English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Social Security is widely known as “The Third Rail of American Politics” and the program has proved been remarkably stable and politically resilient, over time. While true, this basic story about the institutional stability of Social Security in the US should not hide the segmented, discontinuous nature of its politics over the last four decades. As suggested in this article, the changing nature of Social Security politics is reflected in the variety of the policy options debated, which range from incremental benefit cuts and revenue increases adopted during the Carter and the Reagan years to structural, path-shifting proposals associated with the idea of Social Security privatization, which only became a mainstream policy alternative during the Clinton years. The following analysis explores the debate about these diverse policy alternatives, if and when they entered the federal policy agenda during the periods under consideration.

The Segmented Third Rail: The Politics of Social Security from Carter to Obama