Increasing Poverty Through Welfare Reform

ITS HARD TO BELIEVE its been twenty years since Bill Clinton proved he was not entirely liberal by signing into law a reformed, watered down welfare bill, just like the republican congress ordered. Accordingly, welfare money is now handed out to the states in block grants, to appropriate as they please, and the cost to the government has dropped from about twenty billion a year to around sixteen billion. TANF, Temporary Assistance To Needy Families, may, according to the law, be applied in four different ways. As direct cash payments to impoverished families, to encourage people not to have children out of wedlock, for education and work training, and to provide, believe it or not, marriage counseling to married couples to help them stay married in order to avoid divorcing and thus providing society with yet more impoverished single mothers and children. There is now a limit on how long people may receive such assistance. It tuns out that in most states most of the money is applied to marriage counseling and educating people to avoid getting pregnant while single, with a good amount of it going to job training and last and least to impoverished families as direct cash assistance. The problem with the marriage counseling part is that all across the country perfectly affluent middle and upper middle income married couples are and long have been enrolled, which means that although they are perfectly affluent, they are on welfare. Also, it doesn't work often enough. By the time married couples seek marriage counseling, its usually too late. The crusade against unwed mothers may be having some effect, but is offset by a cultural shift in which it is no longer considered a great sin and crime to get pregnant out of wedlock. In fact, many women prefer it that way. Job training is having a good impact, but not good enough, as job skills gained do not always match available jobs. Also, many of those receiving job training are quite capable of getting it at their own expense, because it is available to many income level groups. Direct assistance to families in need, the old fashioned way, still might be the best answer, and the fact that the time allowed for receiving it is now limited helps diffuse the traditional complaints from conservatives that welfare creates permanent dependency. Unfortunately, only about twenty five percent of the block grant money usually goes for that purpose. The end result of all this is that the number of people living below the poverty line continues to increase as a percentage of the population, indicating that welfare isn't working quite as well as planned. It merits consideration, however, that without any welfare system at all, probably half the country would be living in poverty, and that is surely systemic. Unless, or course, someone wants to suggest that half the American population is either stupid, lazy, or incompetent. Not even a conservative would be so insensitive and unrealistic to make such an assertion. At least, so we can hope.