User talk:Colson09

Welfare Reform in 2009
Welfare reform has been a topic of conversation for several years. Presidents, politicians, and the public at large have been trying to figure out how to help the poor become self-sufficient and provide for themselves without the help of welfare. We now live in a time when the face of welfare is changing and hard working Americans from all classes are losing their jobs and their ability to support their families. Many of the unemployed have been forced to turn to state welfare programs to help make ends meet such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). So what is TANF and are the policies and procedures of this 1996 welfare reform program truly effective for our time?

In 1996 President Clinton signed into law The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). This legislation was labeled as ‘welfare reform’ and would drastically change the former entitlement program Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), to what we know now as TANF. TANF’s approach to welfare is to impose strict work requirements, sanctions to those not meeting the work requirements, means testing (also known as Gate keeping) as a way to determine eligibility, and time limits on benefits. In contrast to the open-ended time frames of AFDC, The Colorado State Plan for TANF states that, “Adult members of the assistance unit are limited to 60 months of TANF assistance during their lifetime. Up to 20% of the caseloads may receive an extension of federal TANF assistance beyond the 60-month lifetime limit if their cases meet hardship or domestic violence criteria.” (pg 4)

TANF money is funded to individual states in the form of block grants. The states are then free to make their own rules and regulations regarding the TANF program as long as they meet with federal guidelines and goals. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; States receive a block grant to design and operate their programs to accomplish the purposes of TANF. These are:

•	assisting needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes

•	reducing the dependency of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work and marriage

•	preventing out-of-wedlock pregnancies

•	encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. (Office of Family Assistance)

The TANF program for Colorado is called Colorado Works and according to the Colorado State plan for TANF, “Colorado Works statutes state that no individual is entitled to benefits or services under the Colorado Works Program. Colorado Works provides fair and equitable treatment to all applicants and participants and does not discriminate based on age, disability, race, color or national origin.” (pg 2)

Benefits of the TANF program are, “monthly cash assistance that you may receive while you prepare for, look for, and/or maintain employment. If you apply for TANF, you are also applying for food assistance, Medicaid, and child support services. In addition, childcare assistance through the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program (CCCAP) and other supportive services are available while you prepare for or look for a job.” (DHS) The child support services of TANF aid their recipients in the collection of child support by establishing paternity, finding absent parents, and mandating court ordered child support; however, “Before poor parents can receive TANF benefits, they must sign over their child support rights to the state, including arrearages. Any child support collected on behalf of TANF families is retained by the state and used to defray the cost of TANF benefits, until that debt is paid.” (Dinnito 215) Each state is required to collect a certain amount of child support money annually in order to receive their TANF money, a portion of this money is paid back to the federal government since the program is partly funded by them. The CSE policies have done an excellent job in changing the attitudes of many about the responsibility that parents have to pay child support, the down side of this is that it has also drove many absent parents completely off the radar in order to avoid paying anything to the state. I can’t help but wonder if this money would be better placed in the hands of parents instead of going to the state, would this not in turn help defray the cost of welfare?

As we can see the focus of TANF is to get people back to work and off of welfare. This concept is great when we have a good economy and a thriving workforce, neither of which do we have now. Our nation is currently in a recession and experiencing unemployment at a rate that we have not seen in 25 years. Due to a poor job market many of the unemployed are unable to find new employment quickly and are finding their savings depleted, thus leaving them unable to pay for their homes, their bills, and to put food on their tables. An article in TIME Magazine, “Why Unemployment Could Be Worse This Time” tells us how some economists are predicting that the number of people that will become unemployed during this recession will be equal to or greater than that of previous recessions. What makes this recession different than the others is that due to many different variables, our country is experiencing a poor job market. This means that the unemployed are unable to find new employment quickly and remain unemployed for longer periods of time. (Gandel, Stephen)

In 1996 the TANF program started off with a bang and within one year caseloads were down in some states by as much as 60%, proponents of the program were elated. In Colorado in 1997 there were 71,088 TANF recipients and in 2008 there were only 19,835 TANF recipients. (Office of Family Assistance) These numbers would prove that TANF has been successful at promoting self-sufficiency and reducing the number of people who need welfare,  but if we were really looking at some of the reasons for such a drop in caseloads we would see that;

1.	 The economy at that time was in good shape and jobs were plentiful, people were able to find employment and leave welfare

2.	Many who were currently on welfare at the time did not meet with the new eligibility requirements and were forced to leave welfare

3.	Sanctions are given for not keeping appointments or meeting work requirements and many were removed from welfare for those reasons

4.	Some just left welfare without offering any reason

The problem with the 3rd example is that if an appointment is set and a recipient is unable to make it due to work, lack of transportation, or any other reason sanctions are given. Keep in mind that the goal of welfare reform is to reduce the number those on welfare. Regardless of why people were leaving welfare, as long as the numbers were shrinking it pointed to the success of the program. I will agree that promoting work instead of dependency on welfare is a good thing; however, when the only government welfare program offering cash assistance to the public focuses mainly on whether someone is able to work or not in an economic environment like we are in, I do not feel that the program is performing as effectively as it should for the needs of the people it is intended to serve.

