The Politics of Welfare Retrenchment, 1873-1898 and 1973-2002

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Politics of Welfare Retrenchment, 1873-1898 and 1973-2002 City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 2002 No Relief: The Politics of Welfare Retrenchment, 1873-1898 and 1973-2002 Stephen Pimpare Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1690 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9’ black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. / f No Relief: The Politics of Welfare Retrenchment, 1873-1898 and 1973-2002 by Stephen Pimpare A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2002 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3047253 Copyright 2002 by Pimpare, Stephen All rights reserved. ____ ________ (f t UMI UMI Microform 3047253 Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ©2002 STEPHEN PIMPARE All Rights Reserved Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. This manuscript has been read and accepted by the Graduate Faculty in Political Science in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy [signature] ranees Fox Piven Chair of Examining Committee [signature] Da e W. Ofuatey Ki Executive Officer Herbert J. Gans John H. Mollenkopf Frances Fox Piven Andrew J. Polsky Sanford F. Schram Examining Committee THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A b s t r a c t No Relief: The Pblidcs of Welfare Retrenchment, 1873-1898 and 1973-2002 by Stephen Pimpare Advisor Frances Fox Piven No Relief compares the national repeal of AFDC in 1996 with the widespread campaigns against municipal poor relief that occurred throughout the United States some one hundred years earlier. In both eras businesses and the governments that depended upon them, threatened by growing labor power, civil unrest and the rising costs of poor relief, launched an attack against poor people and the limited benefits available to them. They did not do so directly but under cover of the Charity Organization Societies of the Gilded Age and conservative think tanks of the late twentieth century - “neutral” reform organizations that obscured the class-based nature of their activism. In addition to examining these institutions through which anti-relief campaigns were waged. No Relief explores the arguments used to justify relief reforms (which in both periods drew upon Malthusian and Spencerian ideas about the dangers of a profligate pauper class and the “natural” role of the state); the policies ultimately enacted (which restricted access to relief and made what was still available conditioned upon work or new standards of moral behavior); and the outcomes of such policy changes (which led to rising costs and less effective service provision, in which greater sums of money were distributed to private contractors and not-for-profit service providers, and less money reached those most in need). What reformers achieved was to remove the minimal supports available to poor men and women, forcing them into the low-wage labor market, into marriage, or into prison. No Relief concludes with an analysis of what these cases reveal about the circumstances under which welfare benefits previously extended to citizens can be rescinded with relative impunity and offers some thoughts as to what the ultimate outcomes of relief reform in the late nineteenth century might portend for the beginning of the twenty-first century. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V P r e f a c e Here’s to You, Gertrude Hmmelfarb! The following pages seek to respond to a few challenges. An early inspiration was Andrew Polsky, who pointed me toward events in nineteenth century poor relief he thought I might find puzzling. He was right. Why did so many cities abolish poor relief at the end of the century? Why did other cities not do so? I began my investigation in hopes of simultaneously addressing social welfare historian Michael Katz’s complaint that “all discussions about the reasons for variation in [late nineteenth century poor] relief must remain speculative until historians do research on the topic. Virtually none exists at the moment” (Katz 1986, 341 fill3). But to fully answer that challenge was, I soon realized, a fool's errand, not least because of the scarcity of reliable data. I am not the first to note the problem. F.B. Sanborn quipped at the 1877 National Conference of Charities and Corrections (NCCC) that “Mr. Canning once said in parliament, 'I can prove anything by figures, except the truth.’ This is eminently the case with the figures which relate to pauperism.” The 1891 President’s address to the NCCC noted that “no state keeps complete statistical records.” “It is impossible to obtain statistics of value from the majority of the States,” complained another in 1892. Amos Warner wrote in 1894 that 'There are absolutely no reliable statistics of outdoor relief in the United States as a whole.” From the NCCC of 1898 we learn that “there is yet no uniformity [on reporting on relief] between the States, and the statistics secured are very imperfect.” As late as 1922, Katherine Howland of Smith College wrote that “Not only is there no central body of our federal government which collects statistics on poor relief, but in a large number of states not even figures are available for all the counties.” Suffice to say I cannot here offer the kind of rich comparison and analysis of poor relief patterns, city-by-city, that Katz (and I) would like to see. Instead, I gather what data are available to offer a few more pieces of the weird puzzle that is nineteenth century “welfare” (outdoor relief, or out-relief it was called then) and show how many of the same forces have more recently been at work once again. I do better addressing Lawrence Mead's complaint (2000) that scholars have too little attended to the politics of recent policymaking, especially to the conservative welfare changes Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. of the 1980s and 1990s. I take the challenge, ceitain he will find little to like in my explanation, and up the ante a decade by beginning that part of my story in the 1970s. But more on Mead below. I also pick up a gauntlet tossed down by Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. (Howard (1987, fh6), who lamented that “much of the history of popular political struggles over poor relief in the United States before the Great Depression remains to be written." True enough. Most people I daresay don’t even know that there were heated battles over outdoor relief in the late 1800s or that many cities abruptly cut off assistance, imposed work requirements, tightened eligibility standards and enacted other “reforms” that eerily echo the “reforms" made in the late twentieth century. This is a faint response to their fair challenge (and one that owes much to them and their work) but it helps, I hope, solve another intriguing puzzle: given that Americans have always been ambivalent about welfare (whatever we have called it), why at the end of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries did we so give up on offering aid to poor people, and in so much the same way? Why then and why now? But it turns out that these pages are as much as anything a reaction to those Gilded Age charity reformers and some contemporary would-be Victorian revivalists who argue that it is a decline in values ( virtues, Gertrude Himmelfarb would insist we say) that is the real problem and that public efforts to reduce poverty by offering material aid, however well- intentioned, will only make matters worse, encouraging dependency, breeding illegitimacy and leading generally to the demise of all things decent and good.
Recommended publications
  • Lake Ontario Maps, Facts and Figures
    Lake Ontario maps, facts and figures A project by the FINGER LAKES-LAKE ONTARIO WATERSHED PROTECTION ALLIANCE and NEW YORK SEA GRANT 1. Origins of Lake Ontario Direct Drainage Basin 2. Population by Census Block Groups 3. Detailed Surface Water New York’s Lake Ontario . shown in maps, facts & figures Lake Ontario, the 14th largest lake in the world, is the smallest of the Great 4. Topography Lakes. Bordered to the north by Ontario, Canada, and to the south by New York State, it is the smallest in surface area, fourth among the Great Lakes in maximum depth, but second only to Lake Superior in average depth. The basin land area is largely rural with a significant forested and Lake Ontario at a glance 5. Land Use Types agricultural portion. The Lake is nestled between the mighty Niagara River Lake Ontario is the 14th largest lake in the world. to the west...and the picturesque St. Lawrence River Valley to its east. Length: 193 mi / 311 km Width: 53 mi / 85 km Almost one-third of the land area of New York State drains Published by Finger Lakes-Lake Ontario Watershed Protection Alliance (FLLOWPA) Average depth: 283 ft / 86 m 6. Wastewater Treatment Plants and New York Sea Grant. into Lake Ontario, making the wise use and management of Maximum depth: 802 ft / 244 m All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval natural resources vital to the long-term sustainability of the system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, 3 3 photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • State and Local Immigration Regulation in the United States Before 1882
