Misplaced Pages

#461538

76-500: The Bill for an Act with this short title may have been known as a Welfare Reform Bill during its passage through Parliament. Northern Ireland Scotland The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act is sometimes referred to as the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 ( PRWORA )

152-728: A change in the law permitted states to extend benefits to families where the father was unemployed, a measure which 25 states eventually adopted. The words "families with" were added to the name in 1962, partly due to concern that the program's rules discouraged marriage. The civil rights movement and the efforts of the National Welfare Rights Organization in the 1960s expanded the scope of welfare entitlements to include black women. The welfare rolls’ racial demographics changed drastically. The majority of welfare recipients still remained white and most black female recipients continued to work. Starting in 1962,

228-484: A critical barrier to low-income mothers who now are required to find work. Welfare and poverty rates both declined during the late 1990s, leading many commentators to declare that the legislation was a success. One editorial in The New Republic opined, "A broad consensus now holds that welfare reform was certainly not a disaster—and that it may, in fact, have worked much as its designers had hoped." However,

304-457: A downwards trend. As enrollment in TANF decreased, macroeconomic indicators such as unemployment rate, number of children in poverty and extreme poverty, and number of single-parent households below the poverty line followed an upwards trend with sharp increases during the late 2007-2009 recession. Alleging that enrollment in the program did not track poverty, critics of welfare reform point to this as

380-547: A failure of the PRWORA. Frances Fox Piven said that the problem with AFDC was not a problem with the welfare system, but with low-wage work : Logically, but not in the heated and vitriolic politics created by the attack on welfare, a concern with the relationship of welfare to dependency should have directed attention to the deteriorating conditions of the low-wage labor market. After all, if there were jobs that paid living wages, and if health care and child care were available,

456-513: A five-year lifetime limit on benefits. After the passage of the law, the number of individuals receiving federal welfare dramatically declined. The law was heralded as a "re-assertion of America's work ethic" by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce , largely in response to the bill's workfare component. AFDC caseloads increased dramatically from the 1930s to the 1960s as restrictions on the availability of cash support to poor families (especially single-parent, female-headed households) were reduced. Under

532-629: A great many women on AFDC would leap at the chance of a better income and a little social respect. PRWORA has been accused of attempting to fight poverty by "controlling the reproductive capacity of women, compelling unmarried mothers to work outside the home, and coercing women into relations with men." Barbara Ehrenreich , a feminist political activist, has said that the bill was motivated by racism and misogyny, using stereotypes of lazy, overweight, slovenly, sexually indulgent and "endlessly fecund" African-American welfare recipients, and assumed that out-of-wedlock births were "illegitimate" and that only

608-441: A job but are also the primary caregiver to their children. According to census data from 1995, one year before PWORWA was enacted, found that "11 million children under age 6 have mothers who work outside the home and thus make use of some form of child care. It has been estimated that this number will increase by almost 2 million when mothers who previously received AFDC assistance are required to find employment." Child care provides

684-456: A job would mean not only losing benefits but also incur child care, transportation and clothing costs. Their new jobs probably would not pay well or include health insurance, whereas on welfare they would have been covered by Medicaid. Therefore, there are many reasons welfare recipients would be discouraged from working. In the 1980s, AFDC came under increasing bipartisan criticism for the program's alleged ineffectiveness. While acknowledging

760-490: A large increase in enrollment. For example, caseloads rose 24% from 1960 to 1965, but rose 126% in the period from 1965 to 1970. The Supreme Court ruled in Califano v. Westcott (1979) that two-parent families with an unemployed mother are entitled to Aid to Families with Dependent Children benefits. Early in the program, there were concerns about whether it encouraged unwed motherhood . Some advocates complained that

836-522: A larger discourse on welfare reform . Republican governor Tommy Thompson began instituting welfare reform in Wisconsin during his governorship in the late-1980s and early-1990s. In lobbying the federal government to grant states wider latitude for implementing welfare, Thompson wanted a system where "pregnant teen-aged girls from Milwaukee , no matter what their background is or where they live, can pursue careers and chase their dreams." His solution

SECTION 10

#1732765201462

912-583: A lifetime ban for drug felons. The change is part of criminal justice reforms lawmakers have passed in aiming to prevent recidivism or the tendency for convicted criminals to reoffend. Another provision of PRWORA made some immigrants entering the United States ineligible for federal public benefits during the first five years after securing "qualified" immigrant status. Qualified immigrants include: All other immigrants, including illegal immigrants, temporary residents, and those who are lawfully present in

988-415: A loss of opportunities for promotions and pressure on women to prioritize their domestic duties and to work jobs that can accommodate for these duties. She asserts that welfare systems, including PRWORA, were not made for women, because they have been created based on the male Breadwinner model , which believes that people are poor because they are jobless and the solution is to give them jobs. But because of

1064-494: A male could confer respectability on a child. PRWORA dismissed the value of the unpaid work of raising a family, and insisted that mothers get paid work, "no matter how dangerous, abusive, or poorly paid". Three assistant secretaries at the Department of Health and Human Services, Mary Jo Bane , Peter B. Edelman , and Wendell E. Primus, resigned to protest the law. According to Edelman, the 1996 welfare reform law destroyed

1140-640: A means of "privatizing poverty, reaffirming patriarchy, and spotlighting women of color as moral failures." AFDC Aid to Families with Dependent Children ( AFDC ) was a federal assistance program in the United States in effect from 1935 to 1997, created by the Social Security Act (SSA) and administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provided financial assistance to children whose families had low or no income . The program grew from

1216-491: A memo saying that, if states found ways to increase employment generally, they could apply to waive the requirement that 50 percent of a state's TANF caseload be employed. The waiver would allow states to continue distributing TANF funds without requiring individual recipients to work. The Obama administration said this was intended to give states flexibility in how they operate their welfare programs. Some states struggled to help TANF applicants find jobs, noted Peter Edelman ,

1292-406: A minor part of the social security system to a significant system of welfare administered by the states with federal funding. However, it was criticized for offering incentives for women to have children, and for providing disincentives for women to join the workforce . In July 1997, AFDC was replaced by the more restrictive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. The program

1368-507: A part of the family's total income. By 1981, the Supreme Court went further and required that states take into consideration the income earned by step-fathers. The year 1967 saw the establishment of the thirty-and-a-third rule, which allowed families to keep their first $ 30 earned along with one third of their income following the first $ 30 without the change affecting their eligibility for benefits. This and other factors led to

1444-631: A strong negative correlation for TANF assistance granted to immigrants, as states with large African American populations were more likely to correspond with excluding lawful permanent residents from the program. In addition, states with large immigrant populations were more likely to correspond with people participating in Medicaid, as the program was designed to incentivize high-poverty states to include more people. In fact, high-poverty states acquire higher federal funding rates for each individual they cover through Medicaid. A large body of research examines

1520-454: A unique position when it comes to welfare, poverty, and work. Without proper education and training programs, women are often not able to obtain jobs that provide an income large enough to lift themselves and their families out of welfare. Another major impact of work requirements on women in welfare programs is the absence of adequate and affordable child care. This issue disproportionately affects single mothers on welfare who are required to get

1596-722: Is a United States federal law passed by the 104th United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton . The bill implemented major changes to U.S. social welfare policy , replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. The law was a cornerstone of the Republican Party 's " Contract with America ", and also fulfilled Clinton's campaign promise to "end welfare as we know it". AFDC had come under increasing criticism in

SECTION 20

#1732765201462

1672-410: Is a function of population, it is not perfectly responsive considering the populations that would perceive benefits (i.e. population greater than 10%) only grew from five states in 1984 to ten in 2001. The remaining states exhibited negative relationships between Latino population and welfare generosity with legislative incorporation not overcoming this phenomenon. The last major reform effort of PRWORA

1748-407: Is envisioned as being lazy, uncaring of her children (who are also stereotyped as having been born out-of-wedlock), and unwilling to work. This version of the woman is labelled as "undeserving" of their welfare. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act has continuously been criticized for its violations of universal human rights. Susan L. Thomas, a professor at Hollins University , wrote

1824-426: Is further critiqued for its lack of consideration of familial responsibilities, such as caring for children and elderly parents, which are placed more heavily upon women. The bill has also been criticized for ignoring and not accommodating for the complexities of gender, color, and sexual preference discrimination within society that contribute to the poverty of people of color, women, and LGBT people. Diana Pearce,

1900-412: Is only amplified when considering the issue of the segregation of women into underpaid work, limiting possibilities of economic growth. Susan L. Thomas made similar arguments, stating that these disadvantages were created from masculinism . She argued that masculinism gives men more roles in the labor market, while reserving the responsibility of "family" and reproduction to (white) women, resulting in

