Social Welfare Policy Analysis

1
MODULE II SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY READINGS
PART I, 1,4 5/30 6/5
2
Module II Social Welfare Policy (SWP)

• PART 1
• What is social welfare policy (swp)? More
  particularly, what are its definitions, types,
  origins, trends? Why is it important for social
  workers to know about it?
• PART 2
• Why are institutional contexts and, especially,
  politics the keys to understanding swp? Who
  supports/opposes policies why?

I actually prefer to think of myself as an
egghead
Thats no guy---thats a prof!
See, I told you it was a guy!
3
PART 1
gtRelevance gtOverview gtDefinitionsgt TypesgtOriginsgtT
rends
4
WHY STUDY SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY? (1)

• Because
• It is the social in social work it is the
  major factor in shaping the practice
  environment.
• More broadly still, swps both reflect and help to
  define the type of society we live in. For
  example, some of the most important distinctions
  between the US and Canada are reflected in the
  differing swps characteristic of the two nations.
  
• American politics is largely about what should be
  the range and types of swps adopted by various
  levels of government.
• Both the CSWE NASW codes require that swp and
  social justice be key features of social work
  education.

5
WHY STUDY SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY? (2)

• SOCIAL WORKERS NEED TO HAVE
• THEORETICAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE ROLE SUCH
  POLICIES PLAY IN SOCIETY.
• POLITICAL SAVVY TO GRASP WHY PARTICULAR GROUPS
  ADVOCATE PARTICULAR SWPs.
• APPLIED KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTENTS AND IMPACTS OF
  SWPS.

6
RELEVANCE QUESTION (3)

• WHERE DO SOCIAL WORKERS FIT INTO THESE PROCESSES?

7
RELEVANCE (4) ANSWER

• EVERYWHERE!

• Social Workers Are
• Activists
• Administrators
• Advocates
• Public and Agency
• Officials

8
Overview SW Policy and Policy Making

• EXPLANATIONS
• Welfare State
• Total stock of social
• programs policies,
• to which newly
• enacted laws are added.
• See module 3.
• 2/3. Context politics

5. ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATION
4. The content of major social
welfare policies and programs is the principal
subject matter of this course, as will
become evident in later sessions. 5. Application
The level of greatest immediate concern to
social work practitioners. Covered in practice
courses and, to some extent, throughout this
course.
4. SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (LAWS))
2. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT (E.G., US CONGRESS)
3. POLITICS (BARGAINING)
1. WELFARE STATE (PROGRAMS/INSTITUTIONS)
9
Definitions (1) Policy, Social Policy, Social
Welfare Policy
A subset of social policies, in particular
programs/regulations designed to
satisfy individual and familial needs
inadequately met through the market system. See
slides 11/12 for a closer definition.
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)
Social policy is sometimes used as a synonym for
social welfare policy, but this is really
a misnomer, since the former is a far more
inclusive term encompassing all sorts of
domestic issues (e.g., education).
SOCIAL POLICIES
Policy generically refers to the goals, means,
and principles pursued by institutions, whether
public or private. The term is somewhat
confusing for that reason---i.e., it
encompasses both means and ends, but is
particularly associated with the notion of
principles, which are implicit/explicit
assumptions guiding specific actions in pursuit
of goals.
POLICIES
THE NEXT SLIDE PROVIDES ANOTHER
REPRESENTATION OF THESE CONCEPTS
10
Definitions (2) Policy, Social Policy, Social
Welfare Policy
PUBLIC POLICIES
SOCIAL POLICIES
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES
11
DEFINITIONS (3)
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES (SWPs)

• Publicly financed and administered programs
  designed to meet basic needs inadequately met
  through the market system.
• Program eligibility determined by citizenship,
  contributions, and/or means criteria.
• Contents determined via the legislative process,
  as mediated by values, interests, and clout of
  the contending political actors and their
  supporters.

