Debates about welfare programs continue to ignite controversy. White Americans often view “welfare recipients as Black, female, and violating the norms of work ethic,” according to a study published in the Journal of Political Behavior (Myers et al., 2024). Their findings highlight a discrepancy between perception and reality. Of course, Black women are not the only group benefiting from welfare programs, and many hard-working individuals depend on government assistance. However, conversations about welfare are often obscured by racist misconceptions.
Consider, for instance, how presidential nominee Ronald Reagan popularized the “welfare queen trope.” By highlighting a high-profile case of a Black woman prosecuted for committing fraud as the average welfare recipient, he diminished support for these programs. He fed into the notion that they weren’t needed. This campaign was successful. In 1981–82, the Reagan administration “made more than $22 billion in cuts to social welfare programs,” according to a report cited by the New York Times. While this shift harmed low-income families of various backgrounds, none of these cuts would have been possible without racism. The belief that mostly Black women benefited and that they were undeserving became instrumental in the rollback of social programs. Even today, the endorsement of racist stereotypes is associated with opposition to welfare (Zhirkov et al., 2025).
Poor white people, a racialized group seen as more deserving, were “likely to be the beneficiary of local governments’ increased capacity and spending,” according to a study published in The Sociological Quarterly. Their findings demonstrate how race, independent of class, affects perceptions of deservingness. Despite poor Black and white people facing similar economic conditions, respondents ranked one group as more deserving of aid than the other. This occurs because racial attitudes are inextricably tied to the policy positions people support. Welfare programs serve as a crucial lifeline for individuals and families in need. Yet, resistance hinders their implementation and, consequently, their ability to alleviate the social effects of poverty. Part of the problem is public perception, as “people significantly overestimate the number of African-Americans benefiting from the largest programs.” The other part is their racism, which makes the racial identity of beneficiaries a sticking point in their willingness to embrace these programs.
“Race-based economic inequality is both a defining and persistent feature of the United States that is at odds with national narratives regarding programs toward racial equality,” noted Michael W. Kraus. This denial perpetuates the status quo, as those who either refuse to acknowledge the vast gap between racial groups are less likely to support efforts to mitigate harm. Some attempt to rationalize disparities by claiming that those seeking welfare benefits are lazy. In this way, they focus on “personal responsibility, while overlooking “collective responsibility.” Not only is such an assessment reflective of racial bias, but it is also an example of ableism, as not all people can work. When society assigns value based on someone’s ability to churn out 40-hour workweeks, older people, younger people, and disabled people are cast aside. It’s a worldview that fails to account for nuance, as even hardworking people fall through the cracks. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are at least 6.4 million working poor individuals in the United States.
The misperception that only Black people benefit from government assistance, or that most individuals and families receiving welfare are scamming the system, makes it easy for politicians to propose cutting programs, even those designed to uplift a wide swath of citizens. In this case, racism acts as a pre-existing condition, making the public at large more vulnerable. When President Trump met with the Congressional Black Caucus in 2017, one member pointed out, “welfare cuts would harm her constituents.” “not all of whom are black.” To which he replied, “Really? Then what are they?” He seemed unaware, indeed shocked to learn that the vast majority of welfare recipients in America are white. Shouldn’t our shared humanity be enough to justify strengthening these programs? Sadly, many discussions about welfare are racialized to the detriment of citizens. This spring, a Republican operative close to the White House attempted to save social welfare programs using a similar race-centered pitch. “Medicaid is not just for Black people in the ghetto, these are our voters,” they argued. Of course, the implication here is that their voters are “white people,” and the fact that they would be affected by these cuts should give pause.
House Republicans recently proposed cuts to Medicaid and the related Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which could leave millions of Americans without healthcare coverage. Their so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” also proposes the “deepest cut” in food stamps, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), in the nation’s history, a move expected to impact millions of families in need. Likewise, the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), which assists seniors to buy groceries, is also at risk under the proposed new budget. Instead of receiving funds, they will receive “MAHA Food Boxes,” which could jeopardize their access to essential items. Additionally, the administration has proposed cuts to the Housing Choice Voucher Program, which is expected to slash federal rental aid by 40%. The Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program are on the chopping block. Such a shift would once again weaken the social safety net and jeopardize citizens’ access to essential resources and services. And yet, none of this would be possible without the stingy spirit of racism in American society.
Perceptions of deservingness are intricately tied to the racial attitudes of Americans. That is why, despite the nation’s vast wealth, many citizens languish in poverty. Moreover, sadly, the road to addressing gaps, such as providing citizens with food, shelter, and healthcare, is lined with people asking, “Who benefits?” In 1993, when Tupac released his hit song, “Keep Ya Head Up,” he shared a line relevant to this discussion– “they got money for war but can’t feed the poor.” He was describing a deep-seated irony at the heart of American society, namely, that the nation’s economic entanglement in international affairs seemed to betray the nation’s domestic social problem of poverty. However, Shakur was also raising the idea that many suffer not because of an actual lack of resources, but because of misplaced priorities. The same can be said of the nation today. Racism interferes with this otherwise natural process of ensuring the welfare of fellow citizens.