Personal Opinion On Welfare Reform

782 Words4 Pages
Ian Short PHI-1030 TR 8:30-9:45 For over a decade, welfare reform has been an important ethical issue, from the dinner table to the political debate table. This paper will give a brief history and summarize a few key arguments for the increased regulation and transparency of the welfare system as well as arguments against the welfare portion of the new stimulus bill, drawing from Kantian, Social Contract and Rule Utilitarian ethical theories. In 1996, the Welfare Reform Act was signed into law, effectively replacing the outdated Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which was adopted during the New Deal, with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF. Under this new law, welfare recipients were required to work within a period of 2 years in order to receive benefits as opposed to being able to claim welfare for indefinite periods of time.. However, the 2009 stimulus bill rescinded these historic reforms with an unprecedented $264 billion increase to carte blanche welfare spending – 32% of the total $816 billion stimulus bill – with the explanation of pre-empting and therefore avoiding widespread unemployment and poverty. If we look at the historical results of the TANF, we see that the old AFDC welfare rolls declined by 60% across the country, as former recipients moved into real jobs and enjoyed an increase in their income[1]. As a result, child poverty levels fell as did federal spending on the AFDC/TANF. It also effectively decreased some suffering and improved self-confidence in those who were able to become contributing members of society. With the new stimulus bill being signed into law, we are once again providing an open line of taxpayer money for welfare dependency, now with fewer questions being asked. The inception of the TANF was loosely based on utilitarianism and social contract ideals of creating less

More about Personal Opinion On Welfare Reform

Open Document