The most surprising thing for me from Melissa’s presentation was actually something positive. I did not realize that the state of Georgia ranked so well in the United States in our child welfare system. Since Georgia ranks so poorly in other areas like school performance, I assumed we ranked poorly in other areas as well. This was very interesting for me to learn about and refreshing to hear that Georgia does well compared to other states.

It was also refreshing to hear Melissa talk about the positive side of the child welfare system and all of the good work that they do in helping keep children safe. I think that we hear too often about the negative side of the system. As Melissa discussed, we often only hear about the death and the mistakes of the child welfare system. I think she made a really valid point that these stories are “outliers” and not the norm for our system.

I was not aware of the dramatic effects that these stories can make. For example, it was interesting to see how the rates for foster care dramatically rose after the case of Terrell Peterson. I knew that stories like these certainly can change the perceptions of the public, but it was interesting to hear about how the system was actually impacted as well.

This legislative session, I think a lot of things were at play. First of all, the session was really short and I think this certainly impacted the outcome of a lot of the legislation. The media and news stories also had an impact on the legislative session. The stories of the children who died after their abuse had been reported has an impact on the session and legislators used these anecdotes to capture the public.

The single most important thing we can do to improve the creation of social policy in the area of child welfare is to educate and advocate. I believe in education and making people more informed about the realities of issues. I think that child welfare hits home with a lot of people and can evoke emotional responses that may not be true for other issues. The more awareness we have about how hard social workers, case managers, and other people working in child welfare work every day to ensure the safety of children, the more support these people will have. As Melissa mentioned, a lot of the issues in the child welfare system comes back to overburdened and underpaid workers. The public needs to be educated on this reality.

Upon watching the “Sick Around America” and “Sick Around the World” videos and reading more about the current healthcare system in the United States, it is obvious that the healthcare system in the United States is broken. I definitely think there is a lot we can learn from other countries, such as Japan, and the ACA is certainly a step in the right direction and in the next several years, we can see the results of it.

First, I’ll start with a personal anecdote. I am very fortunate that as someone under the age of 26 I can still remain on my mom’s health insurance plan, which is through her employer. Similar to the story that Dr. Palmiter shared in her blog, my mother’s price for health insurance for my family increased this year. Because my mom is still paying for her own student loans from getting her doctoral degree, she is still paying a mortgage on her home as well as a car payment, and the increased cost of healthcare for my dad who has Parkinson’s disease, it is not easy for her to pay more for our health coverage. Upon reading Your Health Plan Changing? Employers, Insurers Largely to Blame, I had a little more perspective on the reasons why this happened. Just as Dr. P said in her post, I am going to have to wait and see if anything changes in the next few years until I make my judgment on the ACA’s cost to my family. And though it may not seem beneficial to me as an individual at this moment, I know that many other people are really benefitting from its implementation. I also know that if I am unable to find a job that offers health benefits after I turn 26, I will be thankful for having more affordable health coverage available to me if needed.

In thinking of my own story, the profile of the 23-year old in “Sick Around America” stood out to me. He would have benefitted from the change in law that allows young adults to remain on their parents’ health insurance until the age of 26 instead of ending coverage at the time they graduate college. As jobs are difficult to find for someone fresh out of undergrad, particularly jobs that offer health benefits, this policy change was incredibly needed. This guy may have been able to pursue a career in something he was passionate about and not had to settle for his current job in order to have health benefits.

One of the stories from “Sick Around America” that will certainly be changed by the Affordable Care Act is Paul Stephens, the man who lost his job and was left without health insurance. Due to his pre-existing conditions such as heart problems and diabetes, the private insurance turned him down for coverage. Under the ACA, no one can be denied coverage due to any pre-existing conditions (Healthcare.gov). His story is one that I found very frustrating and devastating. It is crazy that the cost of healthcare is so high that someone would have to sell all of their belongings, file for bankruptcy, and relocate their lives due to their medial bills. According to the “Sick Around America” documentary, around 700,000 Americans go bankrupt due to medical bills every year. This number is staggering and a huge red flag for the cost of health care as well as the number of Americans uninsured or underinsured.

