Dividing Citizens

1. New Deal's Dual Legacy: Expanded Citizenship, Deepened Divisions

The New Deal constituted the decisive break of the American polity with the old regime of dual federalism, and the transformation toward a more centralized administrative state whose reach extended into the lives of ordinary citizens.

Transformative era. The New Deal fundamentally reshaped American governance, moving beyond the limited federalism of the past to establish a national administrative state. This "constitutional revolution" introduced new social and economic dimensions of citizenship, promising greater security and welfare for Americans. Policies like the National Labor Relations Act, Social Security Act, and Fair Labor Standards Act marked a permanent expansion of federal authority into daily life.

Unintended stratification. Despite this expansion, the New Deal inadvertently created a "divided citizenship." While white men were largely incorporated into national, standardized programs, women and minority men often remained subject to variable, discretionary, and often nonliberal state-administered policies. This division wasn't always intentional but emerged from complex political and institutional dynamics.

Structured governance. The book introduces a "structured-governance" approach, examining how policy design and institutional arrangements shape citizenship. It asks:

• On what basis is policy bestowed?
• Who is included/excluded?
• How is it administered?
• What rules and procedures apply?
• What are the political processes and loci of development?
  The answers reveal how groups are incorporated, shaping civic and social life.

2. Federalism's Paradox: National Progress, State-Level Discretion

In effect, the new welfare state treated men and women like members of separate sovereignties.

States as laboratories, or barriers. While federalism is often lauded for fostering democratic participation and policy experimentation, the book argues that in the context of the New Deal, it often undercut full inclusion and equal participation. State-level policies, particularly those for social welfare, tended to be less inclusive, more variable, and often inferior to national standards.

Police power and economic competition. Historically, states wielded "police power" to preserve local social order, often at odds with individual rights, and were less restrained by federal oversight. This power, combined with interstate economic competition (the "race to the bottom" to attract businesses), made states reluctant to implement generous or uniform social and labor policies.

• Police Power: Used to uphold racial segregation (Jim Crow) and paternalistic labor laws for women.
• Economic Competition: States feared increasing business costs, leading to lower benefits and weaker regulations.

Fragmented authority. The New Deal's federal-state partnerships, while expanding the reach of social policy, often left significant discretion to states. This fragmented authority allowed local prejudices and economic interests to shape who received benefits and under what conditions, creating vastly different experiences of citizenship across state lines.

3. Gendered Foundations: "Breadwinners" vs. "Dependents" in Policy

Most scholarship on gender and welfare state development assumes a relatively direct correspondence between intentions of policymakers and policy outcomes.

Beyond intentional sexism. The book challenges the notion that New Deal policies were simply the result of a conscious agenda to marginalize women. Instead, it highlights how gender inequality became institutionalized through a complex interplay of:

• Policymakers' reflexive reliance on Progressive Era traditions.
• Political imperatives and unintended consequences.
• Institutional factors and policy design.

Maternalism and paternalism. Progressive Era reforms, like mothers' pensions and protective labor laws, were "maternalist," recognizing women's role as mothers but often reinforcing their "dependent" status. Simultaneously, "paternalist" efforts for male breadwinners often failed. The New Deal, while seemingly more gender-neutral, built upon these foundations, prioritizing policies for male wage earners.

The "family wage" ideal. Many New Deal policymakers adhered to the "family wage" ideal, believing men's earnings should support families, allowing women to focus on unpaid domestic work. This assumption influenced policy design, leading to:

• Programs primarily for male "breadwinners."
• Special corollary programs for women that were often limited.
• Disregard for the economic realities of working women, who often supported families.

4. Old Age Insurance: A National Right for (Mostly) Men

The program that Armstrong and Brown had worked so hard to establish as the source of national, standardized rights of citizenship for elderly Americans had come to be, through the negligence of the CES and the actions of the Ways and Means Committee, geared primarily to men.

A new national right. Old Age Insurance (OAI), later Old Age and Survivors' Insurance (OASI), was designed as a contributory, rights-based program, distinct from "relief." It was intended to provide economic security for "independent" wage earners, primarily men, and was administered nationally with standardized procedures.

Exclusions and amendments. Despite initial efforts by Barbara Nachtrieb Armstrong to include survivors' benefits, these were initially omitted. Crucially, agricultural, domestic, and non-profit workers were excluded due to administrative concerns and Southern congressional pressure, disproportionately affecting women and minorities.