    BENJAMIN J. KLEBANER STATE AND LOCAL IMMIGRATION REGULATION IN THE UNITED STATES BEFORE 1882 The absence of significant federal regulation in the area of immigration legislation until 1882 1 no more denotes a laissez-faire approach in this area than in many other aspects of American economic life. For many generations Congress had left the task of regulating the immigrant stream to the states and localities.2 The first general federal law (1882) is best understood in the context of antecedent activity on the local level. Eventually most of the seaboard states, including many without an important passenger traffic, enacted statutes dealing with immi- gration. Table I presents a brief outline of their essential features. After a consideration of certain aspects of the provisions of these laws, their administration in the major seaports will be surveyed. It will then be shown how the increasing opposition by business inter- ests to state legislation, culminating in decisions by the Supreme Court declaring such regulation unconstitutional, eventually paved the way for the 1882 Act of Congress. I. THE STATUTORY BACKGROUND Nine of the thirteen colonies reflected in their enactments the desire to protect the community from the burden of foreigners likely to 1 Federal space and sanitation requirements, however, date back to 1819. Federal legis- lation is conveniently compiled in U.S. Immigration Commission, Reports, vol. XXXIX (Washington, 1911). Cf. John Higham, Strangers in the Land (New Brunswick, N. J.; Rutgers University Press, 1955), p. 44. This article does not discuss legislation enacted in a number of states which barred foreign convicts. - The author acknowledges with gratitude the many helpful suggestions made by Professor Carter Goodrich, who super- vised his doctoral thesis "Public Poor Relief in America, 1790-1860" (Columbia University, 1952) from which much of the material for this article is taken.
    [Show full text]
  • Families Coping Without Earnings Or Government Cash Assistance
    Families Coping without Earnings or Government Cash Assistance Sheila R. Zedlewski Sandi Nelson The Urban Institute with Kathryn Edin Northwestern University Heather Koball Kate Pomper Tracy Roberts The Urban Institute Occasional Paper Number 64 Assessing the New Federalism An Urban Institute Program to Assess Changing Social Policies Families Coping without Earnings or Government Cash Assistance Sheila R. Zedlewski Sandi Nelson The Urban Institute with Kathryn Edin Northwestern University Heather Koball Kate Pomper Tracy Roberts The Urban Institute Occasional Paper Number 64 The Urban Institute 2100 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 Assessing Phone: 202.833.7200 the New Fax: 202.429.0687 Federalism E-mail: [email protected] An Urban Institute http://www.urban.org Program to Assess Changing Social Policies Copyright © February 2003. The Urban Institute. All rights reserved. Except for short quotes, no part of this paper may be reproduced in any form or utilized in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the Urban Institute. This report is part of the Urban Institute’s Assessing the New Federalism project, a multiyear effort to monitor and assess the devolution of social programs from the federal to the state and local levels. Alan Weil is the project director. The project analyzes changes in income support, social services, and health programs. In collaboration with Child Trends, the project studies child and family well-being. This study was funded by the Smith Richardson Foundation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. The Assess- ing the New Federalism project is currently supported by The Annie E.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Child Welfare Workers
    Supporting Child Welfare Workers Invest in the workforce, invest in NYS’ children and families New York State Citizen Review Panels 2019 Annual Report Supporting Child Welfare Workers Invest in the workforce Invest in NYS' children and families NYS Citizen Review Panels The New York State (NYS) Citizen Review Panels (the Panels) for Child Protective Services (CPS) are important conduits for public sentiment and offer an external perspective on the efficacy of New York State’s child protective policies, practices, programs, and fiscal priorities. Panel members, appointed by the Governor or the NYS Legislature, are volunteers with a breadth of experience and knowledge in child welfare practice and law, social work, education, and technology, among other areas. Each of the three Panels has up to 13 members. Of those members, the Governor appoints seven, and the Senate President and Speaker of the Assembly appoint three each. The Western Panel covers the 17 counties in the western region of the State. The New York City Panel covers the five boroughs of New York City. The Eastern Panel covers the remaining 40 counties. The Panels are authorized by both State and Federal law to examine the policies, procedures, and practices of the state and local departments of social services and, where appropriate, the outcome of specific cases. The Panels are authorized to hold public hearings and to evaluate the extent to which the agencies are effectively discharging their child protection responsibilities. The Panels have reasonable access to public and private facilities receiving public funds to provide child welfare services within the Panel jurisdiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Hunger Is No Accident
