When Bill Clinton declared in 1992 that we needed to "end welfare
as we know it," many of the nation's governors cheered. We wanted
to experiment -- in some cases boldly -- with our states' welfare programs.
At our annual meeting in early 1996, the National Governors Association
unanimously adopted a set of principles to guide welfare reform. Families,
we said, should be better off when a parent works rather than remaining
on welfare. Cash benefits should be time-limited as a general rule. Reform
should stress actual work rather than job training. Fathers should not
have to abandon their families in poverty to enable them to qualify for
welfare. And states should be freed from the one-size-fits-all mentality
that governed how welfare operated.
Not everyone agreed on the need for comprehensive welfare reform. Nor
did everyone agree with the notion of devolving power to the states. Critics
warned of a "race to the bottom" in which states would slash
recipients from the rolls and use the money intended for them for other
purposes.
In most states, however, the feared race to the bottom turned out to
be a race to the top. States have used waivers from Washington and the
flexibility granted them by the 1996 welfare reform law to ensure that
the majority of families who move from welfare rolls to payrolls are truly
on their way to becoming better off.
My home state, Delaware, is a case in point. When persons walk into a
welfare office seeking cash assistance, they are asked, "How would
you like to go to work instead?" If they lack the skills for an available
entry-level job, the state provides them with training. The government
contractors who actually do the training are paid in part on the basis
of whether their trainees remain in the workforce.
Not all of these new workers have their cash assistance cut off all at
once, either. Instead, welfare payments for workers whose incomes are
still well below the poverty rate are gradually phased out as their take-home
pay rises. We also expanded eligibility for child care dramatically. And
many of these new workers can obtain health care coverage for all of their
children up to age 19 for just a dollar a day.
As Congress and President Bush prepare to reauthorize welfare reform
in 2002, what should be on the agenda? States suffering high unemployment
need to be able to tap into their welfare "rainy day" reserve
funds more easily. The food stamp program does not work as effectively
as it could. And the subject of responsible fatherhood deserves special
scrutiny.
But the old adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," certainly
applies to reform's "work-first" approach. We must not change
welfare's new focus, even as we build on the many positive changes that
we've made.
Blueprint Keywords: Extra Carper
