Proposed TANF Rules Impossible
to Meet
 According
to Pennsylvania's Department of Public Welfare (DPW), new TANF
requirements proposed by the Bush Administration and the U.S.
House of Representatives would be "virtually impossible to
meet".
That assessment is contained in documents prepared by DPW to
help policymakers understand the impact in Pennsylvania of various
proposals for the next phase of welfare reform.
The Bush Administration proposal, passed by the U.S. House on
May 16th and sent on to the Senate, would eliminate Pennsylvania's
existing case reduction credit, raise the work requirement from
30 to 40 hours per week, and penalize states in which at least
70 percent of parents on cash assistance fall short of 40 hours
per week.
DPW documents describe grave consequences for Pennsylvania if
the President's plan is adopted: "States that wish to continue
the policies and resource allocations that have evolved from their
5 years of experience would be better advised to ignore the new
requirement and accept the 5% penalty. In Pennsylvania this would
be about $36 million. Although much smaller than the costs of
attempting to meet the requirement, this is no small matter. Our
current child care program for non-TANF related families now keeps
up with demand. Families rarely have to wait for services. A $36
million cut would result in long waiting lists across the state."
At stake are the positive results achieved since the reform effort
began in 1997. According to DPW, those include:
1. 79 percent of the families that have been on welfare have
left and have not returned. Only 3 percent of the original
caseload remain on welfare.
2. The median length of time on cash assistance has fallen
from 15 months to 7 months.
3. Nearly two-thirds of families leave welfare in less than
12 months, up from 43 percent before.
4. Over $300 million annually is currently supporting employed
parents not on welfare through child care subsidies and retention
and advancement programs.
To meet the proposed new requirements, DPW would need to retool
its programs. The emphasis would change from getting working parents
off welfare quickly to keeping working parents on welfare so that
they could be counted toward the 70 percent minimum.
According to DPW, meeting the proposed new requirements would
necessitate spending annually $62 million more for training programs,
$100 million more for publicly supported employment, and $200
million more for child care while parents are busy meeting the
40 hour minimum. To pay for this, DPW has said it would stop helping
non-welfare parents who are struggling in low-paying jobs.
At a June 3 news conference in Harrisburg, Senator Rick Santorum
expressed enthusiastic support for the tougher federal requirements.
Santorum said due to the dropping caseload, DPW has plenty of
money to pay for programs to keep 70 percent of parents busy 40
hours a week and also to pay for the care of their children.
Governor Schweiker sees it very differently. In a May 17th letter
to Santorum, Schweiker said the House-passed bill would "unfairly
penalize the Commonwealth" and "would require us to dismantle
much of our own time-tested and effective welfare program."
The 40 hour-a-week work requirement has often been characterized
as "reasonable" because so many Americans work a 40-hour
week. This misses the point. In the real world, parents leave
welfare by securing marginal jobs at variable hours. As their
hours become more regular and approach 25-30 per week, the family
stops receiving cash assistance. There simply is no glut of welfare
parents stalled at 30 hours of work who will get moving again
if the standard is raised.
Back to Top
|