    HUNGER IS NO ACCIDENT: New York and Federal Welfare Policies Violate the Human Right to Food This report is produced by the New York City Welfare Reform and Human Rights Documentation Project This report was made possible by funding from: The Ford Foundation Mazon: A Jewish Response to Hunger The Rose and Sherle Wagner Foundation The Shaler Adams Foundation The Strategic Alliance Fund For a free copy of this report, please contact the Urban Justice Center’s Human Rights Project 666 Broadway, 10th Floor _ New York, NY 10012 Tel: (212) 533-0540 _ Fax: (212) 533-4598 E-mail: [email protected] or download a copy from our website at www.ujchumanrights.org © 2000 New York City Welfare Reform and Human Rights Documentation Project Permission is hereby granted to reprint any portion of this report for any non-commercial reasons. New York City Welfare Reform and Human Rights Documentation Project The New York City Welfare Reform and Human Rights Documentation Project is a collaboration of anti- poverty organizations that work together to monitor the implementation and impact of welfare reform in New York City. Trained monitors gather quantitative and qualitative data that document the experiences of welfare applicants, recipients or former recipients throughout New York City. Using this data, the Documentation Project produces and disseminates reports in order to continue the push for a higher standard of government accountability for meeting basic human needs. The Documentation Project is coordinated by: Community Food Resource Center
    [Show full text]
  • Up from Dependency: a New National Public Assistance Strategy
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 316 592 UD 026 5a4 AUTHOR Weinberg, Daniel; Germanis, Peter TITLE Up from Dependency: A New National Public Assistance Strategy. Supplement 4: Research Studies and Bibliography. INSTITUTION Interagency Low Income Opportunity Advisory Board, Washington, DC. PUB DATE Apr 98 NOTE 200p.; For other volumes in this series, see UD 026 579-584 and UD 027 261. AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) -- Reference Materials Bibliographies (131) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC08 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Bibliographies; Community Programs; Employment Programs; Family (Sociological Unit); Federal Programs; Literature Reviews; Migration; Policy Formation; Poverty; *Poverty Programs; Program Development; Program Evaluation? *Public Policy; Research Methodology; Social Science Research; Social Services; State Programs; Taxes; Unwed Mothers; *Welfare Services IDENTIFIERS Aid to Families with Dependent Children; Child Support; *Dependency (Economic); Food Stamp Program ABSTRACT Twenty years after the War on Poverty was launched, dependency on public support remains widespread. Part 1 of this report summarizes current research concerning the following issues affecting welfare programs:(1) evaluating the economic effects of welfare;(2) dynamics of dependency;(3) welfare and work; (4) welfare and family structure;(5) welfare and child support; (6) elfare and migration;(7) attitudes, the upperclass, and the intergenerational transmission of welfare dependency;
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix O Consultation Letters
    APPENDIX O CONSULTATION LETTERS C e--, fC(( Ht=>/ (>-J ~I c.LoG ~'~.- New York Stafe Offlco 01 Pa r1<s, RecTsstfoh: B nd Hlaloria Preservation Histol'ic Preservattoll Field SeNle&s EI ureau Pe,ble~s Ishind, PO Box 189'. waterford. New Vork 12108-0189" 518-237-8643 June Paul L. Piciulo, Ph.D. Program Director Radioactive waste Management Program Department of Energy P.O. Box 191 West Valley, NY 14171 Dear Dr. Piciulo: Re: DOE West Valley Demonstration Project Ashford, Cattaraugus county 95PR1233 Thank you for requesting the comments of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). We have reviewed the materials submitted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the relevant implementing regulations. Based upon this review, it is the SHPO's op~n~on that the West Valley Demonstration project Site (the site of the former Nuclear Fuels Service Irradiated Fuels Processing Plant) is not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. When responding, please be sure to refer to the SHPO project review (PR) number noted above. