Copyright 2002 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
April 11, 2002 Thursday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1870 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS
SUBCOMMITTEE:
HUMAN RESOURCE
HEADLINE: WELFARE OVERHAUL PROPOSALS
TESTIMONY-BY: MARTIN O'MALLEY,, MAYOR, BALTIMORE,
MARYLAND,
AFFILIATION: ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. CONFERENCE
OF MAYORS
BODY: Statement of
Martin
O'Malley, Mayor, Baltimore, Maryland, on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Mayors
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House
Committee on Ways and Means
Hearing on Welfare Reform
Reauthorization Proposals
April 11, 2002
Good Afternoon, Mr.
Chairman, Congressman Cardin and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
giving me the opportunity to testify before you today on an issue critical to
America's cities and America's families - including many in my city, Baltimore.
I am Martin O'Malley, Mayor of Baltimore. I am testifying today on
behalf of The United States Conference of Mayors in my capacity as Chairman of
the Conference of Mayors Task Force on
TANF Reauthorization.
The U.S. Conference of Mayors represents mayors on both sides of the
political aisle. And regardless of party, this is an issue about which we care
deeply. Cities have made great progress in reducing our welfare caseloads since
1996. Child poverty recorded its greatest 5-year drop in 30 years. The
percentage of people on welfare fell to In the past five years, we've learned
what works and what doesn't. For example, education and
training and access to child care are major factors in how
people fare after welfare.
People with a degree or skill are more likely
to escape poverty. And among parents who left welfare for work, and are now
unemployed, lack of child care was the leading reason for their job loss.
Baltimore's Congressman Ben Cardin introduced a bill that addresses one
of these critical needs by increasing Child Care and Development Block Grant
funding to $
11.5 billion.
Welfare offices play a
critical role in determining whether families leaving welfare actually receive
the support they need.
They must one-stop centers providing referrals
for a range of services including child care, health care and transportation.
And they would work better by combining
TANF and Workforce
Investment Act funding.
This year, we have an opportunity to work
together - on all levels of government - to complete the job we have begun:
moving more families from welfare to work, and more working poor families to a
better, more self-sufficient life.
My testimony today will focus on
three primary objectives that are critical in
TANF
reauthorization: opportunity, accountability and outcomes.
Opportunity
My personal view is that time limits and work participation rate
requirements are critical to the continued success of welfare reform. But while
they have changed expectations, these reforms have resulted in a welfare system
that is increasingly concentrated in America's cities. In my own state of
Maryland, since 1995, Baltimore has gone from representing 43% of the State's
welfare caseload to 63% - even as the number of cases in our city dropped by
more than half.
This shift, has left us with the enormous task of
lifting the residents of America's poorest, most violent and blighted
communities - communities that were allowed to, or even hastened into, decay by
decades of well-intended but misguided government policy on the federal, state
and local level.
Given government's culpability, we have a special,
moral responsibility to invest in returning these areas to decent standard of
living. Many of the pathologies that affect cities, like teenage pregnancy,
addiction, violence and generations of grinding poverty, were enabled by
policies that shredded the social compact in America's cities - in the apt
phrase of former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, we "defined deviancy down."
In our inner cities, and even in places like the rest of Maryland's
counties where the welfare rolls have dropped by more than three-quarters, the
goal of self-sufficiency in the current law is not being met. Without work
supports such as childcare, transportation, food stamps, housing supports, and
Medicaid, many people who are working, and working hard, would not be making it.
No one with a family can be self-sufficient in a minimum wage job. And
many of those who still remain on the welfare roles are, in fact, only qualified
to work in minimum wage jobs. They are the hardest to help. Many have multiple
barriers to employment. Many are high school dropouts with no GEDs. Many are
non-English speaking. Many often have multiple problems like substance abuse and
mental illness. Many are severely learning-disabled. And many have no work
history.
If you were an employer, would you hire them without the
assurance that they have had significant skills
training? TANF
should:
Provide funding for transitional community service jobs. One
possible means to accomplish this is through a federal/local partnership funding
entry-level jobs in cities to improve the quality of life in troubled
neighborhoods - a double benefit, providing local employment and enhanced local
services, like sanitation and community development.
Help low-income
fathers find jobs by extending access to
TANF employment
services.
Eliminate provisions that bar two-parent families from
participating.
Additionally, we should expand the earned income tax
credit and eliminate the existing marriage penalty in the effective program.
Accountability
Given the great need to invest in
training and addressing other critical needs for those
Americans who remain on our welfare rolls five years after the beginning of
reform, it is encouraging that there is broad consensus to preserve
TANF funding at its current level. The President is providing
strong leadership in this regard.
