This chapter analyzes the debates over inclusion of parents in the survivor benefit program under the 1939 amendments to the Social Security Act and the design and implementation of dependency standards for parents. Definitions and measures of dependency varied between different eligible groups. Qualifying for benefits proved difficult for aged Americans under administrative practices which privileged dependency centered on the nuclear family model. These benefits mirrored the occupational exclusions found in Old Age and Survivors Insurance, thus limiting access based on race, gender, and citizenship. Survivor benefits for parents are in a middle ground between means-tested and contributory systems in the spectrum of American social policy. While initially facing a means test, parent recipients were then presumed to be dependent for their lifetime, thus avoiding the continued investigations in OAA. Once dependency was established, the program’s administration placed recipients in the contributory track of social policy.

This chapter describes how states and their human service agencies team up with private companies to turn vulnerable populations into sources of revenue. Cash-strapped states have been unwilling to raise sufficient revenue through general taxation and are thus looking for money elsewhere, including schemes that are largely unknown to the public to divert federal aid and other funds from children and the poor. Foster care agencies take resources from children in their care, including Social Security disability and survivor benefits, Veteran’s Assistance benefits if their parents died in the military – and even child support. States use illusory budget shell games to siphon away billions in Medicaid funds intended for children and low-income adults. Juvenile courts maximize revenue by removing children from their homes. To illustrate the interconnections of a sampling of the practices, Anna is introduced, a hypothetical foster child who encounters and is impacted by the revenue strategies in different states. The chapter explains how the state practices are undermining the purpose of government and the intended benefits of fiscal federalism – and how a fundamental realignment is required so that states are true to their purpose, to exist not for themselves but for the good of the people.