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (518) 237-8643 ext. 255. er ly, l;Y( ~.D. obert D. Historic Preservation Coordinator Field Services Bureau RDK:cm Art"Equal Opporh.mltylAflIrmativ9 Action Ag'l:lncy Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project 10282 Rock Springs Road West Valley, NY 14171-9799 July 18, 2008 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3817 Luker Road Cortland,NY 13045 SUBJECT: Rare Species Consultation for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the Wesi Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center Dear Sir or Madam: The purpose ofthis letter is to notify you that the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Changes in New York Welfare and Work, Child Care, and Child Welfare Systems Lynne Fender, Carolyn O’Brien, Terri Thompson, Kathleen Snyder, and Roseana Bess
    An Urban Institute Assessing the New Federalism Program to Assess Changing Social Policies THE URBAN INSTITUTE State Update No. 12, September 2002 Recent Changes in New York Welfare and Work, Child Care, and Child Welfare Systems Lynne Fender, Carolyn O’Brien, Terri Thompson, Kathleen Snyder, and Roseana Bess Introduction gram, Safety Net Assistance (SNA). SNA, With welfare reform, New York’s cash financed with state and local funds, incor- assistance program for families underwent porates and expands Home Relief, New a substantial philosophical shift. A system York’s former General Assistance program New York’s welfare formerly focused on prompt and accurate that made cash benefits available to child- delivery of cash benefits was required to less adults for up to two years. SNA con- reform program shifted change into an employment-focused, tinues New York’s long-standing commit- work-first program. Interest in making ment to aiding poor households by provid- away from cash these changes began well before New ing cash benefits to those not eligible for York’s new welfare program was signed FA, including income-eligible families assistance and skill into law in August 1997, but the program’s exceeding the 60-month TANF time limit, final form took some time to work out. The children living apart from any adult rela- development to final legislative compromise softened some tive, families of persons refusing drug of the most dramatic plans for overhauling screening, and legal aliens during their emphasizing a strong the existing welfare system that Governor first five years in the country. After two Pataki had put forward in 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • The Traveler's Aid Society
    Molloy College DigitalCommons@Molloy Faculty Works: History and Political Science 2016 The rT aveler's Aid Society: Moral Reform and Social Work in New York City, 1907-1916 Eric C. Cimino Ph.D. Molloy College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.molloy.edu/hps_fac Part of the United States History Commons, and the Women's History Commons DigitalCommons@Molloy Feedback Recommended Citation Cimino, Eric C. Ph.D., "The rT aveler's Aid Society: Moral Reform and Social Work in New York City, 1907-1916" (2016). Faculty Works: History and Political Science. 3. https://digitalcommons.molloy.edu/hps_fac/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Molloy. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Works: History and Political Science by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Molloy. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. The Travelers’ Aid Society: Moral Reform and Social Work in New York City, 1907–1916 Eric C. Cimino, Molloy College n director James Gray’s recent film The Immigrant (2014), a Polish Iimmigrant named Ewa is awaiting deportation at Ellis Island when she encounters a man who claims to be a worker for the Travelers’ Aid Society. The man, Bruno, promises Ewa a safe place to stay and a good job if she will leave the island with him.1 Having no other options, she agrees. Bruno escorts her off the island to an apartment on the Lower East Side, where Ewa senses that something is not right. Her initial suspicions are confirmed when the next day Bruno takes her to a seedy burlesque theater where she is put to work as a seamstress.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals of New York
