Radical and mainstream social scientists still speak of the effect of President Ronald Reagan’s administration on the welfare state and the legacy of Great Society and Equal Opportunity programs, but, as indicated in a search of the American Sociological Review and Critical Sociology, there is less research focused on President Bill Clinton’s plan to end welfare as we knew it. Here we begin with an historical perspective on race and gender gaps, 1955–2016, including a consideration of macro-economic processes associated with postmodernism. Then we compare the effects of marital and family status on earnings, focusing on race and gender effects, at the beginning (1993) and end (2000) of the Clinton era. We find considerable support for the concerns raised by early radical critics, notably, evidence of an influx of low-income black single mothers. We consider the possibility that these are institutional rather than regime effects, in conclusion.
AvellarSSmockPJ (2003) Has the price of motherhood declined over time? A cross-cohort comparison of the motherhood wage penalty. Journal of Marriage and Family65(3): 597–607.
2.
BanksRR (2012) Is Marriage for White People? How the African American Marriage Decline Affects Everyone. New York, NY: Plume [Penguin, previously a Dutton edition).
3.
BaratzMSWhiteSB (1996) Childfare: A new direction in welfare reform. Urban Studies33(10): 1935–1944.
4.
BeckEMHoranPTolbertCM (1978) Stratification in a dual economy: A sectoral model of earnings determination. American Sociological Review43(5): 704–720.
5.
Ben-GadM (2004) The welfare effects of the Reagan deficits: A portfolio choice approach. Economic Inquiry42(3): 441–454.
6.
BianchiSMMilkieMASayerLC, et al. (2000) Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Social Forces79(1): 191–228.
7.
BlinderAS (1973) Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural estimates. The Journal of Human Resources8(4): 436–455.
8.
BudigMJEnglandP (2001) The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review66(2): 204–225.
9.
BurnhamL (2001) Welfare reform, family hardship, and women of color. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences: Reforming Welfare, Redefining Poverty557 (September): 38–48.
10.
CancioASEvansTDMaumeDJJr (1996) Reconsidering the declining significance of race: Racial differences in early career wages. American Sociological Review61(4): 541–556.
11.
CohenPN (2002) Cohabitation and the declining marriage premium for men. Work and Occupations29(3): 346–363.
12.
DaguerreA (2008) Blaming the poor again? The second phase of US welfare reform, 2000–2006. Social Policy & Administration42(4): 362–378.
13.
DavidsonN (2017) Crisis neoliberalism and the regimes of permanent exception. Critical Sociology43(4–5): 615–634.
14.
EnglandPBearakJBudigMJ, et al. (2016) Do highly paid, highly skilled women experience the largest motherhood penalty?American Sociological Review81(6): 1161–1189.
15.
GlaubnerR (2008) Race and gender in families and at work: The fatherhood wage premium. Gender & Society22(1): 8–30.
16.
HarveyD (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity. Cambridge: Blackwell.
17.
HodgesMJBudigMJ (2010) Who gets the daddy bonus? Organizational hegemonic masculinity and the impact of fatherhood on earnings. Gender & Society24(6): 717–745.
HoganR (2005) Political opportunity and capitalist crisis. In: TillyCKousisM (eds) Economic and Political Contention in Comparative Perspective. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press, 161–176.
20.
HoganR (2013) Deconstructing race, class, and gender inequality in personal earnings. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology50(2): 159–186.
21.
HoganRPerrucciCC (1998) Producing and reproducing class and status differences: Racial and gender gaps in U.S. employment and retirement income. Social Problems45(4): 528–549.
22.
HoganRPerrucciCC (2007a) Racial and gender income gaps. In: PerrucciRPerrucciCC (eds) The Transformation of Work in the New Economy: Sociological Readings. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
23.
HoganRPerrucciCC (2007b) Black women: Truly disadvantaged in the transition from employment to retirement income. Social Science Research36(3): 1184–1199.
24.
HoganRPerrucciCC (2014) Who gets the daddy bonus and who pays the cost?International Journal of Contemporary Sociology51(2): 117–144.
25.
HoganRPerrucciCCWilmothJ (2000) Gender inequality in employment and retirement income: Effects of marriage, industrial sector, and self-employment. In: DemosVSegalMT (eds) Advances in Gender Research, Vol. 4. Greenwich, CT: JAI, 27–54.
26.
JannB (2008) A Stata implementation of the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition. Stata Journal8(4): 453–479.
27.
KoningsM (2010) Neoliberalism and the American state. Critical Sociology36(5): 741–765.
28.
LeninVI (1972 [1939]) Imperialism: The Highest State of Capitalism. New York, NY: International Publishers.
29.
McIlweeJS (1988) Reducing occupational sex segregation: Explaining failure and success. Sociological Focus21(1): 35–51.
30.
MarxK (1967 [1867]) Capital, Vol. 1. New York, NY: International Publishers.
31.
MaherS (2017) The capitalist state, corporate political mobilization, and the origins of neoliberalism. Critical Sociology43(4–5): 779–797.
32.
MorrisA (1984) The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement: Black Communities Organizing for Change. New York, NY: Free Press.
33.
NavarroV (1988) Welfare states and their distributive effects: Is Reagan a closet Keynesian?Political Quarterly59(2): 219–235.
34.
OaxacaR (1973) Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets. International Economic Review14(3): 693–709.
35.
OzawaMN (1994) Women, children, and reform. AFFILIA9(4): 338–359.
36.
PivenFF (2001) Globalization, American politics, and welfare policy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Reforming Welfare, Redefining Poverty577(September): 26–37.
37.
QuadagnoJStreetD (2006) Recent trends in U.S. social welfare policy: Minor retrenchment or major transformation. Research on Aging28(3): 303–316.
38.
SomersMRBlockF (2005) From poverty to perversity: Ideas, markets, and institutions over 200 years of welfare debate. American Sociological Review70(2): 260–287.
39.
SouleSAOlzakS (2004) When do movements matter? The politics of contingency and the equal rights amendment. American Sociological Review69(4): 473–497.
40.
SouleSAMcAdamDMcCarthyJ, et al. (1999) Protest events: Cause or consequence of state action? The U.S. women’s movement and federal congressional activities, 1956–1979. Mobilization: An International Journal4(2): 239–256.
41.
TangTL-PSmith-BrandonVL (2001) From welfare to work: The endorsement of the money ethic among welfare recipients, welfare recipients in training programs, and employed past welfare recipients. Public Personal Management30(2): 241–260.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) (2015) Measuring the economy: A primer on gdp and national income and products accounts. Available (accessed 9 July 2018) at: http://www.bea.gov
45.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) (2017) Gross domestic product (GDP), percent change from preceding period. Available (accessed 1 August 2018) at: https://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gpd
46.
WaiteLJGallagherM (2000) The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. New York, NY: Doubleday.
47.
WrightEOPerroneL (1977) Marxist class categories and income inequality. American Sociological Review42(1): 32–55.
