SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY

LENGTH: 1274 words

COMMITTEE: HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS

SUBCOMMITTEE: HUMAN RESOURCE

HEADLINE: WELFARE OVERHAUL PROPOSALS

TESTIMONY-BY: VANESSA BROWN,, LEADER, MOTHERS ON THE MOVE COMMITTEE,

AFFILIATION: PHILADELPHIA UNEMPLOYMENT PROJECT

BODY:
Statement of

Vanessa Brown, Leader, Mothers on the Move Committee, Philadelphia Unemployment Project, and Member, National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support

Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House

Committee on Ways and Means

Hearing on Welfare Reform Reauthorization Proposals

April 11, 2002

Hello, my name is Vanessa Brown of the Philadelphia Unemployment Project. I am a leader of the Mothers on the Move Committee at PUP and a member of the National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support.

Today I would like to share with you my personal story about the TANF program.

I ran a restaurant in Philadelphia for seven years. The business fell on hard times and I was forced to close the restaurant. I then turned to the welfare department for assistance and they placed me in a TANF Training program. I went into the program with high hopes, because I had heard that there was a great opportunity to get field training and a good job. Upon graduation from the program, I was placed in a job at a call center. I held that position for little over a year until the tragedy of 9/11 happened. The call center closed because it served the travel industry and after 9/11 there was no more business and no more calls to take.

Today, I am one of the lucky workers out of 200 welfare-to-work moms at my old job. I collect unemployment. Many of my former co- workers do not. They did not work in enough quarters after leaving TANF to be able to receive benefits. They had no safety net.

Currently, I am a student at the Community College of Philadelphia. I chose to pursue higher learning following my lay- off because I realized that my TANF training only prepared me for an unstable, low-wage job.

I am here to testify that all welfare recipients don't fit into one-category. One size doesn't fit all for us. I know that from my experience with the TANF program and the experiences that many others have told me about that TANF is not working. I am currently a leader at Mothers on the Move to assess the needs of welfare recipients and to help them tell their stories like I am today.

I am here to represent the thousands of women and men who are affected by the decisions that you, our elected officials, will make today. There are three things I would like to discuss today. They include the 40-hour work week proposed by the Bush Administration; lifting the cap on education and training and the creation of public jobs and transitional work programs.

First, I would like say that the 40-hour work week would be counter-productive for most poverty-stricken families. With the challenges that face many of these families, it is difficult to meet the current requirements which are only 30 hours a week in most states.

Even when I left TANF for employment, I had to be at work every day at 8:30 which was the same time that my son was expected to be at school. I had to ask my boss to reduce my hours so that I could get my son to school on time and be able to pick him up from aftercare by 5 PM. In the end, I only worked 25 hours a week so that I would be able to care for my son before and after school. It did not make sense to work extra hours at my job just to be able to afford before and after school care. Even if I wanted to work full-time at the call center, I couldn't, as my employer did not allow us to work more than 37.5 hours.

The Administration's proposal would increase the work requirement to 40 hours a week. This would place a burden on families as well as states that would be responsible for implementing this new requirement.

There is already of scarcity of jobs in Philadelphia. How is the state going to create something from nothing in my community? The only thing that states will be able to do is create huge workfare programs. Workfare requires welfare recipients to work full time in exchange for their benefits. When I was on TANF, all I got was $316 a month. The general public seems to think that welfare is life sustaining. At $316, I could hardly pay my utilities and keep a roof over my head. That's why, the Administration's proposal is not grounded in the reality that faces poor people in this country.

The truth is that there are many obstacles and hurdles that keep us away from moving our families out of poverty. The bottom line is more work is not the answer. Taking parents away from their children in order to work more hours just to keep their welfare check will create more problems than it will address.

What we DO need, however, is more access to education and training. After my lay-off, I found that Community College was offering a free semester to people who had been laid off. I took advantage of that opportunity and enrolled in school full time. I decided that continuing education was important because I knew that I have to have a degree in order to get a job that will allow me to support myself and my son. It is important to me to show my son how important education is so that he will be sure to go to college and not have to go through some of the challenges that I have faced.

That's why we need to lift federal caps on education and training. States are allowed to have only 30 percent of the caseload engaged in ed & training now and individuals can only be in education or training programs for up to 12 months. There needs to be more access to continuing education and technology- based training. This will allow people to develop the skills to compete in today's fast-paced job market. This would allow welfare recipients to get out of poverty and leave the welfare rolls forever.

I feel that the TANF training I received left me dependent on the system. I long for the day when I can completely walk away from it. I feel as though I need time to complete a certificate or Associate's degree program that will validate me to be a viable candidate for jobs that will allow me to truly support my family above the poverty line.

The last point I would like to touch on today is about the creation of public jobs. The National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support is proposing a $500 million fund, separate from the TANF block grant, for a national public jobs program. Public jobs would create opportunities for people to combine work experience with training. These jobs would be transitional and would place welfare recipients in hospitals, schools and other community service positions. The benefit of allowing welfare recipients to earn a wage for their work would make me, and many others like me, feel more confident about our ability to maintain a long-term working position on my own. A transitional job would help to build a real track record of successful employment for welfare recipients.

As you finalize your decisions today, keep in mind the constituents that you serve. Remember the hardships that face them and your responsibility to aid the entire community to have what is necessary for everyone to be self-sufficient. Your goal today should not be reducing welfare caseloads, but to encourage states to reduce poverty. Ending poverty will start when you give people access to the education and training they need and help place them in real jobs. Many of you may think that TANF was not designed to be a poverty reducer. In terms of dollars and cents, would you rather spend money on programs that only prepare people for low-wage jobs which means they have to cycle on and off the rolls just to keep their head above water, or allocate those same dollars to educate and create real jobs that will allow people to move their families out of poverty?

Thank you.



LOAD-DATE: May 1, 2002