On Welfare Reform

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

I worked in the nonprofit sector in human services and worked directly with welfare recipients early in my career. I have analyzed welfare policies and managed programs under the federal "Welfare-to-Work" legislation. (A bit bit of law made worse by ill-conceived regulations from DOL.)

Until 1996, welfare (AFDC, now TANF) was run as an income maintenance program. The system did not encourage economic independence... it simply provided a check to persons based on poverty. The reform of the welfare system created incentives for both recipients and social services agencies to move people off the rolls. These incentives included short-term and lifetime limits on welfare, requirements to work or participate in work preparation activities, fraud reduction initiatives and incentives for social services agencies to reduce caseloads. (TANF agencies are awash in money because funding has been held at 1995 levels while caseloads have dropped substantially.)

"This is not the end of welfare reform, this is the beginning, and we have to all assume responsibility." -- Bill Clinton, August 22, 1996

"With those words, President Bill Clinton signed welfare reform legislation largely authored by congressional Republicans, making good on his now-famous promise to 'end welfare as we know it.' The new law replaced the 61-year-old federal guarantee of aid to the poor with a system of block grants to the states that imposes work requirements and a 5-year lifetime limit on benefits, while denying aid to all immigrants, legal or otherwise." CNN/Time

"All Americans, without regard to party, know that our welfare system is broken, that it teaches the wrong values, rewards the wrong choices, hurts those it was meant to help," Clinton said. "We also know that no one wants to change the current system in a good way more than people who are trapped in it."

What Clinton realized was that the welfare system started growing during the "War on Poverty" in 1965. Some thirty years later, the poverty rate had actually increased by a percentage point and the number of out-of-wedlock births had jumped from 5% to over 30%.

In short, the welfare system did not "fix" poverty despite the trillions of dollars spent... and the best intentions of liberal social policy wonks. Welfare rolls increased and the social problem associated with welfare seemed intractable.

Until 1996, the democrats in Congress blocked any meaningful reform of the welfare system. With the cooperation of President Clinton, the republican congress ended "welfare as we know it."

In 1996, there were 12.8 million welfare recipients in the United States (DHHS) In June 2000, the number had fallen to 5.7 million, a reduction of 59%. Certainly, some of this reduction can be attributed to a strong economy, however, the reform clearly has had an impact. Despite the dire predictions of liberal democrats, the reform of the system has not lead to an exposion of poverty.

America tried to "fix" poverty by giving people a check... and for 30+ years the welfare rolls increased. We are now trying the notion of personal responsibility... and the rolls are shrinking.

A safety net is a hammock for some people. Few disagree that society should care for the truly disadvantaged, the profoundly disabled or the mentally ill. Personally, I think the able-bodied are capable of contributing to society... and that few things are more corrosive than government handouts. The poor Native American reservations of the west are an excellent example. For some interesting reading...

Welfare Reform in Maryland

Welfare Reform in Wisconsin

DHHS statistics

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 09, 2001

Answers

Old knowledge well put. As for the "corrosive" effect you should hear our otherwise stalwart depression enduring, WW2 fighting parents whine that medicare funded HMO copays went up on the first.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 09, 2001.

Ken, a friend of mine is a recipient of welfare-to-work training. She's working hard to get off of welfare and to make sure her kids are never on welfare as adults. (Her husband abandoned them.) The funny thing is, she showed ME how to get into the same training program even though I'm not a welfare recipient. We're both headed for better things -- these programs do work, and they work for more than just welfare cases.

-- helen (b@r.f), January 10, 2001.

Helen,

Welfare-to-Work has, without doubt, helped a few people. The poorly written legislation has also left state and locals governments unable to use the funding because the legislation is so restrictive. Some states refused the federal money outright. A state refusing federal money is like a hog refusing feed corn.... there's something wrong with the corn.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 10, 2001.


Ken:

A state refusing federal money is like a hog refusing feed corn.

That would be because of deoxnivalenol or DON.

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 10, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