Though I am convinced that the Affordable Care Act is going to do more good than harm, I still have a lot of questions. For example, I am hearing from friends and acquaintances that it is going to be hard for them to afford the mandated health coverage. Some of them are deciding to pay the penalty and remain uninsured because they claim the cost will be lower than paying for the costly insurance. Of course, it leads me to wonder how they will pay for medical bills if they were to have a medical emergency. Will they end up like Paul Stephens who was forced to file for bankruptcy due to hospital bills?  I definitely think that the ACA will become clearer once the “kinks” are worked out and we can see the changes over time and people’s doubts may turn into hopefulness.

How did DeParle change my perception of the ability of social policy’s ability to combat poverty?

After reading the first several chapters of The American Dream by Jason DeParle, I have a slightly different perception of the ability of social policy to combat poverty, mostly that it is more complicated that I once believed. Coming from an undergraduate program in Sociology, I began reading this book knowing that there are structural barriers to ending poverty and it cannot be fixed with just a simple policy change. I believe that poverty cannot be combatted unless some things change on a societal level. However, I was not aware of how complicated the “war on poverty” has been and the intricate history and key people involved. I definitely have even less faith in our current political system after reading DeParle in being able to make any major strides in combatting poverty. Knowing how power and money impacts the decisions of lawmakers and leaders, I feel that it is unlikely for policy to eradicate poverty. DeParle’s account of welfare during the early 90s is evidence there is a lot of push and pull, especially when the budget is an issue.  Just as with President Clinton’s “end welfare as we know it” campaign, there is always going to be criticism on both sides of the coin. Thinking about it in terms of our current system, I still believe that social policy can be changed for the better and that we can see some minor changes in the unemployment rate and the poverty rate. However, I don’t foresee any significant changes in the current poverty issue in the current political climate.

In the stories of the women who relied on welfare as depicted in DeParle’s The American Dream, it is apparent that welfare is not combatting poverty for them and the future does not look promising. Even with their monthly check, the women are struggling to make ends meet and are never able to live without worry of money. In this “real life” example, I think it is evidence for the inability of the past and current welfare system to actually combat poverty, but instead just keep people barely “above water”.

Does DeParle believe that there is a liberty-equality trade-off?

On one hand, I do not think that DeParle believes there is a trade-off between liberty and equality. I think that the overall message of The American Dream is that the “pull yourself up by your boot straps” mentality is not true for all Americans (or people in general for that matter). I don’t think that DeParle would agree with the negative liberty side of Stone’s description, which views liberty as something that must be compromised for people with financial resources in order for impoverished people to have equality. DeParle would argue that the opportunities available to people with wealth, access, and resources far outmeasures anything that these people would have to “give up” in order for there to be more equality for those without access to the same things. I get a sense from DeParle that he would believe that everyone benefits whenever equality is reached and that it does not necessarily lead to anyone’s liberties being compromised. Therefore, DeParle’s overall view of liberty would be on the positive side of the argument and he would say that there is not a trade-off.

However, I think that the stories of Angie, Opal, and Jewell give some argument that DeParle may believe that there is a trade-off in America for people who are in need of government aid. These women were forced to give up their liberty in order to have a shot at “equality” in a sense. They were not free to live life as they pleased. For instance, in order to maintain the same income from their welfare check, they had to hide their employment. If they had true liberty, they would be able to report their work without an issue. In order to receive more in welfare, these women also moved to a different city. Their lives were relocated to Milwaukee due to the knowledge of having a chance at more income.  Waiting for months to hear back about jobs and having to wait for hours in order to talk with someone are also examples of how their lives were driven by the welfare system. In summary, my argument is that the women whose stories are told in DeParle’s American Dream prove that any shot at equality by using the American welfare system forces people to give up liberties. Therefore, I would argue that this means that DeParle may support the notion that there is a liberty-welfare trade-off if one views it from the perspective of someone who is enrolled in the welfare system.

