Prototypes of Social Work Political Participation: An Empirical Model

Since the founding of the profession, social workers have been urged to assume a key role in social welfare policy. Despite this, the profession remains "at war with itself about the extent to which it should engage in matters of social justice and reform" (Thompson, 1994, p. 457). This conflict occurs at a time when opportunities for political participation abound, the welfare state is under attack, and public- and private-sector social welfare program funding patterns have become increasingly complex (Gummer, 1990; Jansson, 1994). When social workers neglect to engage in the politics of social welfare policy, that is, in acts aimed at influencing policymakers' resource distribution decisions, the needs of social work clients and the profession itself are left out of the policy development process. Social workers are in a unique position to increase the political salience of social problems. Expertise and "interests" place social workers as mainstream policy actors who can make a difference in policy design, implementation, and outcomes (Burch, 1991; Laumann & Knoke, 1987; Peterson, 1990-91). Understanding how social workers can and do participate in the politics of social welfare policy is integral to advancing the profession's philosophy and goals (Haynes & Mickelson, 1991; Weismiller & Rome, 1995). With emerging policy reform action among other disciplines and organized interests, social workers must exhibit greater dedication to policy practice or risk being undermined by others who take the lead (Figuiera-McDonough, 1993; Hoefer, 1993). "If you do not make [policy choices], you have selected someone else's policy as your default choice, which is probably different than what you would have preferred" (Burch, 1991, p. 197). Many opportunities exist in the American political arena to realize the resource distribution and political interests of social workers who apply analytic, assessment, problem-solving, and political skills to build policy agendas; define problems; construct proposals; and enact, assess, and evaluate policy (Jansson, 1994; Schorr, 1985). The importance of practitioners' paying attention to resource (that is, political) decisions lies at the interface of policy and practice: "Professionals who ignore social choices and social values in favor of developing practice skills are like musicians playing background music to a melody that seems to come from nowhere" (Gilbert, Specht, & Terrell, 1993, p. 21). Because of these dichotomies, discrepancies remain in the levels and types of political participation engaged in by social workers (Ezell, 1993; Reeser, 1986; Reeser & Epstein, 1990). To expand the profession's contributions to social welfare policy decision making, social workers must become more cognizant of and act on the "political" actions that already are an integral part of their practice. Literature Review Social work literature cites numerous reasons for the variations in social action and political participation activity. One reason pertains to the need to develop a model of political participation that is easily integrated into professional practice and identity. When greater emphasis is placed on learning clinical skills at the cost of developing attitudes, knowledge, and skills in advocacy and social action, practitioners are ill prepared to succeed in the political arena (Figuiera-McDonough, 1993; Gilbert et al., 1993; Haynes & Mickelson, 1991; Wolk, Pray, Weismiller, & Dempsey, 1996). The reluctance to get involved in politics also stems from practitioner concerns that political activity will compromise professional values or threaten the individual's position within an agency (Ezell, 1993; Jansson, 1994; Reeser & Epstein, 1990). Fears that taking stands on issues or candidates may result in the loss of agency community standing or sources of support also inhibit political activity (Richan, 1988). All these factors may be compounded by restrictions placed on political participation by state and federal legislation such as the Hatch Act (Pawlak & Flynn, 1990; Thompson, 1994). …