{"title":"福利禁毒与刑事法律循环","authors":"Naomi F Sugie, Carol Newark","doi":"10.1086/725424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.","PeriodicalId":7658,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Sociology","volume":"129 1","pages":"41 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Welfare Drug Bans and Criminal Legal Cycling\",\"authors\":\"Naomi F Sugie, Carol Newark\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7658,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Sociology\",\"volume\":\"129 1\",\"pages\":\"41 - 75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725424\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725424","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.
期刊介绍:
Established in 1895 as the first US scholarly journal in its field, the American Journal of Sociology (AJS) presents pathbreaking work from all areas of sociology, with an emphasis on theory building and innovative methods. AJS strives to speak to the general sociology reader and is open to contributions from across the social sciences—sociology, political science, economics, history, anthropology, and statistics—that seriously engage the sociological literature to forge new ways of understanding the social. AJS offers a substantial book review section that identifies the most salient work of both emerging and enduring scholars of social science. Commissioned review essays appear occasionally, offering readers a comparative, in-depth examination of prominent titles. Although AJS publishes a very small percentage of the papers submitted to it, a double-blind review process is available to all qualified submissions, making the journal a center for exchange and debate "behind" the printed page and contributing to the robustness of social science research in general.