Encouraging Participation of All Groups

I think it is common knowledge that there are certain groups of people who are less likely to vote and participate in other political activities. Before reading the Soss article, I assumed these groups were divided based on race, economic status, education...etc. I gave little thought to the extent that policy structures unique to each group influence and shape the way they view government. As Soss explains, it may not be that welfare overall decreases a groups participation but rather the structure of certain welfare programs send negative cues to people about how the overall government agencies operate. Soss shows how recipients of AFDC are less likely to go to the polls that other individuals. This may largely be due to the nature in which these recipients are treated through the process of getting welfare aide. For example, recipients of AFDC must frequently prove that they are eligible for assistance and constantly fear their aide will be terminated. These people are at the mercy of the caseworkers and fear speaking up or defending their stituation. These fears influence their opinion of government overall causing AFDC participants to refrain from becoming active members in the political system.

I have to wonder if these insitutions are built in such a way to specifically discourage participation from a certain class of individuals. Many Americans have a negative view of welfare recipients and believe they are draining the wealth of other Americans. As Schneider talked about, there groups within the population which posses different levels of influence over policy, due to their power and positive or negative reputations within a society. The advantaged group is the group that has power and a positive reputation within society. AFDC recipients could fall in the group which is powerful (due to the number of individuals) but negatively viewed by society. Schnieider calls this group the contenders. Often, policy makers will impose a cost on the contenders that sends the message to other groups (mainly the advantaged group who the policiy makers are most responsive towards) that policy makers are interested in punishing this group for their abuse of power and their sefishness (receiving welfare). It seems logical that the construction of institutions like AFDC are meant to send the message to all groups that the government is going to make these contenders (welfare recipeints) work for their handouts. Therefore, while policy makers might be hesitant to make the availability of welfare handouts more accesible, because they may upset advantaged groups with the message that these actions send, these steps would no doubt improve the political participation of many Americans. If the contenders develop a more positive view of welfare agencies such as the AFDC, they will likely view the government overall as being interested in their well being.