• Agricultural workers: 89.6% male, but many women worked unpaid.
• Domestic workers: 93.3% female, often non-white.
• Non-profit workers: 75.7% teachers, 74.6% religious workers, 64.3% social/welfare workers (mostly women).

Incorporating "dependents." The 1939 amendments added wives' and widows' benefits to OASI, incorporating married women as "dependents" into the national program. This broadened OASI's popular base but reinforced traditional gender roles and devalued women's paid labor, as women often received spousal benefits instead of their own earned, but lower, benefits. This was a strategic move to strengthen OASI against the popularity of OAA.

5. Old Age Assistance: State-Dependent, Discretionary Aid

The weakening of federal controls for old age assistance would have extensive implications in terms of both gender and race, given that already the coverage of the two programs for the elderly appeared to be quite sex and race specific.

Responding to popular demand. Old Age Assistance (OAA) was a federal grant-in-aid program for the elderly poor, designed to preempt more radical pension movements like the Townsend Plan. It was initially more equitable in its treatment of men and women than OAI, especially in states with strong populist movements.

Congressional weakening of standards. Southern congressmen, fearing federal interference in local racial hierarchies and labor systems, stripped OAA of national standards:

• Removed the "reasonable subsistence" clause, allowing states to set meager benefits.
• Softened language on merit-system hiring, preserving patronage.
• Allowed states to impose property restrictions and other eligibility criteria.

Variable and discriminatory implementation. OAA became highly variable by state, with low benefits in the South and high discretion for local officials. This led to racial discrimination, with lower benefits and underrepresentation for African Americans in Southern states.

• Benefit disparity: In 1940, OAA ranged from $7.87/month (Arkansas) to $37.87/month (California).
• Racial bias: Non-white recipients often received lower benefits, especially in the South.
• Discretionary rules: States imposed citizenship, moral, and residency requirements, often applied unevenly.

6. Unemployment Insurance: A Fragile Right, Unequal Access

Unemployment compensation must then be limited by strict definition to those persons who are ordinarily employed with a fair degree of regularity.

A contentious birth. Unemployment Insurance (UI) was the cornerstone of the Social Security Act, but its design was fiercely debated. While some advocated for a fully national system, the Committee on Economic Security (CES) ultimately adopted a "tax-offset" scheme, encouraging states to create their own UI laws with federal oversight. This preserved state autonomy but ensured widespread adoption.

Gender-neutral language, gendered impact. UI was ostensibly gender-neutral, focusing on "attachment to the labor force." However, this definition implicitly favored male breadwinners and disadvantaged women:

• Exclusions: Agricultural, domestic, seasonal, and part-time workers were excluded, disproportionately affecting women and minorities.
• Wage-related benefits: Women's lower wages meant lower benefits.
• "Casual workers": Women were often deemed "casual" or "intermittent" workers, seen as less deserving of benefits.

State-level restrictions on women. States developed restrictive eligibility rules that disproportionately affected women, often based on traditional gender roles:

• "Availability for work": Interpreted to mean full-time, regular hours, disadvantaging women with domestic responsibilities.
• "Domestic quits": Women leaving work due to pregnancy, childbirth, or marital obligations were often disqualified, deemed "voluntary" unemployment.
• "Suspect class": Women, especially married women, were viewed as "secondary workers" whose need for income was less legitimate.

7. Fair Labor Standards: National Reach, Gendered Gaps

The gender-neutral language of the law, though a tribute to equality between the sexes in an abstract sense, contrasted sharply with the gender-specific effects of the statute.

A new federal floor. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 established the first national minimum wage, maximum hours, and child labor prohibitions. It was a landmark achievement, upheld by the Supreme Court in 1941, overturning previous restrictive interpretations of the commerce clause and "freedom of contract."

Cautious scope and political exemptions. Despite the expanded judicial interpretation of "interstate commerce," the FLSA's coverage was cautiously defined, leaving out many low-wage workers. Political considerations, particularly the need for Southern congressional support, led to significant exemptions:

• Agricultural workers: Excluded, disproportionately affecting Southern Black and non-white workers.
• Domestic workers: Excluded, a heavily female and non-white occupation.
• Retail and service workers: Largely excluded, impacting many women's jobs.

Unequal impact. While the FLSA benefited women in covered industries like garment and textiles, it left the majority of low-paid women workers unprotected. In 1940, 62.1% of exempt female workers earned below the minimum annual salary, compared to 35.6% of exempt male workers. This meant women had the most to gain from coverage but were largely excluded.

8. Political Imperatives: Southern Veto and Administrative Choices

Southern members of Congress also insisted, however, on administrative arrangements that would preserve “states’ rights” and local autonomy.