    CHECKLIST OF AMPHIBIANS, REPTILES, BIRDS AND MAMMALS OF NEW YORK STATE Including Their Legal Status Eastern Milk Snake Moose Blue-spotted Salamander Common Loon New York State Artwork by Jean Gawalt Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Fish and Wildlife Page 1 of 30 February 2019 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Diversity Group 625 Broadway Albany, New York 12233-4754 This web version is based upon an original hard copy version of Checklist of the Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals of New York, Including Their Protective Status which was first published in 1985 and revised and reprinted in 1987. This version has had substantial revision in content and form. First printing - 1985 Second printing (rev.) - 1987 Third revision - 2001 Fourth revision - 2003 Fifth revision - 2005 Sixth revision - December 2005 Seventh revision - November 2006 Eighth revision - September 2007 Ninth revision - April 2010 Tenth revision – February 2019 Page 2 of 30 Introduction The following list of amphibians (34 species), reptiles (38), birds (474) and mammals (93) indicates those vertebrate species believed to be part of the fauna of New York and the present legal status of these species in New York State. Common and scientific nomenclature is as according to: Crother (2008) for amphibians and reptiles; the American Ornithologists' Union (1983 and 2009) for birds; and Wilson and Reeder (2005) for mammals. Expected occurrence in New York State is based on: Conant and Collins (1991) for amphibians and reptiles; Levine (1998) and the New York State Ornithological Association (2009) for birds; and New York State Museum records for terrestrial mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • A Regional Study of Secular and Sectarian Orphanages and Their Response to Progressive Era Child-Saving Reforms, 1880-1930
    Closer Connections: A Regional Study of Secular and Sectarian Orphanages and Their Response to Progressive Era Child-Saving Reforms, 1880-1930 A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Department of History of the College of Arts and Sciences by Debra K. Burgess B.A. University of Cincinnati June 2012 M.A. University of Cincinnati April 2014 Committee Chair: Mark A. Raider, Ph.D. 24:11 Abstract Closer Connections: A Regional Study of Secular and Sectarian Orphanages and Their Response to Progressive Era Child-Saving Reforms, 1880-1930 by Debra K. Burgess Child welfare programs in the United States have their foundation in the religious traditions brought to the country up through the late nineteenth century by immigrants from many European nations. These programs were sometimes managed within the auspices of organized religious institutions but were also found among the ad hoc efforts of religiously- motivated individuals. This study analyzes how the religious traditions of Catholicism, Judaism, and Protestantism established and maintained institutions of all sizes along the lines of faith- based dogma and their relationship to American cultural influences in the Midwest cities of Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh during the period of 1880-1930. These influences included: the close ties between (or constructive indifference exhibited by) the secular and sectarian stakeholders involved in child-welfare efforts, the daily needs of children of immigrants orphaned by parental disease, death, or desertion, and the rising influence of social welfare professionals and proponents of the foster care system.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-New Deal Work Relief in Onondaga County, New York, 1931-1933
    EMERGENCY EMPLOYMENT, PUBLIC ENJOYMENT: PRE-NEW DEAL WORK RELIEF IN ONONDAGA COUNTY, NEW YORK, 1931-1933 A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Grant S. Johnson August 2014 © Grant S. Johnson 2014 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the impact of the Onondaga County Emergency Work Bureau (OCEWB) on Onondaga County from 1931 to 1933. The OCEWB was created as part of the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration (TERA), a pre-New Deal work relief initiative by Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The work begins with an examination of the history of work relief in New York State before the Great Depression, followed by a discussion of the formation of TERA, which allowed for the creation of the Onondaga County Emergency Work Bureau. The projects, personnel, challenges, and ultimate dissolution of the OCEWB are discussed with an emphasis on local political conflicts that stymied potential successful projects. Two case studies, the Onondaga Lake Parkway and Village of Jordan Erie Canal Park, are undertaken to illustrate the impact of the OCEWB on different parts of the county from the 1930s to the present day. iii BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Grant Johnson was born in Dallas, Texas on August 31, 1979. Late that year, he moved with his family to Downers Grove, Illinois, and then to Manlius, New York in 1990. In 1997 he entered Syracuse University in Syracuse, New York. While at Syracuse, Grant dual-majored in Anthropology and Women’s Studies. He toured the country as a musician for a few years following college, and moved to Cypress, California in 2004.
    [Show full text]