State variation in the drug felony lifetime ban on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Why the modified ban matters
| Author | Brittany T Martin,Sarah KS Shannon |
| DOI | 10.1177/1462474519894982 |
| Published date | 01 October 2020 |
| Date | 01 October 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
State variation in the
drug felony lifetime ban
on Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families: Why
the modified ban matters
Brittany T Martin
University of Georgia, USA
Sarah KS Shannon
University of Georgia, USA
Abstract
The drug felony lifetime ban on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
affects thousands of individuals with felony drug convictions in the United States.
Federal law allows states to choose to opt out or modify the full ban. Prior research
has treated the ban as a binary outcome, characterizing anything but a full ban as a sign
of state reform of this harsh collateral consequence. We argue that modified versions
of the ban, which simultaneously allow greater access to public aid while also moni-
toring and sanctioning recipient behavior, have been overlooked but pose important
theoretical and empirical challenges to this narrative. To address this gap, we analyze
state discretion in the implementation of the drug felony lifetime ban on TANF receipt
between 1997 and 2010 utilizing a multilevel multinomial modeling strategy. Results
reveal that distinct patterns of state-level factors are associated with each form of the
ban, highlighting the need to treat modified bans as unique policy choices in their own
right. Our study informs the understanding of state implementation of collateral con-
sequences that straddle both the penal and welfare systems in the United States.
Corresponding author:
Brittany T Martin, Department of Sociology, University of Georgia, Baldwin Hall, 113 Baldwin Street, Athens,
GA 30602, USA.
Email: Brittanymartin@uga.edu
Punishment & Society
2020, Vol. 22(4) 439–460
!The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1462474519894982
journals.sagepub.com/home/pun
Keywords
collateral consequences, multilevel multinomial modeling, state variation, the drug
felony lifetime ban
Introduction
The drug felony lifetime ban on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) receipt is one of a myriad of collateral consequences “piled on” people
with criminal records in the United States (Uggen and Stewart, 2015). Enacted as
part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996 (PRWORA), the drug felony lifetime ban on TANF denies receipt of public
assistance to people convicted of drug felonies. TANF replaced Aid to Families
with Dependent Children as the primary means-tested program providing cash
benefits to help low-income families meet basic needs. The drug felony provision
of PRWORA allows states to choose one of three policy options: (1) opt out
completely (no ban), (2) implement a modified form of the ban in which recipients
who meet specific criteria can still qualify for benefits, or (3) implement a full ban
that excludes anyone with a felony drug conviction from benefit receipt. Allowing
states to choose among these options is reflective of U.S. welfare policies more
generally, which are primarily decentralized and permit states to define eligibility
requirements and benefit levels.
The number of people impacted by this collateral consequence is difficult to
measure, but one estimate shows that at least 180,000 women were denied benefits
between 1996 and 2011 in the states that fully ban TANF receipt for felony drug
convictions (Mauer and McCalmont, 2013). The true number of people impacted
is likely substantially higher, however, as this estimate is limited to women and
does not account for people denied benefits in states with modified bans that
exclude people from receiving benefits if they fail to meet various behavioral con-
ditions, such as drug testing and treatment.
The drug felony lifetime ban on TANF receipt is one of a suite of tools intro-
duced by PRWORA that facilitate closer collaboration between law enforcement
and welfare agencies (Gustafson, 2009, 2011). Ostensibly intended as a deterrent for
drug crimes, the ban extends the reach of the criminal justice system into the welfare
system in at least two ways. First, the ban serves as a punitive collateral punishment
implemented through the welfare state for those with particular criminal records
(Gustafson, 2009, 2011). Full bans in particular are exclusionary, disallowing
anyone with a felony drug conviction from receiving aid. Second, the drug felony
lifetime ban on TANF receipt ban can increase scrutinyof recipients’ deviant behav-
ior. Modified forms of the banallow for some people with drug felony convictionsto
receive benefits but only in conjunction with greater state surveillance via behavioral
requirements such as drug testing and/or treatment. Such scrutiny may mean that
people receiving TANF benefits under modified versions of the drug felony lifetime
440 Punishment & Society 22(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial