Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 26 (2008) 323–340 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com The state and structural vulnerability: Policy egalitarianism and household income Stephanie Moller ∗ Department of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28223, United States Received 20 July 2006; received in revised form 10 April 2008; accepted 1 August 2008 Abstract The distribution of household income in the United States is remarkably unequal. Stratification researchers predict levels of income in terms of individual characteristics and structural features of the economy and society. These researchers, however, often neglect the role of the state. Political sociologists have begun to examine the impact of the state on aggregate levels of inequality across nations. I build on this literature to explain household income in the United States. Utilizing 2000 IPUMS data, I clarify how household income varies across the sub-national U.S. states according to policy configurations. I find that sub-national states with more egalitarian policies help to buttress the relative incomes of groups vulnerable to low incomes, particularly service workers and single mother families. These results suggest that studies of income and income inequality should consider the role of policies. © 2008 International Sociological Association Research Committee 28 on Social Stratification and Mobility. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Stratification; Policies; Race; Gender 1. Introduction The distribution of income in the United States is remarkably unequal. Indeed, the wealthiest fifth of households controlled nearly 50% of total income dur- ing the 1990s and early 2000s, while the poorest fifth controlled less than 4% of total income (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2003). In addition, black households and single parent families are disproportionately represented among the lower income population. In 2000, 19% of black families had incomes below the official poverty threshold, compared to 7% of white families; similarly, 25% of female-headed families had incomes under the poverty line, compared to 5% of married couple families. Stratification researchers have illustrated that house- holds’ positions in the income distribution are ∗ Tel.: +1 704 364 3896; fax: +1 704 687 3091. E-mail address: smoller@uncc.edu. determined by the interactive relationship between household characteristics and structural features of the society and economy. Some households benefit from structural arrangements, while others are vulnerable. For example, lower skilled workers are particularly vulnerable to globalization and post-industrialization because these structural shifts reduce the availability of low-skilled jobs and increase long-term unemploy- ment among the uneducated (Wilson, 1987). This is just one example of the abundant research within the strati- fication literature that clarifies the structural constraints on household income potential. This literature, however, does not clearly specify the role of states’ policies. Political sociologists have illustrated that policies have important implications for individuals’ positions within the income distribution. Indeed, cross-nationally, social democratic countries have developed policies that are the most effective at reducing inequality and aug- menting the incomes of the economically vulnerable 0276-5624/$ – see front matter © 2008 International Sociological Association Research Committee 28 on Social Stratification and Mobility. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2008.08.001