Support Act of 1988: Federalism, Developmental Policy, and Welfare Reform

Revising the usual distinction between developmental and redistributivepolicies, I suggest that state and federal governments eachseek programs they believe will help them gain their developmentalgoals. But there is little consensus on the types of welfareprograms that actually do create economic development. Stateand federal participants in welfare reform consequently promotethe kind of federal arrangements that are likely to producethe policies they favor. The developmental politics of the FamilySupport Act of 1988 are shown through five main reform issues:child support; national minimum benefits; transitional benefits;welfare for families having both parents present; and education,training, and employment programs.     

Federal constraints and state innovation: Lessons from Florida's family transition program

Prevailing wisdom holds that limiting the federal role in welfare will free the states to be more innovative in welfare‐to‐work programs. Findings from Florida's Family Transition Program (FTP), a pilot welfare reform initiative, however, suggest that the relationship between federal “strings” and state innovation is more complex. A central feature of the welfare‐to‐work program in the FTP was the direct result of federal requirements imposed by the Department of Health and Human Services during waiver negotiations. Federal regulation, in this case, promoted innovation. Outcome‐orientation, media and political attention, and fiscal structure are argued to be potentially important factors structuring the impact of federal regulation on state innovation. ©1999 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Federalism and suitable housing for the frail elderly: A comparison of policies in Canada and the United States

Abstract

The frail elderly have special multidimensional housing needs beyond affordability, including shelter that is more adaptive to reduced function and offers supportive services. Suitable housing for this population comprises three policy areas—housing, health care, and social services. In a federal system, development and implementation of policies in these areas involves participation of several levels of government and the nongovernmental sector. This paper uses federalism as a conceptual framework to examine and compare these policy areas in Canada and the United States.

In both countries, general national housing policies—relying heavily on the nongovernmental sector and characterized by joint federal‐provincial programs in Canada and by important local government roles and age‐specific programs in the United States‐have benefited the elderly. The effects of such policies on the frail elderly, however, have been less positive because of the general lack of essential human services and, to a lesser degree, health care that enables them to live outside institutions. This is especially true in the United States, where health care policy is fragmented and is dominated by a private insurance system, partial federal financing of health insurance for the elderly, and tense federal‐state relations in financing health care for the poor. Although Canadian policies and programs operate autonomously and more uniformly within a national health plan, neither country has a universal, comprehensive long‐term care system. Geographically diverse patterns of social services, funded by grants to states and provinces and the nonprofit sector, are common to both countries. However, the United States has inadequately funded age‐specific programs and has relied on a growing commercial service provision. Housing outcomes for frail elders are moving in the right direction in both countries; however, Canada seems to be better positioned, largely because of its health care system. As increased decentralization continues to characterize the three policy areas that affect suitable housing for frail elders, the United States can learn from Canada's negotiated federalism approach to more uniform solutions to merging housing and long‐term care.     

Life at the Bottom of the Fiscal Food Chain: Examining City and County Revenue Decisions

Any shifting of responsibilities from the state or federal governmentsto local governments would fall mostly on the shoulders of general-purposegovernments, namely, cities (municipalities) and counties. Thisstudy explores city and county revenue decisions associatedwith general funds—the governmental fund most likely tobe affected by state requirements for greater local financingresponsibility for new or devolved programs. The results suggestthat state control over local revenue authority affects decisionsregarding the imposition of financial burdens on residents,and that intergovernmental aid to cities and counties does notnecessarily mitigate those burdens. Despite evidence of healthyfinancial reserves, especially for cities, shifting responsibilitiesfrom the state to city or county governments could place citiesand counties in difficult fiscal positions. Given the importanceof own-source revenues to current budgets, and in view of thequestionable impact of intergovernmental aid on city and countyresidents' revenue burdens, questions persist about the abilityof city and county governments to maintain (and, if necessary,to expand) services during economic recession.     

A research context for welfare reform

Responsibility for the social safety net continues to “devolve” from the federal to state governments, and many states are now confronting the dilemmas inherent in redesigning welfare—dilemmas that faced Congress, too, as it sought to impose new conditions on receipt of public assistance. This article argues that reforming AFDC is difficult because the public has conflicting goals: putting welfare recipients to work; protecting their children from severe poverty; and controlling costs. For 25 years, reformers have viewed requiring welfare recipients to participate in work-promoting programs as uniquely able to balance these goals. Numerous studies have shown that this approach modestly increased employment and reduced welfare costs. More substantial gains have been achieved by some “mixed-strategy” programs, which stress immediate job entry for some recipients and employment-directed education or training for others. Many people remain on the rolls, however, prompting some policymakers to argue for substituting work-for-benefits or community service work (“workfare”) for welfare after a certain period of time, and others for ending all support. The limited knowledge about work-for-benefits programs suggests that, in contrast to work-promoting activities, this approach ultimately costs money. The research record confirms that there are no easy answers in welfare reform, and that states will have to weigh the trade-offs in considering alternative strategies.     

Deciding to Provide: Local Decisions on Providing Social Welfare

Fiscal federalism predicts local governments will avoid social welfare expenditures, owing to capital mobility across local jurisdictions. Yet Census of Governments data consistently show that many local governments provide one or more social welfare functions, and moreover many jurisdictions provide these functions without federal or state intergovernmental support. This article finds evidence that, while local expenditures are largely driven by fiscal capacity and federal and state assistance, local decisions on providing social welfare functions and participating in intergovernmental revenues are primarily affected by degree of capital mobility and by local political factors. Consequently, local governments exercise much greater autonomy over social welfare policymaking than fiscal federalism suggests.     

