Declarations of dependence and independence: The republican ethical tradition in United States poverty policy.

No one is satisfied with poverty policy in the United States. For over a quarter of a century the political discussion of poverty issues has been dominated by blanket denunciations of the welfare system. However, this results periodically in little more than incremental steps in the same direction: a little more money for job-training programs, and a little more encompassing requirements for welfare recipients to participate in these programs. This study theorizes that such regular patterns in policy debates and policy outcomes are due to the public language which is available for defining problems and promoting policy ideas. In democratic political systems, familiar sets of political symbols (primarily words and combinations of words which provoke strong emotional reactions) are used by politicians to avoid public opposition to policies and build coalitions in support of policies among political elites. The continued use of a set of symbols over time constitutes an ethical tradition, which can come to dominate discourse in a policy area and push policy decisions in particular directions. The public language in several areas of poverty policy was examined from records of Congressional debates, Presidential statements, Congressional committee hearings and other material. A dominating ethical tradition was identified and traced to its roots in the republican tradition of the nineteenth century. The thesis is that a tradition of agrarian republicanism has provided much of the language used to discuss poverty issues in the twentieth century, and that this has had an important effect on policy outcomes. The central chapters lay out the story of how agrarian republicanism developed during the first century after the American Revolution, how the symbols of this tradition became implicated in twentieth century politics, and how contemporary poverty policy has been affected by this heritage. The introductory chapter explains the theory behind this historical interpretation, locating it amidst theories of ideology and the role of symbols in the policy process. The concluding chapter sums up the research findings, discusses the rational coherence of the ethical tradition, and makes some tentative policy suggestions.Ph.D.American historyPolitical sciencePublic policySocial SciencesUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/129404/2/9501082.pd