That's Not What We Meant to Do: Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in the Twentieth Century.

AuthorHeineman, Robert
PositionBook Reviews

* That's Not What We Meant to Do: Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in the Twentieth Century By Steven M. Gillon New York: W. W. Norton, 2000. Pp. 288. $25.95 cloth.

The achievement of the Founding Fathers continues to confound social reformers. In That's Not What We Meant to Do, Steven M. Gillon, an established historian of American liberalism now at the University of Oklahoma, provides ample evidence of the unintended consequences and hardships that reformers can engender by insisting that government implement their vision of the good. Gillon does a thorough, readable job of navigating the intricacies of the American policy process, and there is much to be gained from reading his analyses of the twists and turns of the policies emanating from congressional legislation in five major areas. Throughout, however, he assumes that with the proper planning and tinkering, institutions originally designed primarily to limit government and to promote individual liberty can be adapted to engineer major social reform.

In his opening chapter, Gillon surveys how the "the law of unintended consequences" has affected projects in economics, science, and technology as well in public programs other than those detailed in succeeding chapters. The next five chapters contain carefully documented surveys of the evolution of national programs in welfare, deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill, immigration, affirmative action, and campaign finance reform. In the establishment and conduct of these programs, unsupported assumptions, institutional conflict, and policy disarray litter the field.

Unlike the four other programs Gillon discusses in detail, the nation's efforts to provide effective welfare assistance date from the Great Depression. In the 1930s, Grace Abbott's advocacy for children played an important role in keeping early welfare efforts focused and reasonably controllable. However, by promoting community action among the poor and by deferring to activists who increasingly saw welfare support as an entitlement, the Johnson administration unraveled much of the previous welfare structure. Within a short time, policy initiatives intended to move people off welfare actually increased the welfare rolls dramatically. Gillon duly notes that more realistic assumptions about the issue of poverty under GOP-led Congresses have begun to bring welfare under control, but he concludes that overall "the ultimate irony" of the Johnson administration's attack on...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT