On February 13, the House approved, 230-192, legislation (H.R. 4) that would reauthorize programs under the 1996 welfare law (P.L. 104-193) through FY2008. The bill is almost identical to the one passed by the House last May but was not considered by the Senate (see The Source, 5/17/02). Only two Republicans, Reps. Ron Paul (R-TX) and John Hostettler (R-IN), voted against the measure, while 11 Democrats voted in favor of the bill.
Proponents argued that welfare caseloads have been cut by 50 percent since the 1996 law transformed the welfare system from an entitlement program offering unlimited help to one that provides temporary cash assistance while recipients find work. They contended that the added work requirements in the House bill are justified by the success of the 1996 law. They also stressed that the bill maintains unprecedented levels of child care funding and gives states flexibility in managing how welfare funds are spent.
Opponents argued that the child care funding in the bill is inadequate and barely keeps up with inflation. They claimed that the new work requirements in the bill would impose a large unfunded mandate on states, most of which are experiencing huge budget deficits. They contended that the increased work requirements for welfare recipients and work participation rates for states would force states to focus on moving welfare recipients into make-work activities rather than into real jobs. They also expressed concern that the bill fails to consider that those who remain on welfare are the hardest to place in jobs.
“I ask my colleagues just to look back at the welfare reforms of 1996 and remind them how far we have come, how far the poverty-stricken people in this nation have come,” said Deborah Pryce (R-OH), sponsor of the bill. “Today, we will find children and families in every one of our districts better off now than they were seven years ago,” she continued. “We have reduced the welfare rolls. They continue to drop even in these tough times,” she added.
“I rise to try to inject a heavy dose of economic reality into what has been a morning of self-congratulation,” said Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC). “This is the worst economy in 15 years. Yet we are increasing the hours of work for those who receive TANF and increasing the percentage of families in work-related activities,” she stressed. “What worries me most is that TANF has already creamed off the most ready to work, yet we are raising the requirements for the hardest to place,” she added.
“I want very much to talk about this issue of work requirements because, first of all, all the studies show that welfare reform was most successful in the states with the most stringent work requirements,” said Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-CT). “The University of Michigan studied this, certainly no bastion of conservatism,” she added.
“Too many people are drowning in a sea of poverty,” asserted Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY). “Welfare-to-Work should not merely toss the poorest Americans a life preserver to help them float along, with their heads barely above the poverty level,” she added.
“Our bill provides an additional $2 billion for child care, despite the fact that welfare rolls have declined by 60 percent and despite the fact that the welfare reform bill has more than tripled spending on child care over the last six years,” argued Rep. Jennifer Dunn (R-WA). “Our bill also gives much greater flexibility to transfer more TANF funds toward child care services, which means an additional $3 billion over our additional $2 billion will be available for child care,” she added.
“I do not know how you on the majority side stand up and say you are for adequate child care when it is only $2 billion,” responded Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI). “If we take into account inflation, it is $5 billion to $6 billion inadequate,” he continued. “One billion is so inadequate. It is a smoke screen,” he admonished.
The legislation would provide level funding of $16.5 billion annually from FY2004 through FY2008 for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, which gives block grants to states to design welfare programs that focus on moving recipients away from government dependence and into the job market.
While states would be given the flexibility to design programs that fit their needs, states also would be required to meet certain federal standards. As in current law, states would be required to impose a five-year time limit on federally funded benefits to welfare recipients; however, states would be able to exempt up to 20 percent of their caseload from this time limit.
The legislation would require welfare recipients to work a full 40-hour week, up from 30 hours under current law, and states would be required to put at least 70 percent of their welfare clients to work by 2008, up from the current 50 percent in 2002. Recipients would be required to spend 24 hours of their 40-hour week in direct work, and states would have the flexibility to decide which activities, such as education or substance abuse treatment, should be included in the remaining 16 hours.
For any three months within a 24-month period, recipients could meet the 24-hour direct work requirement by engaging in certain short-term activities that promote self-sufficiency, such as substance abuse counseling or treatment, rehabilitation treatment and services, work-related education or training, and job searches.
The bill would reauthorize mandatory child care funding at $2.9 billion annually from FY2004 through FY2008, a $200 million annual increase over FY2002. The Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) discretionary fund would be reauthorized at $2.3 billion in FY2004. That amount would increase by $200 million for each fiscal year until it reaches $3.1 billion in FY2008. The CCDBG is currently funded at $2.1 billion in FY2002.
States would be required to set aside 6 percent of their funding for activities designed to improve the quality and availability of child care, a 2 percent increase over current law. The bill would allow states to transfer 50 percent of their TANF block grant fund into child care. Current law allows only 30 percent to be transferred.
The bill also would establish a marriage promotion matching grant program, authorizing $100 million in each of FY2004 through FY2008 for programs that encourage healthy, two-parent families. These programs could include pre-marital education, marriage mentoring programs, and counseling, in addition to research and technical assistance to states. The bill also would authorize $100 million annually over the next five years for research activities and demonstration projects relating to marriage promotion activities.
Additionally, the legislation would authorize a $20 million annual grant program from FY2004 through FY2008 to support community efforts to promote responsible fatherhood. The bill would reauthorize $50 million in each of FY2004 through FY2008 for abstinence-only education programs. It also would extend for one year the Transitional Medical Assistance program, which provides temporary health coverage to individuals and families moving off welfare who are not eligible for Medicaid.
The House rejected, 124-300, a substitute amendment by Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) that would have increased funding for mandatory child care by $20 million and would have increased the TANF block grant annually for inflation. The amendment also would have maintained the work requirements in current law.
The House also rejected, 197-225, a substitute proposal by Reps. Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) that would have increased mandatory child care funding by $11 million over five years. This substitute also would have maintained the work requirements in current law and would have removed the ban in current law that prohibits states from using TANF funds to assist legal immigrants.
