success of those states who have already adopted such a program. Nationwide, welfare caseloads have declined significantly since the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. In the few months since the bill went into effect the amount of welfare caseloads are down by approximately 2 million. Figures also show that Alabama reduced its welfare enrollment by 48%, and Indiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Tennessee reduced theirs by 49%. In Wisconsin welfare was reduced by 58% and Wyoming’s cases dropped an amazing 73% (Source: Dept. of Health and Human Services). According to the experts these successful states have a on main element in common, “a serious effort to move welfare recipients into jobs.” In addition, welfare reform is saving both the state and federal governments hundreds of millions of dollars, while giving thousands of Americans who formerly received government handouts a sense of self-worth. Opponents of the bill have a much different view, they believe that the new program will have a negative effect on society and the economy. Labor unions, and others who are against the legislation, are concerned that welfare recipients, often available at lower rates, will displace current workers. Businesses pressured by the federal government to handle their share if the burden in ending welfare as we know it, must struggle with the uncertainty of employing workers who for years were unemployed. Critics of the bills also believe that the legislation goes too far by cutting too much from welfare spending and harming poor children. They contend that the unemployed poor need training in order to get a job, and that a welfare-to-work program including training will cost more money not less. After assessing both side of the issue it is my sincere belief that a nationwide welfare-to-work program would have a positive effect on American society. This sort of program would rid ...
