IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v28yi3p45-65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting Shapiro: Welfare Magnets and State Residency Requirements in the 1990s

Author

Listed:
  • Scott W. Allard

Abstract

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) generated renewed interest in welfare races to the bottom as states received greater discretion over eligibility standards for new residents. Despite U.S. Supreme Court decisions finding welfare-residency requirements unconstitutional and mounting empirical evidence that welfare benefits do not attract poor migrants, state policymakers have enacted welfare-reform plans that treat newcomers differently as authorized in PRWORA. This article reviews the existing research on welfare migration, current state-residency requirements, and central constitutional issues surrounding such requirements. With the likelihood that courts will have the final word on the current round of state welfare-residency requirements, it is essential that empirical research on welfare magnets examine the issues central to the cases currently moving through the judicial system. Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott W. Allard, 0. "Revisiting Shapiro: Welfare Magnets and State Residency Requirements in the 1990s," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 28(3), pages 45-65.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:28:y::i:3:p:45-65
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Conning, Jonathan & Kevane, Michael, 2002. "Community-Based Targeting Mechanisms for Social Safety Nets: A Critical Review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 375-394, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:28:y::i:3:p:45-65. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.