让选民回归:20 世纪 50 年代的社会保障政治

IF 0.4 4区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Journal of Policy History Pub Date : 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1017/s0898030623000350
ERIC S. YELLIN
{"title":"让选民回归:20 世纪 50 年代的社会保障政治","authors":"ERIC S. YELLIN","doi":"10.1017/s0898030623000350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that scholars’ current understanding of Social Security policy making in the 1950s is missing a crucial component: massive letter-writing campaigns by ordinary Americans. Americans’ letters to Congress—and the responses of members and their aides in public debates and constituent correspondence—reflect a more vibrant, more democratic, and messier policy-making process than scholars have previously recognized. In the 1950s, Congress voted to amend the Social Security Act of 1935 repeatedly, expanding both the number of occupations covered by the Old Age and Survivors Insurance program and the level of benefits individuals received. Scholars have depicted this expansion as the work of planners within the Social Security bureaucracy. Yet, the letters in congressional records reveal that the process of amending Social Security resulted from—and helped create—constituencies of Americans who felt entitled to make claims on the federal state apparatus.","PeriodicalId":44803,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bringing the Constituents Back In: The Politics of Social Security in the 1950s\",\"authors\":\"ERIC S. YELLIN\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0898030623000350\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that scholars’ current understanding of Social Security policy making in the 1950s is missing a crucial component: massive letter-writing campaigns by ordinary Americans. Americans’ letters to Congress—and the responses of members and their aides in public debates and constituent correspondence—reflect a more vibrant, more democratic, and messier policy-making process than scholars have previously recognized. In the 1950s, Congress voted to amend the Social Security Act of 1935 repeatedly, expanding both the number of occupations covered by the Old Age and Survivors Insurance program and the level of benefits individuals received. Scholars have depicted this expansion as the work of planners within the Social Security bureaucracy. Yet, the letters in congressional records reveal that the process of amending Social Security resulted from—and helped create—constituencies of Americans who felt entitled to make claims on the federal state apparatus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Policy History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Policy History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0898030623000350\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Policy History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0898030623000350","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,学者们目前对 20 世纪 50 年代社会保障政策制定的理解缺少了一个重要组成部分:普通美国人的大规模写信运动。美国人写给国会的信,以及议员及其助手在公开辩论和选民来信中的回应,反映了一个比学者们之前认识到的更有活力、更民主、更混乱的政策制定过程。20 世纪 50 年代,美国国会多次投票修改 1935 年《社会保障法》,扩大了老年和遗属保险计划覆盖的职业数量以及个人领取的福利水平。学者们将这种扩大描述为社会保障官僚机构内部规划者的工作。然而,国会记录中的信件显示,社会保障法案的修订过程是由那些认为有权向联邦国家机器提出诉求的美国人组成的,并帮助他们创建了这样一个群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bringing the Constituents Back In: The Politics of Social Security in the 1950s
This article argues that scholars’ current understanding of Social Security policy making in the 1950s is missing a crucial component: massive letter-writing campaigns by ordinary Americans. Americans’ letters to Congress—and the responses of members and their aides in public debates and constituent correspondence—reflect a more vibrant, more democratic, and messier policy-making process than scholars have previously recognized. In the 1950s, Congress voted to amend the Social Security Act of 1935 repeatedly, expanding both the number of occupations covered by the Old Age and Survivors Insurance program and the level of benefits individuals received. Scholars have depicted this expansion as the work of planners within the Social Security bureaucracy. Yet, the letters in congressional records reveal that the process of amending Social Security resulted from—and helped create—constituencies of Americans who felt entitled to make claims on the federal state apparatus.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
A New Deal for Wine The Most Iniquitous Lobby: The Committee for Constitutional Government and the Shaping of American Politics, 1937–1955 “Granting” Justice, Debating Delinquency: The Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Offenses Control Act and the UNC Training Center on Delinquency and Youth Crime, 1961–1967 Identity Politics within Kentucky’s Civil Service and the Growth of the Bureaucratic State Mobilizing for the Mind: Veteran Activism and the National Mental Health Act of 1946
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1