1976-551: The American Economic Review by Crystal S. Yang examined the effects of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act's ban on welfare benefits and food stamps to individuals convicted of felony drug offenses. Yang determined that access to welfare and food stamps at the time of release "substantially decreases recidivism among newly released drug offenders". Besides

2052-499: The Social Security Act of 1935, federal funds only covered part of relief costs, providing an incentive for localities to make welfare difficult to obtain. More permissive laws were tested during the Great Migration between 1940 and 1970 in which millions of black people migrated from the agricultural South to the more industrial northern and western regions of the United States to find jobs in wartime defense industry and in

2128-725: The 1980s, especially from conservatives who argued that welfare recipients were "trapped in a cycle of poverty ". After the 1994 elections , the Republican-controlled Congress passed two major bills designed to reform welfare, but they were vetoed by Clinton. After negotiations between Clinton and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich , Congress passed PRWORA, and Clinton signed the bill into law on August 22, 1996. PRWORA granted states greater latitude in administering social welfare programs, and implemented new requirements on welfare recipients, including

2204-427: The Department of Health and Human Services allowed state-specific exemptions as long as the change was "in the spirit of AFDC" in order to allow some experimentation. By 1996 spending was $ 24 billion per year. When adjusted for inflation, the highest spending was in 1976, which exceeded 1996 spending by about 8%. In 1967 the federal government began requiring states to establish the paternity of children eligible for

2280-451: The PRWORA was a lifetime ban on the use of food stamps through TANF for people convicted of drug felonies. It disallowed those with federal or state felony drug convictions from receiving benefits from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and TANF for life. Although it applied to all 50 states by default, states were also given the option to opt out of the ban. As of May 2019, only two states (South Carolina and West Virginia) have

2356-585: The Republican Party would continue to apply political pressure to the President to approve welfare legislation. In 1996, after constructing two welfare reform bills that were vetoed by President Clinton, Gingrich and his supporters pushed for the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), a bill aimed at substantially reconstructing the welfare system. Authored by Rep. John Kasich and introduced to Congress

Welfare Reform Act - Misplaced Pages Continue

2432-424: The U.S., are considered "not qualified". With a few exceptions, PRWORA excluded people in both categories from eligibility for many benefits: TANF, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, and State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). PRWORA enforced new citizenship requirements for federal public benefits. The involvement of immigrants in public benefits programs greatly decreased after

2508-503: The ability to design their own systems, as long as states met a set of basic federal requirements. The bill's primary requirements and effects included the following: The legislation also greatly limited funds available for unmarried parents under 18 and restricted any funding to all immigrants. Some state programs emphasized a shift towards work with names such as " Wisconsin Works " and "WorkFirst." Between 1997 and 2000, enormous numbers of

2584-675: The amount allocated to each state based on the state's spending history. These block grant amounts proved to be more than the states could initially spend, as AFDC and TANF caseloads dropped by 40% from 1994 to 1998 due to the booming economy. As a result, states had accumulated surpluses which could be spent in future years. States also had the flexibility to use these funds for child care and other programs. CBO also estimated that TANF outlays (actual spending) would total $ 12.6 billion in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, grow to $ 14.2 billion by 2002, and reach $ 19.4 billion by 2009. For scale, total spending in FY 2000

2660-451: The appointment. Welfare reform efforts such as PRWORA have been criticized for focusing almost exclusively on individual failure and irresponsibility, especially among people of color, as factors leading to poverty. However, there is no scholarly consensus on the etiology of poverty, and many theories focus instead on structural inequalities such as disparities in pay and hiring discrimination . The concept of "personal responsibility"

2736-414: The bill for not taking all these factors into consideration when deciding who is "worthy" and "unworthy" of welfare. Many critics have argued that the PRWORA bases its reasoning on the stereotype of single black mothers who receive welfare, commonly known as the "welfare queen." The welfare queen is one who often deliberately and intentionally becomes pregnant in order to increase their welfare. The woman

2812-583: The bill violates Articles 2, 5 and 16 of the Women's Convention as it allows states to fail to "condemn discrimination in all its forms", by promoting patriarchal , heterosexual marriage; discriminating against unmarried mothers and women of color ; and infringing on women's constitutional rights to privacy and procreation. Gwendolyn Mink, an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of California, Santa Cruz , has criticized TANF for using marriage as

