Poverty is an issue of grave concern in the modern society. It is for this reason that the federal and state governments provide members of the society with welfare as a basic means of sustenance particularly for individuals with economic needs and health concerns. However, the use of government assistance is different for the people despite similar characteristics. The distinction in experiences is the primary factor influencing the use of welfare (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). According to the authors, women are more likely to experience poverty than their male counterparts. The authors come up with this assumption due to the fact that more women are recipients to the government assistance as opposed to the men. At the time when the research was conducted, congress was dominated by Republicans many of whom were calling for the significant reduction of federal-funded welfare programs. In this regard, it is essential to identify the preferences and usage of welfare among women.
The research seeks to identify the preferences of welfare usage among women along racial lines, immigration status or nativity, and individual experience based on background as reflected by birth place. The study incorporates the use of Current Population Survey (CPS) particularly for women between 1996 and 2008. The multi-stage stratified samples of the CPS are drawn from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, Current Population Survey (IPUMS-CPS) within the same period (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The numerous government assistance programs include food stamp, welfare income, heat subsidy, public housing, and any other form. The women in minority ethnicities show significantly higher participation than Whites and Asians. However, there is no distinction in preference of use across ethnic lines (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). A similar outcome is demonstrated in educational level across race and nativity. The results do not show the preferences across the different ethnicities. In this regard, women who have attained similar level of education may have contrasting employment status and income that influence their need for welfare.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Pr ob ( W = 1) = Φ ( α 0 +α 1 Ω +α 2 Z +α 3 ω +∑ i Ψ i R i
The above probit model is used by the authors to answer the research questions. The Ω is a matrix that influences the probability of welfare use. The dependent variable is W that is a binary indicator where an individual may take the value of 1 and 0 if one is using welfare or not respectively. Therefore, W=1 when a person is using one or more of the various government assistance programs (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The Φ(.) in the equation is used as an indicator of standard normal distributions while the matrix Ω incorporates variables that predict welfare usage including immigration status, marital status, size of family, education, number of children, and employment (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The Z represents a matrix of dummy variables, ω is for income, and R for the variables of particular interest in the study. The R matrix can have numerous dummy variables where in the first model it is race or ethnicity, and the second model it is birthplace.
The results of the study for the first model show that even after controlling factors such as income, immigration status, marital status, size of family, state fixed effects, health status, education, number of children, and employment status, racial differences are evident. In this regard, with the White women as the base group, it is clear that all other women use welfare more than the latter (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). Though Asians, Mixed races, and Hispanic women use welfare more than the Whites, it is the Black and Native American women who use it more with the former having a 9% higher probability than whites. The research finds that the differences evident in race or ethnicity in the use of welfare do not symbolize the impact of the variable (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). However, the race dummy is proxying for something more which is subgroup’s experience or another factor.
Critique
Introduction
In the introduction, the authors identify the purpose of the paper as contributing to literature that there is not preference for welfare usage along racial lines among comparable women. The research goes further to indicate that there is also no preference for welfare for comparable women in native and immigrant groups hence the nationality of the individual does not have any impact. However, the individual background of the woman evident by birthplace does not have significant influence in predicting welfare use among numerous women (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The title of the article appropriately reflects the objective purpose of the paper. It categorically indicates that the researchers intend to prove the influence of race or ethnicity and birthplace as a variable among comparable women in the usage of government sponsored welfare programs. The title of the scholarly work shows that the primary focus of the study will be women in the US and will test the two variables controlling for the traditional factors that are used to predict welfare use.
In the abstract of the study, the purpose of the study is depicted clearly as one focusing on women due to evidence from research that they are more likely than men to live in poverty. The study attempts to identify how usage of welfare is differentiated among individuals who share similar characteristics (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). In this regard, it is noted that their experiences have significant impact on the perception and preferences for using government assistance. During the 1990s, numerous studies showed that individuals in the US were significantly abusing the welfare system. These findings may be used to explain the passing of reforms in welfare through the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). It also demonstrates why Republican congressmen are seeking the downsizing of various welfare programs. The sequence of information coherently leads to the objective of the study.
Methods
The study incorporates a quantitative research design that used CPS data of women in the US from 1996-2008. Multi-stage stratified samples are used as drawn from the IPUMS-CPS. In this case, the data samples are used to highlight different aspects of analysis including demographic variables like education level, marital status, ethnicity, immigrant status, employment status, income, and size of family all of which are traditional predictors of using government assistance (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The data from 1996 is important as it marks the beginning of full implementation of recognizing birthplace of immigrants according to continent which is not available from 1994. Health as a variable for welfare usage is also only available from 1996. The CPS data via IPUMS makes data feasible as it is coded identically from 1962 to 2008 (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). Through the use of this information, researchers incorporate appropriate data for studying the problem. The essential information can be duplicated for a similar study. The probit model is an effective means of identifying probability of using welfare among the sample population.
The methods incorporated by the researchers have significant flaws in the study of the problem. For instance, the study controls for income as one of the predictors for identifying possibility of welfare usage. However, it fails to control for wealth which is a significant factor that may be used to determine preference and perception of government assistance. Despite the fact that a woman may not have a regular income, like a housewife, she may have access to money from the husband which prevents her from using welfare (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). Nevertheless, the sample selection is adequate as it is evident that women are more likely to live in poverty as opposed to men. The multi-stage stratified samples allow the researcher to incorporate the various numerous variables of possible use of welfare into perspective and identify the role of race and birth place.