12
Social Welfare Policies Major Types
About 50 of all social welfare expenditure fall
into this category they are designed to
sustain income during unemployment or old age,
and require contributions from employees and/or
employers.
1. Contributory
Eligibility established by demonstrating
need, according to government mandated
criteria. This type of social welfare program
(e.g., SSI or TANF) accounts for 13 of all
expenditures.
2. Means - tested
Unlike welfare (2), these programs
are Targeted at the working poor (EITC) or
elderly seeking Medicaid assistance for for
long-term care. About 20 of all expenditures.
3. Benefits tied to earnings or savings
13
SWPs ORIGINS (1) (Mainstream version)

• In the mainstream view, modern swps derive
  logically if not spontaneously from the very
  nature of modern society. Whatever its local
  variations, modernity everywhere involves
  urbanization, industrialization, and loss of
  family/local community economic support. Workers
  are consequently exposed to a variety of
  hazards----notably, illness, unemployment or
  injury on the job---previously perceived as
  family and community responsibilities. In the
  same vein, the life phases before and after
  market employment----i.e., youth and old
  age---also require protections as substitutes for
  the family/community goods and services available
  in simpler times.
• The next slide diagrammatically profiles the
  varying attempts to
• satisfy these new needs.

14
ORIGINS (2) VARYING RESPONSES TO MODERNIZATION
(Mainstream version)
Mutual Benefit Societies to protect members
thru insurance plans
Traditional American individualism and
self- Reliance
Trade unions to protect members by
winning benefits through collective bargaining
Government action, including swps,
in response to popular demands
URBANIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION
MODERNIZATION
15
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY ORIGINS (Radical
version)

• Radicals contend that mainstreamers gloss over
  the issue of class struggle---i..e., the
  allegedly ineradicable conflicts in interests
  between workers and owners---that radicals view
  as the pivotal political element in capitalist
  society. The origins of modern swps---in Germany
  in the 1880s---is seen as a prime case in point.
  Then in an early phase of development, German
  capitalism was nevertheless already threatened by
  a comparably dynamic radical political labor
  movement demanding public ownership of the mines,
  factories, and railroads (the means of
  production). In reaction, Germanys Iron
  Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, acting on behalf
  of Germanys capitalist and aristocratic ruling
  class, instituted the first swps. The strategy
  worked by somewhat blunting working class demands
  for more basic change and, at least equally
  important, by classifying workers into various
  social insurance groupings, intentionally
  designed to fragment their capacity for common
  class solidarity. This divide and conquer
  policy deflected the (potentially) revolutionary
  ardor feared by German elites. While American swp
  followed its own distinctive pattern, their
  intent and results were similar.
• The next slide reviews the American case
• more closely from a radical perspective.

16
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES ORIGINS (Radical
version)

• Liberals often view---or, better perhaps,
  venerate--- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) as
  the founding father of modern American social
  welfare policy. This is true in a technical
  sense---the Social Security Act (1935) and other
  important social and social welfare legislation
  were indeed enacted during the New Deal phase
  (1933-41) of FDRs long presidential tenure
  (1933-45). But radical historians argue that
  liberals underemphasize the pressures exerted on
  Roosevelt from both working class Left and,
  especially. capitalist Right, as well as
  Roosevelts own essentially conservative
  inclinations. Thus, radicals regard the Social
  Security Act itself---undoubtedly the most
  important
• swp in US history---as basically prompted by
• corporate Americas demands for public relief
• from its Depression-era pension obligations.
• Conservatives are equally negative about the New
• Deal, as the next slide explains.

17
ORIGINAL SIN THE CONSERVATIVE EXPLANATION

• THIS EDU-RAMA! CLIP IS ONLY 4 MINUTES LONG, BUT
  APTLY SUMMARIZES CONSERVATIVE DISTASTE FOR THE
  ROOSEVELT LEGACY. THE PRESENTER IS PROF. MILTON
  FRIEDMAN, OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, PERHAPS
  THE FOREMOST CONSERVATIVE OPPONENT OF THE WELFARE
  STATE.
• HERE FRIEDMAN EXPLAINS HOW ROOSEVELTS
  DISCUSSIONS WITH LEADING INTELLECTUALS, WHILE FDR
  WAS STILL GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK STATE, SET THE
  STAGE FOR HIS NEW DEAL POLICIES AS PRESIDENT.

EDU-RAMA
18
SWP TRENDS (1) RETREAT, HO!

• Retreat from expansionary social welfare policies
  is one of the major political realities of our
  time, and one that has had especially important
  implications for both social workers and their
  traditional clientele---the poor.
• While the beginnings of this trend predate the
  1980s, it was during that decade, and
  specifically during the Reagan years (1981-88),
  that the process really accelerated---indeed,
  Reagan was elected on an explicitly roll back
  the welfare state platform that constituted a
  wholesale rejection of the
• New Deal tradition.
• Whatever ones values, there is no doubt
• that the era of big government is over and,
• barring exceptional circumstances (most
• obviously, a major economic downturn)
• is unlikely to return any time soon.

