United States Welfare Policy: A Catholic Response
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preface Introduction 1. Catholic Social Teaching: General Approaches to Social Policy Vehicles of Catholic Social TeachingThe Methodology of Catholic Social Teaching: Three CaveatsThe Central Vision of Catholic Social TeachingPositions Regarding Two Key InstitutionsThree Principles for Social Policy 2. The Historical Context of U.S. Welfare Policy The Roots of American Social PolicyThe New Deal and its LegacyThe Permanent Crisis of AFDCThe Role of Charitable and Faith-Based Organizations in the Social Welfare System 3. At the Crossroads: The Welfare Reform Law of 1996 The Block-Granting of WelfareTime Limitation of BenefitsWork RequirementsAnti-Illegitimacy MeasuresOther New Conditions on BenefitsOther Provisions of the 1996 Welfare LawThe Way Forward 4. The Bishops' Contribution to the Welfare Reform Debate The New Welfare Consensus of the 1980s and the Bishops' DemurralDocuments of the U.S. Catholic Church on Welfare Reform: 1994-96Five Guidelines for Social Policy 5. Implementing Welfare Reform, 1996-2006 Further Developments in Federal Welfare Policy, 1996-2002The Fallout of the 1996 Overhaul: Fears, Reaction and ResultsPatterns of State Implementation 6. The Politics and Ethics of Welfare Reauthorization The Politics of ReauthorizationOngoing Ethical Concerns Regarding Welfare PolicyPublic Church Contributions to Social Policy: Present and Future Bibliography Index
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it