IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/10699.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Did the "Illegitimacy Bonus" Reward?

Author

Listed:
  • Sanders Korenman
  • Ted Joyce
  • Robert Kaestner
  • Jennifer Walper

Abstract

The 'Illegitimacy Bonus,' part of 1996 welfare reform legislation, awarded $100 million in each of five years to the five states with the greatest reduction in the nonmarital birth ratio. Three states -- Alabama, Michigan, and Washington DC -- won bonuses four or more times each, claiming nearly 60% of award monies. However, in none of these three states was the decline in the nonmarital birth ratio linked to increases in proportions married, and only in Michigan was it linked to declines in nonmarital (relative to marital) fertility within demographic groups, behavioral changes that the Illegitimacy Bonus was presumably intended to reward. Shifts in the racial composition of births accounted for 1/3 (Michigan), 2/3 (DC) or all (Alabama) of the decline in the nonmarital birth ratio. The non-marital birth ratio fell most in DC, averaging 1.5 percentage points per year over the award period. However, the number of black children born in DC fell by nearly one half from 1991 to 2001. Changes in population composition alone primarily a decline in the number of black women aged 15 to 34 can account for the entire decline in the nonmarital birth ratio in DC between 1990 and 2000.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanders Korenman & Ted Joyce & Robert Kaestner & Jennifer Walper, 2004. "What Did the "Illegitimacy Bonus" Reward?," NBER Working Papers 10699, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:10699
    Note: EH CH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w10699.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert A. Moffitt, 2003. "The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program," NBER Chapters, in: Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, pages 291-364, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Kaestner, Robert & Kaushal, Neeraj & Van Ryzin, Gregg, 2003. "Migration consequences of welfare reform," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 357-376, May.
    3. Robert A. Moffitt, 2003. "Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number moff03-1, March.
    4. Joyce Ted & Kaestner Robert & Korenman Sanders, 2003. "Welfare Reform and Non-Marital Fertility in the 1990s: Evidence from Birth Records," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-36, December.
    5. Ted Joyce & Robert Kaestner & Sanders Korenman & Stanley Henshaw, 2004. "Family Cap Provisions and Changes in Births and Abortions," NBER Working Papers 10214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Rebecca M. Blank, 2002. "Evaluating Welfare Reform in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(4), pages 1105-1166, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leonard M. Lopoo & Kerri M. Raissian, 2014. "U.S. Social Policy and Family Complexity," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 654(1), pages 213-230, July.
    2. Berthold, Norbert & von Berchem, Sascha, 2005. "Lokale Solidarität: die Zukunft der Sozialhilfe?," Discussion Paper Series 76, Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Chair of Economic Order and Social Policy.
    3. Lemieux, Thomas & Milligan, Kevin, 2008. "Incentive effects of social assistance: A regression discontinuity approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 807-828, February.
    4. Berthold, Norbert & von Berchem, Sascha, 2002. "Sozialhilfe im wettbewerblichen Föderalismus: Erfahrungen der USA, Lehren für Deutschland," Discussion Paper Series 58, Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Chair of Economic Order and Social Policy.
    5. Richard V. Burkhauser & Mary C. Daly & Jeff Larrimore & Joyce Kwok, 2008. "The Transformation in Who is Expected to Work in the United States and How it Changed the Lives of Single Mothers and People with Disabilities," Working Papers wp187, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    6. Lincoln H. Groves & Sarah Hamersma & Leonard M. Lopoo, 2018. "Pregnancy Medicaid Expansions and Fertility: Differentiating Between the Intensive and Extensive Margins," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 37(3), pages 461-484, June.
    7. LoPalo, Melissa, 2019. "The effects of cash assistance on refugee outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 27-52.
    8. Gelber, Alexander M. & Mitchell, Joshua W., 2009. "Taxes and Time Allocation: Evidence from Single Women," MPRA Paper 19148, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Lemieux, Thomas & Milligan, Kevin, 2008. "Incentive effects of social assistance: A regression discontinuity approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 807-828, February.
    10. Peter Haan & Victoria Prowse, 2010. "A structural approach to estimating the effect of taxation on the labour market dynamics of older workers," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 13(3), pages 99-125, October.
    11. Nicola Pavoni & G. L. Violante, 2007. "Optimal Welfare-to-Work Programs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(1), pages 283-318.
    12. Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Dahmann, Sarah C. & Salamanca, Nicolás & Zhu, Anna, 2022. "Intergenerational disadvantage: Learning about equal opportunity from social assistance receipt," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    13. repec:ces:ifodic:v:6:y:2008:i:4:p:14567195 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Dalit Contini & Nicola Negri, 2005. "Would Declining Exit Rates from Welfare Provide Evidence of Welfare Dependence in Homogeneous Environments?," LABORatorio R. Revelli Working Papers Series 39, LABORatorio R. Revelli, Centre for Employment Studies.
    15. Erdal Tekin, 2004. "Single Mothers Working at Night: Standard Work, Child Care Subsidies, and Implications for Welfare Reform," NBER Working Papers 10274, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Gregory Acs & Eric Toder, 2007. "Should we subsidize work? Welfare reform, the earned income tax credit and optimal transfers," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(3), pages 327-343, June.
    17. Robert A. Moffitt & Matthew V. Zahn, 2019. "The Marginal Labor Supply Disincentives of Welfare: Evidence from Administrative Barriers to Participation," NBER Working Papers 26028, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Richard V. Burkhauser, 2008. "Creating an EU Flexicurity System: An American Perspective," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 6(4), pages 36-40, December.
    19. Ted Joyce & Robert Kaestner & Sanders Korenman & Stanley Henshaw, 2004. "Family Cap Provisions and Changes in Births and Abortions," NBER Working Papers 10214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Blau, David M. & Tekin, Erdal, 2001. "The Determinants and Consequences of Child Care Subsidies for Single Mothers," IZA Discussion Papers 383, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Ayala, Luis & Rodriguez, Magdalena, 2007. "Barriers to employment and welfare dynamics: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 237-257.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty
    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics

    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:nbr:nberwo:10699. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.