Welfare Reform Needs More Emphasis On "Reform"
 |
Nancy Vosler, Ph.D. Social Policy and the Working Poor |
Professor Nancy Vosler -- a Washington University in St. Louis expert on work, families, and poverty -- has been closely following the proposals of the two presidential candidates, and can help us decipher all the rhetoric we're hearing about "those who have been left behind."
"The prevailing U.S. political ideology stigmatizes welfare and poverty as 'individual' problems, and middle-class and working-class voters believe this ideology, so they've supported the welfare policy overhaul," said Vosler. "So, because the current welfare reform legislation was passed in 1996 with the administration's support, Gore has been politically astute to take credit for cutting the welfare rolls -- especially since the poor are the least likely to vote." Vosler qualified this by noting two things that may mitigate Gore's ability to take credit. "First of all, the welfare rolls might have gone down fairly substantially even without the 1996 legislation. Second, the expanding economy also has contributed to the decline in welfare recipients. Can Gore take credit for the expanding economy? Who knows?"
Vosler is disappointed that neither candidate is addressing some of the deeper problems behind the apparent success of welfare reform. She cautions that it is difficult to tell exactly what is happening to the people who have been removed from the welfare rolls. "Since each state is doing welfare reform in its own way, it is very difficult to make specific statements about what is 'working' and 'not working,' especially this soon after the 50+ programs began," warned Vosler. "We don't yet have definitive data, and each state presents a different set of variables. Anecdotal data indicate that many people coming off the rolls are moving into low-wage jobs without benefits. We don't know whether any -- and if any, how many -- are moving into the underground economy, since these 'jobs' are not reported."
Moreover, Vosler contends that in some ways, welfare reforms could be hurting as much as they help, since the time a parent spends at work necessarily produces other expenses, such as child care. "While some states are providing some supports (child care, transportation, health care), many families could be entering the already substantial 'working poor' category, putting a family at substantial risk for overwhelming stress, including having children in sub-standard child care, children unsupervised after school and during school vacations, and even homelessness," said Vosler. "This is often due to the parent's attempts to juggle housing and utility expenses in a budget that simply does not cover all of the basic necessities of life."
Vosler remains skeptical about Bush's argument that faith-based organizations should play a larger role in ameliorating poverty, and that we should funnel more federal anti-poverty money to such groups. "Yes, faith-based organizations can do some things well. However, I am afraid that this is likely another move (similar to the strategy of block grants over the past 10-15 years) to cut federal support without really knowing whether the 'granting' agency has the additional funds or the expertise to address the problems that we as a society say we want to address," said Vosler. She is also cautious about blurring the line between church and state. "There are very good political reasons to have that division in place, given our nation's diversity. For instance, what is the view of proselytizing in any given faith-based organization? What assumptions are made about recipients' needs and what might be required of them in terms of religious beliefs at a very vulnerable time in their lives?"
Finally, Vosler is concerned about the candidates recent emphasis on tax cuts -- presumably because the working poor already pay little if any in taxes, and so tax cuts will not benefit them. "Instead of focusing on cutting taxes, the candidates should recognize that the Earned Income Tax Credit is an important anti-poverty measure and should be expanded," she said. The Republican tax cut plan will benefit the rich greatly, and will likely put federal programs (including Medicare and Social Security) at much greater risk than will the Gore plan."
