This paper examines the American welfare state through a liberal political lens, contrasting it with conservative perspectives that tend to discount government intervention. It explores foundational economic schools of thought—Keynesian, new classical, and Marxist economics—and their relevance to social welfare. The paper defines social welfare policy as the diversion of public resources toward social justice and equity, distinguishing welfare programs from broader social campaigns. Finally, it outlines a four-step policy analysis framework that includes problem definition, identification of alternatives, comparison of current versus alternative policies, and longitudinal monitoring of effectiveness.
The American welfare state is best viewed through a liberal lens. In the United States, conservative views discount the role of government, whereas liberal perspectives champion the ability of government to create a better society through collective quality-of-life improvements. Because a conservative framework tends to disavow the efficacy of social welfare programs, the American welfare state can most meaningfully be analyzed from a liberal standpoint.
The American welfare state has not been as strong as it could be, partly because it is not rooted in strong traditions. Social welfare programs such as those that began during the New Deal have become somewhat entrenched, but there have been many instances in which the United States has proved itself ambivalent toward social welfare programs. The American ideology and national mythos are built on the myth of meritocracy, which is part of the problem.
There are several schools of economic thought relevant to understanding social welfare. The Keynesian school seeks to explain economic conditions on the basis of demand. New classical economics takes a different perspective, emphasizing microeconomics and rationality as the basis for its models. A third school of thought is Marxist economics, which is grounded in Marx's writing on the nature of capitalism rather than the systems used in Communist countries.
Both new classical economics and Keynesian economics argue from a point of natural equilibrium. New classical economics emphasizes the role of markets in achieving that equilibrium, while Keynesian economics works within the framework of fiscal and monetary policy to reach the same end. These distinctions matter for welfare policy because they shape how policymakers understand the causes of poverty and the appropriate role of government intervention.
"Definition and scope of social welfare programs"
"Four-step framework for evaluating welfare policy"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.