Congressional power dynamics. The shape of New Deal federalism and its gendered outcomes were heavily influenced by congressional politics. Southern Democrats, holding key committee assignments due to unchallenged one-party rule and seniority, wielded a "southern veto" over legislation. They insisted on preserving states' rights to maintain racial hierarchies and low-wage labor systems.

Exclusions and discretion. This political leverage led to the exclusion of agricultural and domestic workers from national programs like OAI and FLSA, as these sectors were crucial to the Southern economy and disproportionately employed Black workers. For grant-in-aid programs like OAA and ADC, Southern congressmen ensured that federal oversight was minimal, allowing states broad discretion in setting eligibility and benefit levels.

Bureaucratic influence. While Congress played a crucial role, administrative officials also shaped outcomes. The Social Security Board (SSB), for instance, actively promoted OAI over OAA, using rhetoric that emphasized the "earned right" of male breadwinners. Their focus on strengthening the contributory system led to decisions that further marginalized public assistance programs, which disproportionately served women and minorities.

9. The "Woman Question": Unpaid Labor and Policy Blind Spots

There are those [women] who have never worked for a livelihood but have always been dependent upon others, a father, husband, son, or daughter.

Devaluing unpaid work. New Deal policies, particularly OAI and UI, were primarily structured around paid labor force participation. This framework inherently devalued the unpaid domestic and caregiving work predominantly performed by women. Policymakers often overlooked the economic contributions of homemakers, leading to their exclusion or secondary status in social insurance programs.

"Dependent" status. The inclusion of wives' and widows' benefits in OASI, while expanding coverage for women, explicitly framed them as "dependents" of male wage earners rather than as individuals with their own earned rights. This reinforced traditional gender roles and meant that women's security was tied to their marital status and their husband's employment history.

Policy blind spots. Despite the presence of prominent women reformers like Frances Perkins and Barbara Nachtrieb Armstrong, and the advocacy of groups like the Women's Bureau, the broader political and economic context often led to policy blind spots regarding women's unique needs. Issues like maternity benefits or the challenges of balancing paid work with domestic responsibilities were largely ignored or relegated to state-level discretion.

10. Consequences: Stratified Status, Fragmented Participation

Governed under separate sovereignties, men and women, further differentiated by class and race, gained very different and unequal forms of status in the political community.

Unequal status. Divided citizenship created qualitatively different experiences of state-citizen relations. Men in national programs were treated as "worthy, independent, and free" rights-bearing individuals, receiving benefits through standardized, routinized procedures. Women and minority men in state-administered programs were often seen as "dependent," subject to intrusive scrutiny, moralistic evaluations, and variable benefits.

Political fragmentation. This stratification also shaped political participation. Male-dominated labor unions focused their efforts on national policy, advocating for expanded social citizenship for workers. Women's reform organizations, however, were often forced to return to arduous, state-by-state campaigns for protective labor laws and improved welfare, perpetuating divisions within the women's movement itself.

Reinforced inequalities. The institutionalization of these disparities meant that social and economic inequalities were not merely reflected but actively reinforced by the state. The "American citizen" experience diverged sharply between a retired man receiving a national Social Security check and a poor mother navigating local welfare rules, solidifying distinct and unequal forms of belonging in the polity.

11. Enduring Divide: From New Deal to Modern Welfare Reform

At century’s close, however, the patterns of citizenship divided by gender seem reinvigorated once again, as governance in particular policy areas is being restored to the states.

Mid-century persistence. Divided citizenship persisted for decades after the New Deal. Wartime gains for women in the workforce were temporary, and most proposed universal social reforms failed due to conservative congressional forces and presidential preoccupation with war. States remained resistant to expanding social and labor policies, perpetuating uneven and often discriminatory governance.

Blurring boundaries (1960s-1970s). The Civil Rights Movement and the "second wave" of feminism, coupled with Supreme Court decisions, began to dismantle some aspects of divided citizenship. FLSA coverage expanded, and AFDC (formerly ADC) gained more national standards, limiting state discretion in areas like "suitable home" rules and residency requirements. This period saw a move towards more universal national social citizenship.

Reinventing the divide (1980s-1990s). However, the late 20th century witnessed a resurgence of devolutionary policies, particularly in welfare reform. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 abolished AFDC, replacing it with federal block grants and returning significant control to states. This re-established highly variable, discretionary, and often punitive systems for poor women and children, effectively "reinventing divided citizenship" and signaling a potential shift towards a more moralistic, coercive national government role in welfare.