The current social policy issue that I chose to discuss in my first blog post is raising the federal minimum wage. I first decided to discuss this when I heard a friend discussing how President Obama issued an executive order to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 for federal contractors. I researched the issue and found several current news stories discussing it, including one from Fox News, which helped me to get a better understanding. After more research on the background of the issue, I decided it would be best to break this blog post into sections to give a clearer idea of this issue. I also realize that this issue has a lot of “layers” and I was not able to research every aspect of it. From the articles I read, I was able to form my own opinion on the issue but I am certainly open to hearing from others and how they feel about it.

The Issue and the Debate

The current federal minimum wage in the United States is $7.25 per hour and though some states have set theirs higher than that, many have not. I found a great resource to see the different wages set across the United States from the United States Department of Labor.

It is also important to note that the heated debate of whether or not to raise minimum wage has been going on for many years in the United States. Those who believe that minimum wage should not be increased think that raising it will lead to fewer jobs because the price of labor will increase. However, supporters of increasing the minimum wage believe that the current wage is far too low to maintain a decent standard of living for workers (Chicago Tribune).

Support for the Increase

As I researched the issue, I discovered that Tom Harkin, a Senator in Iowa, has been one of the strongest supporters for the increase of minimum wage. In July of 2012, he introduced a bill called the Fair Minimum Wage Act. This is also one of the main components of Harkin’s Rebuild America Act, which was introduced in March 2012.

I also found recent support for this policy. Representative Keith Ellison from Minnesota has been urging President Obama to sign an executive order to increase the minimum wage for federal contract workers for several months. This is due to the fact that members of Congress have not been able to push this through the legislative process due to some strong opposition of the policy. If interested, you can read more about that here (Huffington Post).

These legislators are just two examples of the support behind raising minimum wage and this issue will continue to be one of heated debate.

Obama’s Executive Order

One of the powers of the president is to bypass the legislative branch and issue an executive order. During President Obama’s 2014 State of the Union Address he stated that he would be using this power to increase the federal minimum wage for federal contract workers.  This means that any person who is a federal contract worker and begins a new job will have the pay rate of at least $10.10 per hour.

This seems like a very good step in the right direction at first glance. However, this only impacts a very small percentage of workers in the U.S. Upon researching this further, it appears that only new federal contract workers will experience this pay increase, so those already in a contract will not reap the benefits. According to an article from Daily Finance, in 2009, there were only 2 million people who worked as federal contractors and many of those already made above minimum wage.

There are numerous examples of Americans struggling just to get by even though they are working 40 hours a week or more due to low pay. From my perspective, it seems like a “no brainer” to increase the federal minimum wage for all workers, not just those who are federal contractors. However, many people disagreed with the President’s decision and certainly don’t agree with expanding it to include all workers. From the outside looking in, it would seem that now is the perfect time for someone to be able to pass legislation increasing minimum wage. However, the President had to bypass the legislative branch and use his executive powers just to help a small percentage of people.

I know that raising minimum wage for even a few people is a positive change, but I think that more can be done. All legislators need to recognize the dire need for wage increases for working Americans who are barely getting by on their current income. I realize that many believe that increasing wages will lead to fewer jobs, but I think that a compromise can be made if both sides work together. I don’t think President Obama’s executive order was a bad move necessarily, but I think everyone needs to examine exactly who this is going to impact and how much of an impact it is really going to make before it is considered monumental.

Hello, this is my first blog post! Yay!

Welcome to your brand new blog at sites@gsu.edu!

To get started, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.

For assistance, visit the comprehensive support site, check out the Edublogs User Guide guide or stop by The Edublogs Forums to chat with other edubloggers.

For personal support, you can attend Georgia State’s training on Edublogs or stop by The Exchange for one-on-one support.

You can also reference the free publication, The Edublogger, which is jammed with helpful tips, ideas and more.