This article explores the relationship between supervisory approaches to governance, punishment, and poverty among people with drug convictions. Tying government assistance to supervision could improve employment and economic outcomes. However, if experienced as punishment, recipients may forgo financial assistance and be more likely to experience poverty. Using information on policies that restrict access to welfare for people with drug felony convictions in the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP), this paper makes two contributions. First, it documents state variation in the balance between supervision and punishment in these bans. Second, using data from NLSY97, it estimates how individuals’ likelihood of being in poverty is related to state SNAP drug ban policies. States have shifted away from overtly punitive policies denying access to welfare toward policies that increase supervisory requirements, especially for SNAP. This shows that punitiveness extends beyond work activation programs like TANF. Additionally, poverty among people with drug convictions is almost half in no ban states compared to those in full ban states. While poverty is lower in states that include supervisory requirements than in those for which a drug conviction fully blocks access to welfare, this difference was not statistically significant.

中文翻译：

---

国家监督处罚与贫困：以福利领取禁毒案为例

本文探讨了对毒品定罪者的治理、惩罚和贫困之间的监管方法之间的关系。将政府援助与监管挂钩可以改善就业和经济成果。但是，如果受到惩罚，受助人可能会放弃经济援助，更有可能陷入贫困。本文使用了关于限制贫困家庭临时援助 (TANF) 和补充营养援助计划 (SNAP) 中被判有毒品重罪的人获得福利的政策信息，做出了两个贡献。首先，它记录了这些禁令中监督和惩罚之间平衡的状态变化。其次，使用来自 NLSY97 的数据，它估计个人陷入贫困的可能性与州 SNAP 禁毒政策之间的关系。各州已从拒绝获得福利的公开惩罚性政策转向增加监管要求的政策，尤其是针对 SNAP。这表明惩罚不仅仅是像 TANF 这样的工作激活计划。此外，与完全禁毒的州相比，禁毒州的毒品定罪者的贫困率几乎减少了一半。虽然在包含监管要求的州中贫困率低于因毒品定罪而完全阻碍获得福利的州，但这种差异在统计上并不显着。与完全禁毒的州相比，禁毒州的毒品犯罪者的贫困率几乎减少了一半。虽然在包含监管要求的州中贫困率低于因毒品定罪而完全阻碍获得福利的州，但这种差异在统计上并不显着。与完全禁毒的州相比，禁毒州的毒品犯罪者的贫困率几乎减少了一半。虽然在包含监管要求的州中贫困率低于因毒品定罪而完全阻碍获得福利的州，但这种差异在统计上并不显着。