Results
The results of the study clearly reflect the title of the research. The table 3 data is a summary of estimating equation 1 that seeks to identify the impact of race on welfare usage. The column headings and labels are accurate for ease in interpretation. Column 1 looks at the comparable women sample as a whole with control on factors such s education, employment status, and family size among other demographic attributes associated with preference for welfare (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The same column identifies the different ethnic groups of the women and their probability to use welfare. The Black women are the most likely to use welfare in their lives. The data is organized for ready comparison and interpretation as seen in the comparison between the citizens, immigrants, US born, and naturalized. The text further expounds on the meanings derived from the tabulated data. In this case, it is evident that despite the minority women showing a slightly higher preference for welfare usage than the White women, it is not to state that race is the defining factor rather is proxying for another experience.
The major discrepancy in the data between the results in the text and in the tables is the interpretation. In the aforementioned section, it is evident that ethnicity and the status of the individual either as citizen, immigrant, native, or naturalized, the significantly change in preference for use of welfare. In the same way, the birth place experiences significant discrepancy. The places of birth provide different probabilities of using welfare despite similarities or contrast in ethnicities. For instance Black women and White women born in Africa have a similar probability to using welfare as white women born in the US. In this regard, the findings show that place of birth has little impact on the preference for welfare use (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). The data presented in the tables and text clearly reflects the stated objectives. The study reveals the intended views of the researcher as preference for government assistance is not based by racial lines or birthplace rather by need.
Discussion
The interpretation of the results is a complementation of the data in the previous section. The authors clearly indicate the two primary research question of the study that will be used to make a discussion of the data. It is evident that race does not strictly influence probability of using welfare programs beyond the variable of race and could reflect on the experience of subgroups. The results of the study significantly add onto the previous literature that showed the differences between welfare usages in various races. The findings show that welfare is based on need. In this regard, it is evident that the congress who made reforms during the 1990s to have grossly misjudged the racial underpinning of the circumstances. The significant notion that the results provide is to refute the claim that welfare recipients are poor black women and immigrants (Hainmueller, & Hopkins, 2015). Numerous studies cited in the article support this notion of alleviating the ethnic inclination or birthplace influence in welfare usage.
The research pointed out the various flaws evident in the study of the problem. In this case, all welfare programs are considered equally in the calculations. However, the researchers point out that each program has a significant cost hence the need to conduct a study separately. Furthermore, the authors recognize the restrictive aspect of using income as a control variable without considering the wealth of the individual (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). Though numerous studies along with the authors of this text argue for the relevance of wage and income in predicting welfare usage, wealth usually is for longer term outcomes. In this regard, if wealth is to be considered a control measure for the study, it would mean that the sample population is no longer comparable. The authors suggest the research possibility of identifying various ways of putting into place policies that would help minority women to get out of welfare usage.
Overview
Looking back at the abstract of the research article, it is evident that the information in the content is clearly summarized. The women in the US society are more likely than men to lead a life of poverty (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). It is for this reason that the authors focus on this population in identifying the impact of race and birthplace in the preference for welfare use. The authors suggest that welfare programs should be created in such a way they focus primarily on health concerns and economic needs of the recipients. Through this practice members are able to perform significantly in the development of their lives towards financial independence.
The information is appropriately arranged throughout the article. The authors introduce the objective problem based on current events where policy makers seek to downsize a number of welfare programs. The researchers believe that this will negatively affect the women who depend on this assistance to sustain their lives (Oyelere & Oyolola, 2012). It is for this reason that it is important to identify the impact of race and birthplace on the preference to consumer federal and state assistance. The description of the issue flows coherently throughout the article and into the various subsections. The research reflects on previous studies on the same issue to make comparisons and dispute wrongfully stated inferences made.
Conclusion
The research on the role of race and birth place in the use of welfare among comparable women is one of great significance. Other researchers recognize the importance of this issue in the modern society (Abdullah, Wood, & Kinsella, 2017). Since the mid-1990s the high expenditure in federal and state government assistance programs have been assumed to be largely a burden that is created by immigrants and African Americans. This research is an important factor in clearing up the issue and demonstrating that race does not strictly dictate the preference of welfare use. The study resulted in the formulation of new questions. The authors would like to inquire on what exactly the race variable is proxying for particularly for the Black and Hispanic US born analysis of women and their use of government handouts. Additionally, the experimenters would like to make significant improvements to the literature by conducting a research on the influence of birthplace at a more disaggregate level.
The research did not produce practical applications rather a theoretical notion on ways to improve the state of welfare usage. In this case, variables such as government income, educational development, healthcare, and employment are identified as effective measures to help reduce the number of women depending on the assistance. Though these are valid ideas, the exact practical measures are not provided by the authors. The article is an important part of the modern economic, social, technological, medical, and political life. It is evident that the political system is prompted to make significant changes to reduce heavy dependence on welfare and instead focus on ways to make developments. The level of education for majority women particularly in the minority groups will help make efforts to improve technological knowledge.
References
Abdullah, A., Wood, N., & Kinsella, S. (2017). A Comparison of Global Social Welfare Policies and Programs: The United States, Bermuda, Cuba, and Denmark . In 2016 NOHS National Conference–Tampa, FL (p. 18). Retrieved from http://www.nationalhumanservices.org/assets/documents/conference%20proceedings%202016.pdf#page=18
Hainmueller, J., & Hopkins, D. J. (2015). The hidden American immigration consensus: A conjoint analysis of attitudes toward immigrants. American Journal of Political Science, 59 (3), 529-548.
Oyelere, R., & Oyolola, M. (2012). The role of race and birthplace in welfare usage among comparable women: Evidence from the U.S. Review of Black Political Economy, 39 (3), 285-297. doi:10.1007/s12114-011-9122-2