19
SWP TRENDS (2) CAUSAL FACTORS

• The reasons for this reversal are hotly debated,
  but its overall momentum remains indisputable.
  Conservatives point to popular disillusionment
  in President Nixons (1968 73) memorable
  phrase, voters allegedly became tired of
  throwing money at social problems, and so
  withdrew support from initiatives allegedly most
  beneficial to public sector bureaucrats rather
  than the ostensible recipients of services. As
  the Friedman video on FDR testifies, this is
  merely the latest version of the longstanding
  conservative claim that so-called big
  government doesnt work and therefore should be
  downsized to an absolute minimum.
• Radicals, however, see the matter differently. In
  their view, swps have been undercut by increased
  corporate lobbying and the worldwide victory of
  free market economics.
• For more on this controversy, see Part 2 of this
  module, module 3, and relevant assigned readings.
  

20
SWP TRENDS (3) STAGNATION REVERSALS

• No new major social welfare reforms have been
  created since enactment of Medicare/Medicaid in
  1965. On the other hand, several major programs,
  notably public assistance and Supplemental
  Security Income (SSI) have, respectively, been
  transformed or radically reduced. Perhaps more
  importantly, almost no prominent political figure
  in either major party now advocates ambitious
  liberal swp initiatives.
• The last major attempt at innovation was
  President Clintons ill-fated 1994 health care
  proposal (Module 5), which resulted in the single
  greatest domestic political defeat of his
  administration. While dissatisfaction with health
  care continues to simmer, Clintons attempt to
  reform the entire health care system was so
  disastrous as to discredit all further attempts
  at global change. Commenting at the time (1994)
  the inimitable Tom Tomorrow summed up the
  political mess, as follows

21
SWP TRENDS (4) A PLAGUE ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES
COMMENT ON THE CLINTON HEALTH BILL (1994)
22
SWP TRENDS (5) PRIVATIZATION

• Privatization of public service programs is now a
  well-established American pattern. Many
  municipalities, for example, subcontract trash
  collection and some even have experimented with
  private police and fire services. However, the
  most prominent privatization experiments so far
  have been in education (so-called charter
  schools) and in the penal system, with a number
  of states experimenting with corporate run
  prisons.
• Privatization has also dramatically expanded in
  the swp area, notably in administration of state
  welfare programs and reliance on for-profit HMOs
  in the Medicare and, especially, Medicaid
  programs.
• More ambitious still are demands for the
  privatization of Social Security, the colossal
  enchilada among American swps, which some
  conservatives would like to see turned into a
  privatized pension plan.

23
SWP TRENDS (6) PRIVATIZATION PROS CONS

• PRO
• (CONSERVATIVE ARGUMENTS)
• Privatization of public services and programs
  saves money because businesses must meet contract
  specifications or lose money. Because
  contractors have specific bottom line targets,
  they must conduct their operations with exemplary
  efficiency if they want to stay in business.
• In privatizing services, government is avoiding
  long-term contractual commitments to
  employees---a huge cost saving over time.
• Corporate employees are not covered by civil
  service protections, which promote retention of
  dead wood, and otherwise cost the taxpayer
  avoidable expenses.

• CON
• (LIBERAL/RADICAL ARGUMENTS)
• Privatization is essentially a ruse (scam),
  whereby corporations connive with pliant
  politicians to usurp what are legitimately public
  functions. The conservative arguments are
  therefore really red herrings, i.e., designed
  to deflect attention away from the real aims
  underlying privatization.
• Privatization is dangerous insofar as it subverts
  social solidarity, while providing corporations
  with undesirable entrée into all kinds of
  activities---e.g., education and public
  welfare---best left within the public domain.

