Welfare Reform1, Social_Issues, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Social Issues

Welfare Reform1

Welfare Reform1 Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) replaced AFDC, ending some Federal responsibility to welfare assistance. States operate their own programs; determine eligibility services to be provided to needy families, within Federal guidelines. The Federal government cannot regulate the conduct of states except to a few requirements, and states have a wide latitude in administering the program to "provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes; to reduce dependency by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; to prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families" (Danziger, 2000). Welfare reform is such a complex issue with no easy solutions. Recent efforts to reform welfare temporarily solve some of the old problems and create new ones. For instance, a recent study has shown that with TANF, local welfare offices vary in their definitions of the goals of welfare reform. Some stress both welfare avoidance and work incentives, some solely stress work incentives, and some stress the correctness of eligibility decisions and effective anti-fraud programs (Nathan & Gais, 1999). This creates chaos in a system that needs consistency. States may use TANF funds for a variety of supports for needy working families and can determine the income level at which a family is considered needy. Many people find that they do not meet the requirements of “needy” and are thus forced to make a living in jobs that keep them living in poverty. From one-half to two-thirds of those no longer receiving assistance are working in jobs where earnings are not sufficient to meet the federal poverty level (GAO, 1999). There needs to be a way to assist those people who have found themselves a job, yet are still suffering from poverty. Under this Act, states are awarded for increasing the number of children below 200 percent of poverty who reside in married-couple families (Nathan & Gais, 1999). This measure is based on the theory that children in single-parent homes are at greater risk than those in two-parent families and the best solution is marriage. In short, the federal government is rewarding states for encouraging marriage, a very personal decision. How do states measure the results of having more couples getting married? Over the past five years, the federal government has also found it difficult to measure “improvement” in states. Currently, success is based in terms of job entry rate or increases over time in job entry rate, retention rate, and earnings gain. States may use quarterly unemployment insurance wage records, surveys, administrative records, or a combination of those data sources. States are given wide latitude in the sources of information they report. Also, to further distort the findings, there is no baseline data with which to make comparisons (Danziger, 2000). Whose interests are best served by the current welfare requirements? TANF encourages states to provide assistance to those welfare recipients who are most likely to succeed at employment, ignoring individuals who are harder to place. In order to show increases in employment and wage rates, the most attention is given to people who are employable over those people with the greatest barriers to employment-those who are disabled themselves or are caretakers for disabled children, older people, people who live in inner cities or rural areas where it is difficult to find any work or there is limited transportation to jobs, people who have limited education, are homeless, or have other barriers to getting a job, keeping a job, and earning higher wages. These people are living in the highest levels of poverty; they need the most help (Nathan & Gais, 1999). But, to keep the numbers up, and show success in the program, these may be the last to get services. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act restricts states from using federal TANF block grant funds to assist most families for more than five years. However, states can implement their own time limits. In Utah, there is a 36-month lifetime limit. This introduces some problems. A study in Riverside, CA, (before time-limits) found that nearly half of the AFDC recipients would have reached a two-year time limit within four years (Greenberg, 1996). This means, especially in Utah, that time limits will need to make huge behavioral changes to prevent people from reaching their limit so quickly. Bibliography:

Word Count: 731