Welfare Reform in the United States
Name
Institution
Course
Date
Introduction
Reforms on welfare are legislative strategies by government to change the policies on social welfare in the United States. The core aim of welfare reforms is to minimise the number of families or individuals who rely on assistance from the government (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). In addition, the reforms are designed to transform the recipients into self-reliant members of the society. In this regard, initial welfare programs were established to cater for under-privileged individuals during the Great Depression due to poor economic conditions. However, the policy makers felt that these programs were out-dated, promoted indigence and dependency among individuals (Blank, 2002). Therefore, welfare reforms were necessary because the programs were not sustainable to meet every need of less fortunate individuals or families in United States.
Thesis: Although the reform have promoted for reduction of dependency rates and increasing employment on single parents, it have fallen short in reducing cost of Medicaid and other social services in United States.
Part One: Inductive Argument
In 1996, the Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act to terminate the programs as they had prevailed since their inceptions. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA) is commonly referred to as Welfare Reform Act of 1996 (Hacker, 2004). This Act was a catalyst that spurred major changes in welfare provisions and benefits. For instance, the Welfare Reform Act provided for the Welfare-to-Work initiative that demanded for work in response to minimum financial assistance (Blank, 2002). Moreover, individuals who were benefiting from Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) were supposed to work for a minimum of twenty hours every week. The legislation stipulated certain activities that were acceptable to meet this requirement.
Following the enactment of Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA), it characterised by major controversies. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act had major provisions, which included devolution of the welfare programs to local and state governments (Wilde, et al, 2014). In this regard, PRWORA changed the federal Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program (AFDC) to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The reform was controversial because it removed all payments and eligibility rules of federal government (Blank, 2002). In response, the Act gave the state government more powers to design their own financial assistance programs to the public. Therefore, state could choose the families that deserved support.
Secondly, the reform changed the financial systems of welfare programs. The reasons why TANF substituted AFDC remain controversial. This is because the grant under TANF was fixed and the contribution for every state depended on the federal AFDC grant contribution in before Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act was enacted (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). In addition, states were allowed to maintain not less than seventy-five per cent of the initial spending levels on AFDC in order to receive full block grants.
Furthermore, the reforms proposed measures to establish incentives that would minimise non-marital births. However, this was controversial, as it did not provide ways in which such incentives would be implemented (Hacker, 2004). The reform was aimed at reducing non-marital births by promoting legitimate marriages. Moreover, special bonuses were awarded to states that reduced bearing of children out-of-wedlock without raising abortion (Blank, 2002).
There was increase in non-marital births during the 1980s, which was associated with welfare programs. The relevance of issue of births outside marriage is controversial. Initial reports indicated that welfare program were not the main reasons for trends in out-of-wedlock births (Hacker, 2004). The state-to state variations in payments of AFDC were not related to state-to-state differences in non-marital child bearing. Further, significant controversy existed regarding favourable approaches to minimise high rates of pregnancy among teenagers as well as increasing support to children (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). The uncertainty caused difficulties in making laws that cater for specific strategies even when needs have been identified to reach on objectives.
The reforms on welfare were myopic and static since the AFDC focused only on issues to deal with economic, health and social well-being of the underprivileged people. The costs of the welfare were not equitable to all individuals. Prior to welfare reforms, the federal government paid for all cost on supplemental security income and food stamps (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). The federal government allocated Funds on Medicaid and AFDC depending on the per capita income of each state. However, following the enactment of PRWORA the issues of poverty remained uncertain. Considerable controversy prevailed on the best strategies to reduce poverty among underprivileged individuals (Wilde, et al, 2014). PRWORA provided for a lifetime restriction of five years on the recipient of aid of TANF funds. Besides, states could exclude not more than twenty per cent of their caseload from this restriction (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). The state government could continue to fund their underprivileged families after the five-year period entirely out of their state funds.
The Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) funds the needy families with children. In addition, families were given food stamps that helped individuals and families to buy food. Supplemental security income (SSI) offered income to underprivileged individuals such as disabled persons, needy aged and blind while Medicaid provided health care to the poor individuals. However, after the enactment of PRWORA the AFDC was substituted with block grants for TANF in local and states governments (Hacker, 2004). The reform also changed the standards of eligibility supplemental security income and food stamps.