Challenges confronting nonprofit housing organizations’ self‐sufficiency programs

Abstract

In recent years, interest has grown at the federal level in strategies to combine subsidized housing with programs promoting household self‐sufficiency. This article explores how nonprofit housing organizations conceptualize their self‐sufficiency programs for their residents. A broad definition of self‐sufficiency is presented—one that is not exclusively focused on the individual and, instead, also includes program strategies that are focused on changing the context in which individuals live and work.

The paper then analyzes the relationship between the self‐sufficiency strategies being implemented in the nonprofit housing world and how these organizations will be affected by welfare reform, the shrinking and restructuring of federally subsidized housing, the emergence of block grant job training and workforce development programs, and the general devolution of government programs into ever more fungible pots at state and local levels. These transformations in the domestic policy agenda will present challenges to nonprofit housing organizations and to the goal of promoting self‐sufficiency.     

Beyond the categories: human service managers view the new federal aid

Social agency chief executives in six program areas--welfare, health, mental health, community action, model cities, and community mental health centers--were surveyed to determine their reaction to the recent revenue sharing/block grant efforts to decentralize the federal aid system. Despite their strong belief that social initiatives and values were advanced principally by federal action, and that excessive reliance on state and local officials could severely jeopardize social programs with weak constituencies, agency executives also recognized major weaknesses in traditional categorical grant policy and, to varying degrees, supported revenue sharing and block grant alternatives. Those agencies largely dependent on federal support for their survival--model cities, community action programs, and community mental health centers--tended to support the new aid efforts only reluctantly. Those agencies more fully integrated into the regular policy-making arrangements of local government--health, welfare, and mental health agencies--were considerably more positive in their endorsement of greater decentralization.     

The Forgotten Regional Organizations: Creating Capacity for Economic Development

Government capacity helps explain variance in public sector organizations' performance, and measuring capacity helps identify deficiencies that may be addressed in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of these organizations. This study examines the capacity of regional economic development districts to leverage federal grant funds in the counties they serve, controlling for additional sources of potential capacity and demand for federal grants. A decade of data reflecting federal grant funding to counties in one state was compiled from the Federal Awards Data System and analyzed using pooled cross-sectional time-series analysis with panel-corrected standard errors. The results indicate that regional economic development districts demonstrate varied but significant capacity to leverage federal grant funds in the counties they serve. The results suggest that similarity in the purpose and structure of regional economic development districts within a state are not enough; we need to better understand the resources within the organization and the mission that determines how those resources are applied.     

In through the back door: Social equity and regional governance

Abstract

A leading impulse for new regionalism in the 1990s was the sense that suburban and central cities are economically interdependent and should work cooperatively toward common regional welfare in the face of globalized competition. If this is so, we should witness an emergence of regional policies that combat concentrated poverty, segregation, and place‐based inequalities that impose significant economic costs. This article assesses the extent and types of metropolitan equity efforts under new regionalism, the pathways through which they arise, and their prospects.

Research finds that equity‐based regional policies are increasing; they take diverse forms and are commonly shaped by state or federal programs, but they are not explicit and primary parts of regional agendas. While regional entities have not advanced explicit discussions about equity, a confluence of intergovernmental programs and quality of life issues has added regional equity to the portfolio of metropolitan goals.     

FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE MINING POLICY

The federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 not only established national performance standards and permitting procedures for the coal industry, but also provided for stateprimacy. The principle of state primary is both simple and intuitively appealing: Because states do not have adequate resources to develop effective regulatory programs, the federal government would set up comprehensive procedures and criteria to guide the states in preparing their own plans. The obvious advantage of state primacy is that i t provides for flexibility in implementation.
Ultimately, state primacy is an experiment in cooperative federalism, a sharing of authority and responsibility between the states and the federal government to insure both the general welfare and sensitivity to local conditions. The history of surface mining regulation is instructive because i t points out the pitfalls and promise of cooperative federalism as well as the critical role of the courts in making state primacy work.     

Asymmetric Effects of Intergovernmental Grants: Analysis and Implications for U.S. Welfare Policy

Theories of federal grants to states and localities suggestthat these grants have a stimulative effect on spending, causingrecipient governments to expand and contract programs alongwith changes in the grants. However, policymakers may responddifferently to grant decreases than to grant increases becausethey face political and bureaucratic pressures to expand programs.These asymmetric reactions may depend on specific politicalstructures. Pooled time-series regressions of data from theAid to Families with Dependent Children program across 46 statesfrom 1965 to 1994 demonstrate state government responses togrant changes. Bureaucratic pressures and proposals lead statesto expand their welfare benefits upon increases in federal grants,but not to contract them upon decreases in federal grants. Withregard to the 1996 welfare reforms, this study indicates thatthe switch to block grants will lead to little or no state reductionin welfare payments.     

Clean Air Federalism: Do States Race to the Bottom?

Proponents of federal environmental standards argue that competition for industrial development creates a “race to the bottom” in which states relax their own environmental standards to avoid losing businesses to states with more “business‐friendly” regulations. This article presents results from a unique survey of state clean air programs that show—contrary to the race to the bottom—a substantial number of states exceed federal EPA standards in a broad variety of clean air programs. Multivariate analyses of these state policies indicate that states strengthen their environmental programs in response to citizen demands rather than weaken their programs in deference to economic pressures.