TANF REAUTHORIZATION

 

Background

 

In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law P.L104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. The law essentially eliminated the federal welfare program known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and replaced it with a block grant to states called Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF).  TANF ended universal eligibility for welfare benefits and gave states latitude to create their own programs.

 

TANF now limits recipients to 60 months of benefits over a lifetime.  States may pay benefits beyond the 60-month eligibility limit for up to 20 percent of their caseloads due to “hardship.”  TANF agencies develop Individual Responsibility Plans geared to recipients achieving employment in competitive jobs prior to the loss of benefits.

 

Many welfare recipients are on the verge of losing their benefits since their 60-month time limit approaches.  Most former recipients who have gotten jobs are deemed to have been the “easiest” cases for securing and retaining employment.

 

There is evidence from several sources (one is a General Accounting Office study) that a substantial proportion (nearly 50 percent) of those families remaining on the TANF rolls are mothers who themselves have a physical or mental impairment or have children with such impairments.  It is also estimated that there are a considerable number who have never been identified as having a disability, persons who have a disability who are enrolled in the TANF program.  This is particularly likely for women who have mental or cognitive disabilities that were not identified while they were girls in school and never received special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).  These women have few, if any, skills, have very low reading levels and are likely never to have had job training opportunities.

 

TANF recipients with disabilities or those families with children with disabilities have substantial barriers to finding and maintaining employment.  Thus, they are likely to lose their TANF benefits after the 60-month time limit expires unless they are provided special exemptions, accommodations, job training, and other supports.

 

Action Taken by Congress and the Administration

 

TANF is scheduled to be reauthorized in 2002.  Several bills have been introduced and numerous others are expected to be introduced soon.  The Bush Administration has yet to release its TANF reauthorization proposals.  It is unclear what the U.S. Congress will do:  a thorough legislative review of TANF; tinker with the law; or simply reauthorize it for another time period.

 

Fiscal year 2002 funding for TANF is also unclear and may be decided based on the reauthorization process.  Given the anticipated FY 2003 federal deficit and the success rate thus far in reducing TANF rolls, efforts by some to reduce TANF funding is likely.  Better data on those families remaining in TANF and their greater challenges to secure employment may lead the U.S. Congress to protect or increase current TANF funding levels.

 

The Arc’s, AAMR’s, and AUCD’s Recommendations

 

The U.S. Congress must take disability, particularly mental retardation and related disabilities, into consideration as it reauthorizes TANF.  For those TANF recipients with disabilities who can work and want to work, states must put in place systems, programs, and supports to remove the many existing barriers that hinder persons with disabilities from achieving successful employment at sufficient wages to enable them and their families to achieve economic self-sufficiency.

 

For those TANF recipients who cannot work due to their disabilities or their role as caretakers of a child or other family member with a disability, the TANF law must be adjusted to protect and maintain the existing safety net of benefits and supports to enable these individuals to survive in our society.

 

Among the key TANF provisions which should be reviewed by the U.S. Congress in their relationship to disability concerns are:

 

Ø      the statement of purpose;

Ø      initial screening and comprehensive assessments;

Ø      individual responsibility plans;

Ø      agency collaboration and referrals;

Ø      work requirements;

Ø      time limits and sanctions;

Ø      civil rights protections;

Ø      accommodations; and

Ø      systems change, technical assistance, and training.

 

Relevant Committees

 

Senate Finance

House Ways and Means

House Education and the Workforce

 

For more information, please contact The Arc (202-785-3388), the AAMR (202-387-1968) or the Association of University Centers on Disabilities (301-588-8252).

 

2/2002