The law entitled the states with more freedom to allocate block-grant funds. Additionally, recipients of welfare programs who did not comply with the provisions of the new program faced strict sanctions. This reform was controversial because the states were not obligated to support the poor families. Moreover, the law provided for job opportunities for individuals with lower income (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). However, there were decreased opportunities for low-skilled jobs in United States hence limiting attempts towards self-reliance among individuals. The economy in 1990s was characterized by proliferation of jobs opportunities (Blank, 2002). However, the market has changed and jobs available requires high-level of expertise. This has contributed to prevalence of poverty in the country.
The welfare reforms do not take into account the barriers to employment of the welfare recipients. Training on job skills and childcare remains the core barriers to employment among recipients of welfare programs. However, the PRWORA does not account for programs that are related to improving the work related skills for the families and individuals. Reports findings indicate that poverty contribute to lower job skills among welfare program recipients (Austin, & Feit, 2013). Welfare reforms were linked to other social problems such as substance abuse, mental and physical health and domestic violence among welfare recipients.
In 2004, the welfare-to-work program was terminated but it facilitated the changing of lives of millions of American citizens. Welfare program began in 1930 but over the years, the needs and welfare of individuals have changed hence the need for welfare reform (Tanner, 2014). The TANF program was reauthorized in 2005 and this social welfare is the source of help for most struggling families. Medicaid, food stamps supplemental security income also continues to offer services to the public. In addition, the government has also established Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC) that is providing funds to low income citizens to enable them meet their financial needs (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). Following the passing of welfare reform act federal government role has been reduced. It is obligated to provide general goal setting and monitoring for performance of the states.
Second Part: Analysis of the Arguments
Reports by independent Brookings Institute indicate that the national welfare caseload reduced by approximately sixty per cent between 1994 and 2004. For instance, states governments that implemented instant work requirements and robust sanctions to welfare recipients with noncompliance behaviours recorded reduction in caseload by fifty per cent (Porter, 2002). However, state government with sanctions mechanisms that were weak and had no instant requirements on formal work had less than 15 per cent caseload reduction between January 1997 and June 1998 (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). Therefore, welfare reforms have contributed to reduction in dependence rates in United States.
Since the enactment of Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act in 1996, the number of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients reduced by more than 55 per cent. However, a number of states have recorded increase in caseloads (Austin, & Feit, 2013). This is because Temporary Assistance for Needy Families changed the entitlement nature program and converted it to block grants to states. These funds had limited and fixed amount of funds accessible in each state (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). Contrary, recipients of these funds have been encouraged to work by promoting employment opportunities for recipients.
In addition, the number of children who have been on welfare is significantly lower than it has been from 1980s. Furthermore, Census Bureau findings indicate that the percentage of single mothers and low-income earners with a job increased from 57 per cent to 74 per cent between 1993 and 2000 (Porter, 2002).
Welfare reforms were predicted to increase the child poverty levels. However, the reform decreased the dependence level that facilitated beneficial effects on developments of children (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). Reports indicated that a fall in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families caseload led to significant reduction in poverty of children. The child poverty levels have been recorded at 12 per cent – lowest since 1979. The single mother and black child poverty rate are now at the lowest level since the U.S history (Austin, & Feit, 2013). This positive report is recorded at individual state level. For instance, the state of Wisconsin is among the leading states in reduction of poverty in the country (Porter, 2002).
It has minimised the rate of poverty in children by more than fifty per cent and it is one of the lowest in the country. Therefore, states with strict sanctions on non-compliance behaviours by welfare recipients have recorded drastic reduction in child poverty (Hacker, 2004). Nevertheless, states which have lenient sanctions and poor requirements on work have lower reduction in child poverty.
