CHANGING AMERICA: THE IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION ON WELFARE ATTITUDES AND WELFARE REFORM

The purpose of my dissertation is to further our understanding of why some states restricted immigrant access to welfare in the 1990s while other states granted immigrants access to social programs. With the passage of the Personal Responsibility Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), many states diverged from equal access to welfare programs, such as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), for immigrants arriving after 1996. Very little scholarly work examines the variance in immigrants’ access to welfare programs. Current research studying welfare attitudes and policy has largely failed to investigate whether and how the influx of immigrants over the last three to four decades has decreased public support for welfare programs and resulted in policies that both decrease benefit levels and restrict access to programs based on citizenship. This is a serious shortcoming because immigration since the 1970s represents the largest population shift since the early 20th century, a change that has increased the size of the underclass and transformed the cultural and racial makeup of theUnited States. Accordingly, in my dissertation, I will examine how changes to the American political environment, immigration levels and the increasing number of immigration media stories, trigger authoritarian attitudes that in turn form a breeding ground supporting restrictive welfare programs. The results from the individual-level analysis provide strong evidence that authoritarians prefer less welfare spending, fewer immigrants, and a waiting period before immigrants can access welfare programs. In addition, authoritarians view immigrants as a threat due to their perceived failure to socially conform to American society. Building on these individual-level results, I find that states with large authoritarian populations are more likely to adopt restrictive welfare policies

Systemic Racism and COVID-19: Vulnerabilities with the U.S. Social Safety Net for Immigrants and People of Color

America has a mythologized reputation as an accommodative “melting pot” nation that welcomes individuals from all races and countries seeking improved quality of life and reduced material hardship. However, our U.S. social welfare system is more broadly characterized as underdeveloped, restrictive, and exclusionary, especially toward immigrants and people of color. Public health benefits (e.g., Medicaid), food assistance programs (e.g., SNAP), rental assistance (e.g., HCV/Section 8), and cash assistance (e.g., TANF) are oftentimes restricted for immigrants and racial minorities, making them more vulnerable to material hardship and more exposed to pandemic conditions under COVID-19. Moreover, these welfare restrictions are oftentimes rooted in negative social construction and unflattering stereotypes of Black and Latine people. This paper connects deliberately racialized social welfare barriers, developed under the banner of “welfare reform” in the 1990s, to contemporary difficulties accessing benefits by minority groups, and subsequently heightened vulnerabilities around COVID-19. We suggest areas for improvement in social welfare policy development to better address systemic racism and COVID-19, and deepening inequalities from lack of access to the social safety net for immigrants and racial minorities in the U.

Estimating anti-immigrant sentiment for the American states using multi-level modeling and post-stratification, 2004–2008

An estimate is provided of an innovative state-level measure of anti-immigrant sentiment for use in future policy and behavioral studies. State governments became increasingly active in adopting immigrant policies in the 2000s. Previous research highlights the role of public opinion, especially attitudes toward immigrants, in explaining policy priorities and outcomes. Unfortunately, most extant studies utilize political ideology or immigrant populations as rough proxies for public opinion. In this article, we estimate a reliable and valid measure of anti-immigrant sentiment at the state-level using survey aggregation with multilevel regression and post-stratification (MRP) for the period 2004 to 2008. We compare our estimates of anti-immigrant sentiment to alternative measures of immigrant presence and political ideology in predicting multiple variations of state immigrant policies. Ultimately, we find theoretical and statistical advantages of using anti-immigrant sentiment over previous measures in predicting immigrant policies