Mixed Plan for Welfare

The welfare reform bill passed by the House of Representatives on May 16 has serious flaws surrounding it—both in its content and in the partisan, heavy-handed way it was passed. Though some of the job-creation programs for welfare recipients are worthwhile, the Senate should make several substantive amendments.

The Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2002 is fraught with outdated programs and clumsy attempts at social manipulation. Its provisions for puritanical programs endorsing holy matrimony and abstinence infringe upon Americans’ lifestyle choices and create the wrong incentives for getting married. A marriage should be based on love, not on tax relief or on the values of a holier-than-thou Republican House. America’s disadvantaged citizens should be given help, not moral guidance, by the government.

Under this bill, sponsored by Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio), legal immigrants would still be forced to wait five years before becoming eligible for welfare benefits. This policy is offensive; it denies aid to those who face not only economic difficulties but also cultural and linguistic barriers. Legal immigrants should be treated no differently than those who have held longer residency—they should be aided and welcomed into our society, not hung out to dry for their first few years in America.

Welfare reform has had some success since 1996 in cutting welfare rolls and moving recipients to work, but many of those changes occurred during a period of sustained economic prosperity. In these less fortunate times, instead of curtailing benefits, the government should be more compassionate to those in need. The act would have states create commendable workfare programs for welfare recipients who cannot find employment in the private sector. People would have to work a minimum number of hours to keep receiving benefits; drug and alcohol rehabilitation, childcare and other programs would be available in the remaining time. This program is a positive step, but funding should come from the federal government so as not to cause additional financial strain on states. Despite the promise of this program, Congress must ensure that these newly employed workers no longer live in poverty; respectable salaries and prospects for advancement must be available.

Welfare remains a vital part of America’s social responsibility. The arguments over proper reforms should be undertaken in a collegial manner where the well-being of those in need, not party politics, dominates the discussion. Another rabidly partisan display in the Senate, as occurred in 1996, would only detract from the important work at hand—to improve and strengthen the American welfare system.

With only 14 Democrats voting in favor of this year’s bill and just four Republicans dissenting, it is clear that the security and comfort of thousands of America’s disadvantaged citizens was compromised due to a dividing aisle on the House floor. Unfortunately, the negative provisions of the bill overpower the potential for positive change. Senate Democrats should amend this bill by adding more money for childcare, job training and education programs.

Giving welfare recipients valuable work experience is a worthwhile goal, but giving them the tools they need to succeed in the workforce must not be neglected.