24
SWP TRENDS (7) DEVOLUTION

• Devolution refers to the transfer of swps from
  one level of government responsibility to
  another---most recently, from the federal to the
  state and lower levels of government, as was most
  prominently done with public welfare, when it was
  transformed from AFDC to TANF (1996).
• Like the other trends described in this section,
  devolution is a controversial issue. Its
  conservative supporters argue that it will help
  make swps more reflective of the popular will,
  because state governments are literally and
  figuratively closer to the people.
• Liberals and radicals predictably dont see the
  matter in this way. They view devolution as
  simply one way of sloughing off the
  responsibility for swps by downsizing the size
  and power of the federal government---the only
  level of government that, historically, has been
  the most reliable and effective proponent of
  social welfare programs.

25
PART 2 SWP POLITICS
26
THE POLITICAL DIMENSION

• SWPs are first and foremost the product of
  politics that is why it is impossible to engage
  in serious social work study without including
  significant attention to the professions
  political dimension. It is also why both CSWE and
  NASW readily acknowledge the importance of
  understanding politics in general, and the
  politics of social welfare in particular, as
  vital to the future of the profession.
• This second part of Module 2, and associated
  readings, provide a compressed review, of both
  these themes. But doing so is not easy, not least
  because, as we shall see, even defining what
  politics is about is itself controversial,
  depending as it does on whether one accepts a
  mainstream or radical perspective on that
  subject.
• Well focus on this controversy, and its
  implications for social work and social welfare
  policy, but first briefly make note of the
  institutional context within which all political
  activity takes place and the actors who make
  that activity actually happen.

27
Institutions

• All swps are hammered out within certain
  institutional rules and procedures that regulate
  each stage of the policy making process. This may
  occur at the local, state, or federal levels,
  although, historically, the most important
  legislation has been enacted at the federal
  level.
• The way in which institutions are organized, and
  their relationship to one another, can have a big
  impact on swp legislation. Indeed, the so-called
  institutional school of policy analysts believe
  that that impact is decisive in accounting for
  social policy outcomes. These analysts argue that
  the American systems division of powers makes it
  possible to obstruct passage of sw legislation
  (and much else), just as the weak structure of
  our political parties tends to have the same
  effect it is very difficult for party leaders to
  rally the troops when each soldier (read
  legislator) is primarily answerable to his
  local constituents. Finally, older, more
  conservative legislators have often exercised
  extraordinary power simply because, as
  legislative veterans, they have more
  institutional experience and have occupied key
  institutional positions.

28
Institutions and Politics

• Institutional arrangements, of the type
  summarized in the last slide, undoubtedly have
  played a significant role in determining social
  welfare policy. Indeed, when civic texts refer to
  the policy making process, their primary
  emphasis is usually on explaining the rules of
  the game, as it is played in the various
  institutional contexts from which swps emerge.
  Yet it is important to remember that these are
  POLITICAL as well as INSTITUTIONAL contexts i.e.
  that institutional rules have been established in
  order to constrain and discipline the struggle
  for power that we call politics. Therefore,
  while granting that the institutional school
  has its points, most analysts still regard
  politics and political interests as the keys to
  understanding why we get the types of social
  welfare policies we do.
• For that reason, it is important to focus on the
  key questions relating to politics and social
  welfare policy, beginning with the primary one.

29
POLITICAL ACTORS SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY

• Political actors determine the contents and
  disposition of swps.
• The clout of particular political actors in
  turn depends on their resources (1) lobbyists,
  their financial resources (2) politicians, their
  political skills (3) the public, its degree of
  active political mobilization. Generally, (1) is
  the decisive factor, but (2) (3) can also be
  very important, depending on the particular
  issue.
• Policy outcomes are thus often difficult to
  predict
• due to the complex interaction of these
• factors on any given issue
• The next slide provides a diagrammatic
  representation of the relationships among
  political actors.

30
(No Transcript)
31
INSERT THE GREATEST POLITICAL ACTOR OF THEM ALL?

• Students of modern American history often rate
  Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) the most highly
  skilled political leader since FDR. Indeed, LBJ
  was an FDR protégé in his command of
  institutional forms (he was Senate majority
  leader for many years), interpersonal skills (the
  famous LBJ treatment could reportedly
  persuade even the most independently-minded),
  and determined commitment to social justice.
  Using these extraordinary assets, Johnson enacted
  numerous civil rights, education, and social
  welfare laws, including Medicare and Medicaid,
  which are the most important swp legacies of his
  administration (1963 1968). Yet despite these
  extraordinary achievements, Johnsons presidency
  was politically destroyed by the Vietnam war,
  which drained resources from his War on Poverty
  and helped discredit the liberal activism Johnson
  exemplified and championed. Click on Edu-Rama!
  to watch a capsule LBJ bio, which begins with his
  statement following assassination of his
  predecessor, J.F. Kennedy.

