David Stoesz

Why not social service vouchers

THE RECENTATTENTION to the possibility of welfare reform presents an opportunity for welfare professionals to propose some changes of their own. In the current context, welfare reform does not mean recycling old notions that call for more administration, more staff, and, inevitably, more money. Instead, revenue-neutral innovations are needed. So, why not propose the implementation of a system of vouchers to deliver public social services? Vouchers have been used successfully to distribute services to populations associated with welfare programs. The GI Bill offered returning veterans a choice of educational providers. Significantly, blacks used their GI benefits more than did other groups. I Medicaid, enacted during the War on Poverty, provided poor people with access to health care that they had not had before. By the 1980s, Medicaid recipients, for the first time, were using health services at the same rate as were their middle-class compatriots.? Section 8 of the 1974 Housing and Community Development Act offered thousands of poor people the opportunity to escape the gulags of public housing. To be sure, the use of vouchers in these programs has not been trouble-free. Vouchers may not be used optimally because clients are not as knowledgeable about service providers as they might be. Service providers occasionally discriminate against voucher bearers and bilk the government for services not provided. Despite these problems, vouchers have an enduring appeal. Short of government provision of a ser-

Packaging the conservative revolution

‘Packaging the Conservative Revolution’ assesses the role of conservative think‐tanks, particularly the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Heritage Foundation, in engineering conservative prominence in national affairs. While AEI and Heritage have been particularly effective in promoting conservatism to legislators and the public, serious problems emerge from their analyses. The anti‐welfare state bias of AEI projects reflects the dominance of Fortune 500 executives on its Board of Directors. Theoretical manipulation by AEI project directors raises questions about the purpose of their work. Heritage, for its part, has proposed analogues to governmental programs. Notably, Heritage has provided important intellectual support to the traditionalist movement. As conservative think‐tanks grow and influence national affairs, the impartiality and quality of their work become important factors in understanding national politics.

Political correctness, social work, and the breakdown of the child abuse system

This article examines the relationship between political correctness, social work, and the breakdown of the child abuse system. Specifically, the authors explore the myth of the classlessness of child abuse by providing a brief overview of studies relating socioeconomic factors to child abuse. In addition, the article examines groups that stand to gain from perpetuating the myth of classlessness, including liberal politicians and policymakers, academicians, and psychotherapists. The authors then proceed to examine social work training for child protective services, including the preparedness of social workers for child welfare practice, the dearth of trained social workers in child protective services #opCPS#cp, and the politicization of the social work curriculum. Lastly, this article investigates the breakdown of the child abuse system with specific reference to high turnover rates among CPS workers; the declassification of public welfare jobs; and problems in the screening, investigation, and provision...