Social Science Abuse, Social Policy, and Defining Your Goals
A recent Pew Research survey revealed that Americans really want politicians to talk about education, the economy, and care of the poor and needy. This isn’t a review of the report or the relevant statistics. The numbers aren’t all that important. What matters is that politicians and talking heads are probably going to talk about welfare, job programs, education and training policies, and trade policy.
Talk about certain issues, like welfare, tends to stir emotions. People reach in mental file drawers and pull out their convictions about government programs, welfare, and the type of person who gets welfare. Politicians and pundits know this sort of thing happens. They will encourage it. You and your neighbor might not be ready to defend yourself against unscientific explanations and unscientific policy ideas.
Three Things That Make Social Science Abuse Sticky
This issue has at least three elements to it. Elsewhere, I’ve written about the power of keeping things vague. That is the first reason that ad ideas and lies about welfare take hold. People keep needing welfare, so maybe government programs just make people dependent on handouts. Right?
That couldn’t be less true, probably. The second reason that politicians can sell us bad ideas about welfare is the lack of a standard of success. They either cannot define what success looks like or choose not to. Or, like that generic welfare hater above, people say that one person using welfare for years is one too many people.
Thirdly, social science abuse takes hold because people are low on time. We hear a prescription to fix welfare. We hear an explanation of why people stay on welfare. The ideas make sense and maybe come with some relevant stats. The package looks good, so we accept it. We are low on time. Whether food stamps hurt poor people more than help is probably way down your list of things to think about. Whether you lean liberal or conservative, you tend to accept whatever supports your ideological view on welfare. And then you get on with your day.
How Policy Debates Work
Watch for politicians to throw out a story, a couple of numbers, maybe a Dollar amount and tell you that we need to do X or Y to fix welfare. The plan may work. It may even line up with your own political beliefs or morals. Or maybe not. The point is to be aware of how politicians and talking heads might fog up the issue.
How Policy Debates Should Work
In an ideal world, we’d hear about research on welfare. Where does this program or that program really help? Why does it help? What policies or programs reduce the need for welfare? How do we know? One side can make a case for more welfare spending based on need or for cutting this program and expanding that one, based on numbers. Even better, they can share the research that supports their idea. Instead, politicians can fall into appealing to our emotions.
Lack of time and lack of specialized knowledge can also handicap people who truly want to understand social issues. That’s a subject you’ll learn more about in the next article.