EDU-RAMA!
32
WHAT IS POLITICS, ANYWAY?
ITS WHAT CLINTON DOES IN OVAL OFFICE
ITS A FIGHT FOR LOVE AND GLORY
DARNED IF I KNOW !
There is no single authoritative definition of
politics. In fact, as the following 3 slides
explain, its meaning very much depends on
whether you are an mainstreamer or radical.
33
THE MAINSTREAM VIEW OF POLITICS

• As one would anticipate, mainstreamers see
  politics basically as an arena of ideas in
  which individuals and groups seek to promote and
  act into law plans and values they regard as of
  paramount social importance.
• In the mainstream conception, civics is not
  simply an add on, but close to the core of what
  education should be about. That is, the schools,
  especially at the higher levels, should teach how
  to evaluate the objective merit of ideas by
  equipping students with a knowledge of those
  subjects---history, philosophy, and
  economics---most germane to the evaluative task.
• Democracy works to the extent that citizen-voters
  have acquired and are able to exercise this
  analytical capability. Thus, it is possible to
  have a democratic institutional format without
  the democratic commitment to public-spirited
  debate and circulation of ideas. Indeed, many
  mainstreamers worry that this is the current
  American situation.

34
THE MAINSTREAM VIEW LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES

• Usually seen as opposing political viewpoints,
  liberals and conservatives actually share key
  underlying assumptions.
• Specifically, both view politics in terms of
  dialogue and debate their objective is to put
  before the public ideas and proposals they claim
  serve the common interest, rather than specific
  class interests. That liberals and conservatives
  share this view is at least as important as their
  political differences.
• That said, conservatives believe that it is
  necessary to promote corporate goals because
  society will flourish only if business does.
• Liberals do not disagree with this proposition,
  but urge that all people be given an equal chance
  to compete and that government helps those who,
  for whatever reason, fail to compete
  successfully. Liberals also believe that certain
  common social programs should be adopted when the
  private sector proves incapable of furnishing the
  needed goods or services---medical care for the
  aged.
• The following two slides look at these
  differences more closely.

35
LIBERAL VIEWS

• Commitment to basic living standards beneath
  which no one should be allowed to fall.
• Equality of opportunity actively promoted by
  government
• Belief in the benign efficacy of government, as
  led by the liberal elite
• Belief that capitalisms rough edges can and
  should be reformed for the benefit of society as
  a whole.
• Democratic process as the way to effect all
  political changes.

36
CONSERVATIVE VIEWS

• People are, or at least should be, responsible
  for their own lives swp safety nets only
  cushion the lazy and encourage the improvident.
  They should accordingly be minimized or
  eliminated altogether.
• Equality of opportunity, but primary emphasis on
  individual initiative
• Belief in the inherent incapacity of government
  to effectively address social problems. Led by
  well-meaning but naïve liberals, governments can
  be transformed into bureaucratized colossi, which
  threaten individual freedom, even when they
  remain nominally democratic in form.
• There is no such thing as a free lunch
• Democratic process as the way to effect all
  political change.

37
THE RADICAL VIEW OF POLITICS

• Radicals see politics as essentially a struggle
  for power, in which specific groups, individuals,
  and, especially, social classes pursue their
  specific interests by appealing to certain common
  ideas and ideals. In this view, in order to
  understand politics, you must first understand
  what an individual, class, or group is trying to
  achieve in terms of their advantage and then
  relate their political ideas to this objective.
  Ideas flow from interests, not the other way
  around, as mainstreamers believe.
• Expert political understanding, like expert
  therapeutic practice, thus consists in being able
  to distinguish between what political actors mean
  as opposed to what they say. What they say is
  probably designed to convince others (and perhaps
  themselves as well) that passage of legislation
  they are supporting contributes to the community,
  when in fact it is quite partisan in its
  intentions.

