Shifting Party Coalitions and Social Welfare Policy 1932-2008
Van Kessel and Remco (2016) elaborate that in the 1930s, the two regional and ideological distinct camps created a limitation on the ability for liberals to enact social welfare reforms to handle inequalities existing in racial cases (p. 56). The war on poverty and the civil rights movements gave birth to the New Deal Coalition and established a pathway for the Republican Party. Subsequently, in 1970-1980, the conservative white Southerners were attracted by the Republican with the main list of limiting government, reduction of taxes and spending on Anti-poverty programs. In the report, a precise analysis of the evolution of political parties is witnessed, done by Dr. Jennifer, as a prime example of a single subject study. There is also a thorough evaluation of control of findings in the research contained in the discussion between Dr. Jennifer and political analysts, which has the potential of bringing up new evolution (Sotirov & Winkel, 2015, p. 123).
Consequently, I perceive the work recommend ably of value. The discussion has covered the vital areas exhaustively and from recognized scholars like Dr. Jennifer, starting from the content cutting across to the findings. However, despite exposing the limitations, the report does not give a researched work on policy modification that existed afterward-an area that shows some work left that required a re-address.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Sotirov, M., & Winkel, G. (2015). Toward a cognitive theory of shifting coalitions and policy change: Linking the advocacy coalition framework and cultural theory. Policy Sciences , 49 (2), 125-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9235-8
Van Kessel, S., & Remco, C. (2016). Shifting the blame: Populist politicians’ use of Twitter as a tool of opposition. Journal of Contemporary European Research , 12 (2), 594-614. https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articles/Shifting_the_blame_Populist_politicians_use_of_Twitter_as_a_tool_of_opposition/9469646
The Welfare Rights Movement
The discussion has critically analyzed the welfare rights movements, starting with the beneficial outcomes exhibited, such as people receiving better treatment unlike before. There is also an exposition of how data was extracted through interviewing 43 activists within eight states of America (Ernst, 2009). Besides, constraints encountered, like constructing opinions with policymakers, have also been well highlighted. The sentiments elaborated in the discussion are essential elements capable of beefing up the research.
However, I have an opinion, which is not a contraction but rather an addition. When analyzing the welfare rights movements, it is vital to incorporate what aided the initiation of the movement. As posited by Tani (2016), the welfare rights movement resulted from activities of three developments-civil rights movements, the war on poverty, and the evolution of social welfare thought (p. 73). Besides, an omission of the chronological occurrences of events is evident in the work-for instance, the developments of the activities which took place in the 1960s and the stabilization of the mass demonstration against poverty in 1968, among others (Tani, 2016, p. 73).
References
Ernst, R. (2009). Working expectations: Frame diagnosis and the welfare rights movement. Social Movement Studies , 8 (3), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742830903024283
Tani, K. M. (2016). States of dependency: Welfare, rights, and American governance, 1935–1972 . Cambridge University Press.