The welfare reforms contributed to decline of percentage of births out-of-wedlock. Since 1996, there is a drastic growth in legitimacy marriage. The rate of birth-out-of wedlock slowed considerably among the whites and the blacks. The congress openly discussed the effects of illegitimacy on children and society. In subsequent years following the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, the rate of illegitimate births remained low or it slightly increased (Porter, 2002). This reduced the out-of-wedlock childbirths growth due to emphases on personal responsibility and limited amount of financial aid. Report findings documented that within three year of the enactment of the reform, thousands of the American had transformed from being reliance of government funds to being independent (Ben-Shalom, et al, 2011). Additionally, several agencies reported a decrease in the number of cases of social welfare. Furthermore, in 2003, the Congress passed welfare reform agenda. The main goals of 2003 reforms were developed based on Welfare Reform Act of 2006. Besides, the aims of reform act of 2003 were to establish assistance to families and individuals in achieving financial self-reliance from the government (Pierson, 2011). It also incorporated aspects of children protection as well as strengthening the families. In addition, state and local governments were empowered to assist to the families and individuals in achieving the independence status (Porter, 2002). This was an important aspect because it improved the health and economy of not only the individuals but also the nation’s economy.
However, not all the states had active strategies of reducing illegitimacy child bearing or increase marriage. Fortunately, the Welfare Reform Act contributed to change in behaviour in a positive manner even with limited efforts to encourage that change (Blank, 2002). Therefore, the reform caused optimism regarding the program probable effects that were developed to reduce illegitimate births and increase marriage.
The welfare reform also increased the number of single women who were working. Reports indicated that more than seventy per cent of single women were working as compared to sixty six per cent of married women who were working. Moreover, the income of single women has been rising credited to Earned Income Tax Expansion Credit (EITC) (Pierson, 2011). Major companies have hired welfare recipients. For instance UPS employed more than 50, 000 welfare recipients while CVS/pharmacy employed more than 45, 000 workers (Wilde, et al, 2014). Therefore, the reforms have contributed to the increase in job-services relative to critics that jobs opportunities would reduce job opportunities.
In conclusion, the welfare reform programs have not been fully successful in promoting social welfare because more than fifty per cent of women who left the welfare continue to work in low-paying jobs. Therefore, most single working mothers are “working poor” hence many of these families are still struggling (Porter, 2002). In addition, individuals who are challenged by mental illnesses, criminal records and drug abuse have limited opportunity to secure employment (Gordon, (Ed.). 2012). More than fifty per cent of recipients of welfare programs have not attempted to look for jobs. Instead, the individuals engage in activities for enhancing their expertise or attending classes. Consequently, there is no reciprocal responsibility because individual receiving these funds are not engaging in economic activities. The program has also not succeeded in offering services to eligible recipients (Tanner, 2014). The reforms increased eligibility restrictions that discourages individuals from applying them thus it does not assist individuals when they are unemployed. Moreover, while the number of individuals receiving funds under TANF has reduced, other components of social safety are increasing. For instance, the number of recipients of food stamps and Medicaid has expanded by more than 45 per cent since 2001 (Hacker, 2004). In this regard, Medicaid is now the leading financial programs in the country with more than 54 million people while close to 25 million individuals get food stamps. Hence, the welfare system is precisely the same way it was in 1970s and 80s except that it more expensive and bigger.
References
Austin, M. J., & Feit, M. D. (2013). Changing welfare services: Case studies of local welfare reform programs. Routledge.
Ben-Shalom, Y., Moffitt, R. A., & Scholz, J. K. (2011). An assessment of the effectiveness of anti-poverty programs in the United States (No. w17042). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Blank, R. M. (2002). Evaluating welfare reform in the United States (No. w8983). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Gordon, L. (Ed.). (2012). Women, the state, and welfare. University of Wisconsin Pres.
Hacker, J. S. (2004). Privatizing risk without privatizing the welfare state: The hidden politics of social policy retrenchment in the United States. American Political Science Review, 98(02), 243-260.
Pierson, P. (2011). The welfare state over the very long run (No. 02/2011). ZeS-Arbeitspapier.
Porter, B. (2002). The voice of reason (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Tanner, M. D. (2014). Ending welfare as we know it. Development.
Wilde, E. T., Rosen, Z., Couch, K., & Muennig, P. A. (2014). Impact of welfare reform on mortality: an evaluation of the Connecticut jobs first program, a randomized controlled trial. American journal of public health, 104(3), 534-538.