IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Was it the economy or reform that precipitated the steep decline in the US welfare caseload?

Listed author(s):
  • Hal W. Snarr

Objectives of the 1996 overhaul of the US welfare system included reducing dependency, raising employment and de-incentivizing out-of-wedlock fertility. Using public use state-level panel data from 1990 to 2005, I analyse how state implementation of welfare reform simultaneously affects the caseload, employment and out-of-wedlock births (henceforth, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) objectives). Because endogeneity and simultaneity could not be rejected, I use Three-Stage Least Squares (3SLS) method. Results indicated that most of the steep decline in the caseload is attributed to welfare reform, while the economy's overall effect paled in comparison. However, lagged and contemporaneous unemployment individually ranked second and third behind the Hispanic share of state population. The conservative tilt over the period studied ranked forth, followed in declining order by full family sanctions, Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) payments, time limits (lagged by length), access to abortion clinics, lump-sum TANF diversion payments, and TANF benefit payments. Findings also suggest that policy does not always work as intended: caseloads are found to be higher in states that have highly regarded family formation and job retention TANF programs; and EITC payments are associated with lower not higher caseloads. The most compelling finding in this study is that low-income families likely turn first to unemployment insurance and then to TANF assistance.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.

Volume (Year): 45 (2013)
Issue (Month): 4 (February)
Pages: 525-540

in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:45:y:2013:i:4:p:525-540
DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2011.607135
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:45:y:2013:i:4:p:525-540. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.