When addressing an issue such as unemployment we have to look at all the reasons why people are unable to work. Aside from a poor job market, what else is keeping many individuals from finding work? Lack of education is one of the barriers to finding employment and TANF attempts to address this issue by allowing recipients time for job training and education while still receiving their cash benefits. The problem is that the program only allows for short-term education such as a certificate in a particular area of study, this is a far cry from what is needed to compete in today’s job market and provide someone with job security and the opportunity for advancement. Because of this, many of the jobs that are found by welfare recipients are low-level or entry level jobs, their lack of experience and education does not allow them to compete with the millions of other people who have lost their jobs that are educated. As a result, many of those who were able to leave welfare because they found employment are now back line to re-apply, that is if they have not already used their lifetime limit of five years, if so they will be looking elsewhere for help.

To get a better idea of just how many people are applying for TANF, I interviewed Lynn Williams, a Case Manager Coordinator with the Department of Human Services (DHS). Williams is part of a Community Outreach team that works with the homeless and at-risk populations. The team stations themselves at various agencies throughout the Denver Metro Area that serve the homeless; this enables them to provide the clients with easy access to the services available at DHS. Some of these services include: TANF, Medicare, Medicaid, Eviction and Rental Assistance, Hotel Vouchers, and other emergency services. What I wanted most from this interview was to find out about the TANF program; if she felt the policies of the program either hurt or helped her clients, if she has been seeing a drastic increase in the number of clients applying for the program, and why they are applying. Williams informed me that the number of new cases taken on by DHS has risen over 25% in the last year and that four out of five of these cases are experiencing homelessness for the first time with unemployment as the main reason for this. The specifics of whether or not the TANF program and its policies are beneficial to the clients could not be answered, however according to Williams, “The number of ex-clients returning the TANF program are rising due to unemployment”. Williams also explained that DHS has been having financial problems of their own: many programs have been cut due to lack of funding, the funding that is available to existing programs is running out, and lay-offs are to be expected in July of 2009. (Personal Interview 2009)

The financial problems of DHS could not have occurred at a worse time. Another major barrier that keeps people from finding and keeping employment is the issue of childcare. One of the areas of the TANF program that I feel has been a blessing for many working families is the availability of child care through the CCAP program, this program was put into the PRWORA to help eliminate that barrier by providing childcare at low or no cost to working families. Unfortunately, due to the increasing caseloads and applicants to the TANF program and already existing financial problems, this means less funding for CCAP and other programs like it. It appears however that help is on the way through the newly passed Stimulus Package. “Not including an estimated $87 billion hike in Medicaid — federal-state health insurance for the poor — and billions more in low-income tax breaks, the just approved $789 billion economic stimulus package includes as much as $64 billion for the major safety net programs: Food Stamps, unemployment insurance, welfare, child care subsidies, home energy assistance and community service grants. In the case of welfare increases, distributing the proposed $2.5 billion to $3 billion in cash assistance to those hardest hit by the recession could be nearly impossible for most states, experts say. The proposal would require states to start serving more people, which is the opposite direction states have been taking.” (Christine Vestal) There are some who find this Stimulus Package as being nothing more than another welfare program and that the package itself will completely destroy any successes of the 1996 PRWORA welfare reform legislation.

It is clear that when the PRWORA legislation was passed our country needed to change its mindset about the role of welfare, the amount of time that individuals should stay on welfare, and the value of a good work ethic. It appears to me that we are no longer in an age where we need welfare reform for the recipients of welfare as much as we need to reform the welfare system itself to be more effective. As I have pointed out there are many aspects of TANF that are not helpful to those who need it and in some cases would even make a person’s circumstances worse by holding them in the poverty they are trying so hard to rise above. My hope is that through this crisis we are going through as a nation that we would be able to open our eyes to the short comings of the TANF program, expound on its successes, and move forward with a new plan that is appropriate and effective for the issues of our time.

References

Colorado Department of Human Services. Colorado State Plan for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Retrieved 03 March 2009 from www.cdhs.state.co.us/.../Documents/4.4_TANF_State_Plan_01-01-06.doc

Denver Department of Human Services Adult and Family Services. Retrieved 03 March 2009 from http://denvergov.org/Family_and_Adult/TemporaryAssistanceforNeedyFamiliesTANF/tabid/387015/Default.aspx

Dinitto, M. Diana. “Social Welfare Politics and Public Policy” 6th ed. Ending Welfare As We Knew It: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Pearson Education 2007

Gandel, Stephen. “Why Unemployment Could Be Worse This Time.” TIME.com 23 Nov. 2008. Retrieved 28 Jan. 2009 From  http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1861115,00.html

Office of Family Assistance. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. TANF: Total Number of Recipient. 05 Feb. 2009. Retrieved 04 April 2009 from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/data-reports/caseload/2008/2008_recipient_tan.htm and http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/data-reports/caseload/1997/FYCY97.htm

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. About TANF. 20 Nov. 2008. Retrieved 03 March 2009 from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/tanf/about.html

Vestal, Christine. “States Brace For New Safety Net Money”. TS-Si.org 12 Feb. 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2009 from http://ts-si.org/the-states/3945-states-brace-for-new-safety-net-money.html

Williams, Lynn. Personal Interview. 10 Feb. 2009

Colson09 (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)