But there must be greater
accountability for how this funding is spent. Sadly, far too many states are
using
TANF funds to supplant state funds in their budgets. We
support some level of flexibility to ensure that the wide range of issues we
face can be met, but stricter controls must be put in place to remind governors
that the Congress appropriated these funds for families facing hard times, not
politicians facing hard choices.
Let me use the example of my own state
to illustrate what I mean:
As of last year, since the passage of the
1996 welfare reform legislation, 150,589 clients left the welfare rolls. There
were 77,298 welfare recipients in Maryland compared to 227,887 in 1995.
This caseload reduction has resulted in $
530 million in
welfare reform savings in State and federal funds, which once solely made
payments to Maryland's families in need. Half - or $
265 million
- of these savings are federal Temporary Assistance For Needy Families
(
TANF) funds, provided specifically to aid needy families.
Of this $
530 million in savings, $
200
million has been reinvested in breaking the cycle of poverty and dependence by
providing employment opportunities, supporting local welfare-to-work efforts and
subsidizing child care for working mothers.
$
90 million
was shifted to a "dedicated purpose fund" in the event of an economic downturn.
This year, most of this rainy day fund was raided to plug a gap in the State
general fund - to dodge difficult budget choices, not to help struggling
families. There is about $
11 million left.
However,
$
210 million - or 40% - of these funds have been diverted
entirely from the mission of welfare reform: supporting poor families and
helping them become self-sufficient.
The Governor substituted welfare
savings to make Foster Care Payments, and to fund Child Welfare Services and
other DHR programs. While these are
TANF eligible programs,
they always have been funded in addition to not instead of welfare-to-work
programs. By diverting welfare savings from their intended purpose, the State is
able to shift $
210 million in State General Funds, formerly
used for foster care and child welfare, into purposes unrelated to helping poor
families.
As a result - despite $
530 million in savings
that could and should be dedicated to helping poor families - we are spending
much less, not more, to support low-income families in their efforts to become
self-sufficient.
Much of the $
210 million that has been
diverted from welfare reform is being spent in large part on construction
projects around the state. And the dividend from welfare reform's success is not
being reinvested in the human capital that remains.
I know that Maryland
is not alone in these budgetary shenanigans. Very simply, the
TANF funds that the Congress has appropriated are not being
spent in the manner the Congress intended. And they are badly needed for that
purpose - providing opportunity and increasing self-sufficiency. If nothing else
is changed from the 1996 law, please clamp down on this abuse.
One
possible solution, given the increasing concentration of welfare recipients in
America's cities, is to provide
TANF funding directly to
cities. Send the resources to where they are needed and hold us accountable for
getting people to work.
Outcomes
Finally, our calls for
compassion can't be an excuse not to demand results. Mayors are as guilty of
this offense as anyone, but it extends to all levels of government. Adlai
Stephenson once said, "Bad administration will kill good policy every time."
It's not enough to say you care, you have to prove it through your actions.
Just as accountability must be increased for state governments
concerning how
TANF dollars are spent, we support increasing
accountability for local government. What gets measured gets done. We must
remain focused on results.
Given the importance and difficulty of what
we are trying to accomplish, it is unconscionable that we do not better track
outcomes - outcomes like employment, rising income levels, and each generation
improving on their parent's life. This is the American Dream, yet it does not
seem available for children growing up in neighborhoods where poverty is an
expectation and upward mobility virtually unknown.
In Baltimore, every
other week, we are tracking indicators ranging from social services, to job
training and placement, to clients served at our one-stop
centers. We're not yet where we need to be. I don't know that anyone is.
Traditionally, human services agencies have been reluctant to measure
outcomes because the work they do is so difficult. But we must take
responsibility for helping people change their circumstance. The only way I know
is to relentlessly track results and manage based on quality information. Jack
Maple, the inventor of Comstat once told me that everything can be statted.
I don't have all the answers, but I do know if we are not wed to what
has failed in the past, and we are not afraid of what real information might
tell us, we can do a better job for the people we serve.
To do so:
We must end supplanting at the state level.
We must continue
providing flexibility for state - and additionally local - governments to serve
the people they know best.
We must think creatively about how we get
people into jobs, and how we engage the private sector - whether with subsidies
or
training. We must help people get past that first
entry-level job.
And we can't forget fathers.
Thank you for
allowing me to testify here today. This is critical to America's cities. I will
be glad to answer any questions.
LOAD-DATE: May
1, 2002