Abstract
Gone are the days when we were inundated with stories of substance-abusing women (i.e., crack abusers). Over time, the image of all that is wrong in urban America seems to have disappeared from the media and the political elite’s radar. However, in this analysis, I show that this policy population is far from forgotten. Indeed, she reappears in welfare policies in the 1990s, such as California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Act of 1997 (CalWORKs). The 1996 welfare-reform legislation, the Personal Responsibility and Work Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), includes an intersection of crime policy and welfare policy that allows for the denial of benefits to individuals convicted of a drug felony. No other offense results in the loss of benefits. Using a case-study approach, I analyze the convergence of these policies in California to show its impact on African American women in urban areas. Due to racial and, increasingly, gender disparities in the criminal-justice system, African American women and Latinas in urban areas are overwhelmingly in contact with the criminaljustice system. Additionally, these women are overwhelmingly represented among the poor and therefore find themselves reliant on public assistance. African American women’s criminal activity is correlated with their poverty. To deny them assistance appears to be a policy designed to increase their participation in drug abuse and, ultimately, in the criminal-justice system. The impact of the meeting of these policies is felt in a number of areas including the women’s abilities to participate in their communities and to achieve self-sufficiency—impacts that combine to perpetuate inequality within this group.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Charles D. Elder and Roger W. Cobb, The Political Uses of Symbols (New York: Longman, 1983) 24.
Anne Schneider, and Helen Ingram, “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy,” American Political Science Review, 87, 2 ( 1993): 334–47.
Murray J. Edelman, Political Language: Words that Succeed and Policies that Fail (New York: Academic Press, 1977).
W.I. Thomas, “The Relation of Research to Social Process,” in Essays on Research in Social Sciences (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1931) 189.
See the works of Drew Humphries, Crack Mothers: Pregnancy, Drugs, and the Media (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1999)
Gwendolyn Mink, The Wages of Motherhood: Inequality in the Welfare State, 1917–1942 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995)
Gwendolyn Mink, Welfare’s end (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988).
Sanford F. Schram and Joe Soss, “Success Stories: Welfare Reform, Policy Discourse, and the Politics of Research,” in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science: Reforming Welfare, Redefining Poverty, edited by Alan W Heston (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2001).
Patricia Allard, Life Sentences: Denying Welfare Benefits to Women Convicted of drug Offenses (Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2002).
Craig Reinarman and Harry G. Levine, “Crack in Context: America’s Latest Demon Drug,” in Crack in America: Demon Drugs and Social Justice (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 1997) 19.
J.A. Inciardi, The War on Drugs: Heroin, Cocaine, and Public Policy (Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1986).
See Linda Gordon, Pitied but not Entitled: Single Mothers and the History of Welfare (New York: Free Press, 1994)
Martin Gilens, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy (Chicago, IL and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1999)
Kenneth J. Neubeck and Noel A. Cazenave, Welfare Racism: Playing the Race Card Against America’s Poor (New York: Routledge, 2001).
Charles A. Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950–1980 (New York: Basic Books, 1984).
Senator Lauch Faircloth, “Welfare Reform” Congressional Record, (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1996), S669.
tDaniel P Moynihan, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action (Washington DC: United States Department of Labor, Office of Policy, Research and Planning, 1965).
Inger P Brinck and Judy Patrick, Failing to Make Ends Meet: The Economic Status of Women in California (San Francisco, CA: The Women’s Foundation, 2002) 23.
Marc Mauer, Cathy Potler, and Richard Wolf, Gender and Justice: Women, Drugs, and Sentencing Policy (Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 1999).
Zina T. McGee, “The Pains of Imprisonment: Long term Incarceration Effects on Women in Prison,” in It’s a Crime: Women and Justice (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000) 211.
Katheryn Edin and Kathleen Mullan Harris, “Getting Off Welfare and Staying Off: Racial Differences in the Work Route Off Welfare,” in Latinas and African American Women at Work, edited by Irene Browne (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
Dorothy Roberts, “Access to Justice: Poverty, Race, and New Directions in Child Welfare Policy,” Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 1 ( 1999): 71.
See Denise Johnston, Jailed Mothers (Pasadena, CA: Pacific Oaks Center for Children of Incarcerated Parents, 1991).
Copyright information
© 2006 Gayle T. Tate and Lewis A. Randolph
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jordan-Zachery, J.S. (2006). The War on Drugs and Welfare Policy:The Impact of Their Intersection on Black Women in Urban America. In: The Black Urban Community. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-73572-3_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-73572-3_15
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-4039-7068-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-73572-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)