Copyright 2001 The San Diego Union-Tribune The San
Diego Union-Tribune
August 21, 2001, Tuesday
SECTION: OPINION;Pg. B-9
LENGTH:
846 words
HEADLINE: The next step for welfare
reform
BYLINE: Deepak Bhargava and Peter
Edelman; Bhargava is director of the National Campaign for Jobs and Income
Support. Edelman is a professor of law at Georgetown University.
BODY: It's time to move beyond the argument over
welfare reform. This week, as we look forward from the five-year anniversary of
the 1996 law to reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families
(TANF) program in 2002, it is clearer than ever that the issue is not just
welfare. It is poverty, and welfare reform 1996-style won't do enough about
it.
The overriding purpose of the 1996 law was to
reduce welfare caseloads, and by that measure, it succeeded. But that success
obscures both the harm TANF has done and, as important, the good it is not in a
position to do.
First the harm. In the last five
prosperous years, the only demographic groups to lose ground are the very
poorest families and immigrants. Caseloads are down, but poverty persists. TANF
provides no relief at all to most low-income families. Most immigrants, low-wage
workers and two-parent families continue to be denied aid. Eligible families are
thrown off the rolls, steered away from cash assistance or ensnared in endless
red tape. Benefit levels remain below the poverty line in every state.
And then there are the children. TANF's approach to work
ignores the complexities of parenthood for low-income mothers and fathers. As we
all struggle to balance work and family, imagine the challenges for low-wage
workers who often have two jobs, unreliable child care, inadequate
transportation, and no sick leave or parental leave. TANF is not a family
value.
TANF was always about welfare as a system, not
poverty as a fact. TANF "succeeded" in dispatching welfare, but its architecture
is not relevant to the challenge of ending poverty. But, we should acknowledge,
somewhat ironically, that TANF has done two things to help point the way to
genuine poverty reduction.
One, the 1996 law ended the
perennial debate about a system that no one liked, least of all low-income
parents. The resentment and anger that surrounded the AFDC system is gone and
the public is open to a more thorough, rational approach. Two, TANF raised
serious questions, particularly about work and family, and in proving incapable
of answering them, opened the door to solutions that reflect the complexities of
low-income life.
What TANF set in motion can be
redirected, transforming welfare from a punitive system into a ladder of
opportunity that provides poor people with access to the income,
training, and supports they need to lift and keep themselves out of
poverty. Moreover, with TANF proving that poverty far outlasts welfare,
the system should be opened up to all low-income families, including all
low-wage workers, unemployed parents, two-parent families, and immigrants.
There is recent precedent for this approach. More and
more, Medicaid, child health, and child care programs use income as the standard
for eligibility, making these critical services available to a broader group of
low-income families. In some cases, coverage is provided to all children or
parents below 200 percent of the poverty line. These new policies take into
account the fluid incomes of workers who contend with a low-wage job market that
often produces periods of unemployment. Understanding this reality, and
adjusting for it, is the only way to provide seamless coverage to those who need
it most.
A few states also have adopted innovations
that feed a vision for a new TANF framework. Maine, Maryland, and others
have allowed education and training to count as work activity. Montana's
at-home infant care program allows low-income parents to care for their own
young children. Michigan has no time limit for families that comply with program
requirements, and some states provide support to two-parent as well as single
parent families. These efforts, however, have been piecemeal, and we know that
only the federal government can assure maximum impact for everyone living in
poverty.
A new policy framework for TANF
reauthorization will require legislating through the lens of a low-income
family. That means, among other things, encouraging cash help based on need;
suspending time limits for families who do what the law asks; allowing education
and training to count as work so parents can advance in the job market;
discouraging arbitrary rules that cut off or deny help; requiring states to
measure their grant levels against a poverty standard that reflects what it
really takes for families to survive; reducing work requirements for parents
with sick, disabled, or very young children, or infirm relatives; and halting
discrimination against immigrants.
What TANF
reauthorization needs most is a change in perspective, along with action on
other anti-poverty fronts. Unless people of good will across the political
spectrum take a fresh look, we could be in for more posturing that does nothing
to help families get out of poverty.
We'll hear plenty
of self-congratulation in the months ahead by those who know little of the
struggle of poor families. But if we could end welfare as we knew it, then
surely we can end policy making by bumper sticker as we know it.
Document 10 of 13. 