Welfare's Changing Face

1372 Words6 Pages
| Washington, D.C. welfare caseworker Angela Perkins talks to Cynthia Harris. (Juana Arias, Washington Post) | Welfare's Changing Face By Dan FroomkinWashingtonpost.com StaffUpdated July 23, 1998 Welfare as we knew it no longer exists. The 61-year American tradition of guaranteeing cash assistance to the poor came to an end with the signing of legislation in August 1996. Under the old system, founded during the Great Depression, the federal government provided fairly uniform benefits to the nation's poor – mostly mothers and children – without regard to the details of their personal circumstances, and with no time limit. But over time, the system became increasingly unpopular. Political opinion turned against the idea of anyone…show more content…
And it is far from clear whether the poor will be better or worse off. This essay provides an introduction to the following topics: The New System Some Examples The Concerns The Politics Where It Stands This special report includes key news stories and a selection of opinions and editorials from The Post. You can share your thoughts and concerns in our discussion area, or use our select list of links to surf the Web for more. The New System The welfare "reform" of the Clinton era consists of two major elements: a revolutionary change in the basic goals set by the federal government; and a dramatic "devolution" of responsibility – turning what used to be a federal, centralized system over to the states. Reflecting the new federal mission, welfare rules now: Require most recipients to work within two years of receiving assistance, Limit most assistance to five years total, and Let states establish "family caps" to deny additional benefits to mothers for children born while the mothers are already on public assistance. The devolution to the states is in some ways even more dramatic. Traditionally, the federal government set eligibility guidelines on a national basis, then parceled out money to the states to fund specific programs at certain…show more content…
All the variation in public assistance could lead to migrations of welfare recipients to places where benefits are more generous. And some worry that the result could be a "race to the bottom" as local governments reduce benefits in an attempt to avoid attracting more poor people – or even drive them out entirely. The Politics Politically, welfare reform is perhaps the most conspicuous example of how President Clinton adopted – some say co-opted – parts of the Republican agenda. Historically, Democrats had defended the old welfare system against GOP attacks. Clinton defined himself as a centrist Democrat in his 1992 campaign in part by promising to "end welfare as we know it." After the Republican takeover of Congress, he fended off certain GOP welfare provisions but ultimately signed a bill that liberal members of Congress considered much too cruel to the poor. In another notable reversal, it is generally liberals who champion social engineering – and conservatives who scoff at the idea that government should try to change individual behavior. Now it is conservatives who most strongly support certain welfare rules, including the family cap and a requirement that most teenage parents live with their own parents in

More about Welfare's Changing Face

Open Document