38
THE RADICAL VIEW OF POLITICS

• Radicals are divided into various
  sub-classifications---notably, communists,
  socialists and social democrats. However, all are
  more or less committed to viewing politics as
  essentially a struggle for power, in which the
  vast majority of people share common interests in
  world peace and economic security, and would
  accordingly benefit from a high degree of
  cooperation for the common good. That is what is
  in their interests.
• However, these commonalities are obscured
  because a small, property owning
  minority---essentially, the capitalist class---is
  able to exercise decisive political influence in
  pursuit of its narrow ends. (See Module 1, slides
  30 59 for details.)
• The following slide looks more closely at radical
  views.

39
RADICAL VALUES

• Commitment to a decent standard of living for all
  citizens as a fundamental legal and human right
• Full equality of opportunity and partial
  opportunity of result i.e. everyone should enjoy
  roughly the same life chances, but in any case,
  social and economic differences among people
  should be drastically narrowed.
• Activist government working on behalf of those
  most in need of representation.
• Mixed economy
• Democratic process but without current
  inequalities of media or political access

40
POLITICS AND SOCIAL WELFARE POLITICS

• The remainder of this module is devoted to
  applying Part 2 concepts to the politics of
  social welfare.

41
SOCIAL WELFARE POLICYPolitical Supporters and
Opponents

• Actors and, more generally, swp supporters and
  opponents, differ in both their economic
  interests and political values
• Most Americans identify themselves as either
  liberals (not liberalists) and conservatives.
  Radicals are a small minority without effective
  political representation or access to major
  media outlets for dissemination of their views.
• Radicals, like liberals, support popular swps,
  but want to see them extended as part of an
  overall effort to reduce inequality.

42
SWP SUPPORTERS ECONOMIC INTERESTS (1)

• Generous swps are generally supported by the poor
  and working class, as represented by trade
  unions, and by others (e.g., handicappers)
  seeking protection from the unrestrained
  capitalist market.
• Such programs are also selectively supported by
  middle class Americans insofar as universal
  social insurance programs benefit
  them---Medicare, Medicaid (nursing homes), and
  Social Security.
• To the extent that that Americans perceive that
  they have common interests in protecting
  programs, they are likely to become political
  actors.
• The following slides examine these alignments
  more closely.

43
SUPPORTERS ECONOMIC INTERESTS (2)

• Blue collar workers are more vulnerable to lay
  off and hence more interested in safety net
  social welfare protections for themselves and
  their families
• Trade union power is increased to the extent that
  workers have a fall back position in
  negotiations with owners the stronger the swp
  safety net, the more assertive unions are able
  to be in their negotiations with management

Solidarity Forever!
44
OPPONENTS ECONOMIC INTERESTS

• Swps increase taxes and are resented by the rich,
  who can afford to buy protections through the
  market---e.g., health care and retirement
  investments. Their lives are in any case much
  more materially secure than those of ordinary
  Americans.
• The welfare state increases the bargaining power
  of labor, as noted, so that its size and
  coverages are very important considerations for
  employers seeking to restrain wages and benefits.
  
• Owners want consumers to have maximum private
  resources so that, ideally, even necessities are
  purchased through the market rather than
  collectively through the political process.
  (What I want as an individual consumer, as
  opposed to What we want as a political
  community. ) See Module III discussion of
  decommodification for more on this point.

SOAK THE RICH, WHY DONT YOU!
TAX CUTS NOW!
45
ECONOMIC INTERESTS AND POLITICAL BELIEFS A
FINAL COMMENT

• While peoples ideas and interests are ideally in
  harmony---in principle you should be aware of and
  favor those policies that are in your individual
  and class interests----there is often a
  discrepancy between the two i.e., in reality, we
  often believe things that are not in our
  interest.
• Radicals attribute such discordance to false
  consciousness, i.e. what was termed in Module I
  capitalist control over the means of mental
  production and the resultant political ideas and
  proposals that deflect ordinary people from their
  real interests.

46
Part 2 Questions

• As emphasized in this module, politics is the
  driving force behind
• development and enactment of social welfare
  policy. Which political
• position do you identify with---liberal,
  conservative, or radical---and
• on what grounds?
• 2. Does the concept of false consciousness make
  sense to you? If so,
• apply it to a given political situation with
  which you are familiar. If
• not, explain why you think the concept is faulty.
• 3. Imagine that you are a political decision
  maker charged with
• development of new social welfare policies. To
  which policies would
• you give priority? Why do you think these are so
  important?
• 4. Having reviewed the module and associated
  readings, discuss the
• importance of social welfare policy for social
  workers.