2888-601: The director of the Georgetown Center on Poverty, Inequality and Public Policy. The change was questioned by Republicans including Dave Camp , chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee , and Orrin Hatch , who expressed concern that the memo would remove the main focus of PRWORA. Mitt Romney attacked the measure, saying that Obama was "gutting welfare reform". However, PolitiFact stated that Romney's claim

2964-489: The director of the Center for Women's Welfare, writes that poverty for women is fundamentally different from that for men, but welfare itself is created for poor men. She asserts that women's poverty is caused by two problems that are unique for women: the responsibility to provide all or most financial support for their children and the disadvantages they face in the labor market. In 1988, the average woman received 66 percent of

3040-438: The discrimination women faced, simply finding full-time jobs that paid enough money for independence from welfare is not easy for poor women, Thomas proclaimed and added, "for women it is not the lack of employment that leads to their disproportionately high rates of poverty, rather their poverty stems from the ideological consequences of a gender-biased structuring of the distribution of power and privilege." Thomas then criticized

3116-554: The economic trends occurring during the passing and implementation of PRWORA; researchers cannot pinpoint the exact factors that led to the decrease in enrollment in AFDC/TANF, even in times of economic downturn. Some labor economists argue that the continuing decline in AFDC/TANF enrollment was not due to improved standard of living but offset by an exponential growth in the Earned Income Tax Credit , which by 2012

Welfare Reform Act - Misplaced Pages Continue

3192-403: The effects of PRWORA, Hero and Preuhs find that the most inclusive states offer more assistance and welfare generosity to immigrants. These states, however, face challenges in allocating funds due to a larger minority population and cut individual benefit levels per recipient. Moreover, these states assess the costs for inclusion based on racial compositions in the state. In terms of TANF benefits,

3268-600: The enactment of 1996 welfare reform laws. In light of the restrictions to federal funding under the law, states were allowed to grant aid out of their own funds to address the welfare needs of immigrants. Two of the key policies under PRWORA are the inclusion of immigrants in TANF and Medicaid. In 2009, 22 states had extended TANF benefits and Medicaid to immigrants. Five states (California, Hawaii, Minnesota, New York, and Washington) provide assistance to some nonqualified immigrants. Oftentimes, these policies have had discriminatory effects towards minorities. For instance, race has

3344-609: The exception, not the norm." As well as citing many barriers to employment, even after work programs were introduced. Finally, they found that most individuals who were subject to work requirements "remained poor, and some became poorer." It is reported by the National Women's Law Center that "more than 10 million women are the sole support for their children and families." In addition in the labor economy, most women are relegated to service sector jobs and jobs dubbed as low-wage earning jobs. Because of these factors, women are in

3420-436: The income of what an average man earned; the average female college graduate working a full-time job still earned less than the average male high school graduate. But the earnings disparity is not the only form of disadvantage that women face in the labor market. Many women are unable to obtain a full-time job not just due to gender discrimination, but also because of unavailable, expensive, or inadequate day care. This problem

3496-432: The legislation in private meetings. Previously, Clinton had quietly spoken with Senate Majority Whip Trent Lott for months about the bill, but a compromise on a more acceptable bill for the President could not be reached. Gingrich, on the other hand, gave accurate information about his party's vote counts and persuaded the more conservative members of the Republican Party to vote in favor of PRWORA. President Clinton found

3572-589: The legislation more conservative than he would have preferred; however, having vetoed two earlier welfare proposals from the Republican-majority Congress, it was considered a political risk to veto a third bill during a campaign season with welfare reform as a central theme. As he signed the bill on August 22, 1996, Clinton stated that the act "gives us a chance we haven't had before to break the cycle of dependency that has existed for millions and millions of our fellow citizens, exiling them from

3648-644: The month after Confederate Memorial Day in Tennessee, the act gave state governments more autonomy over welfare delivery, while also reducing the federal government's responsibilities. It started the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which placed time limits on welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter conditions for food stamps eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare assistance, and recipient work requirements. Gingrich and Clinton negotiated

3724-471: The most inclusive states have had the largest decline in benefit levels. For example, California has seen a 22.6% decrease in TANF benefit levels for a family of three. Regardless of incorporation, welfare effort and TANF benefits decline as the Latino population grows from a nominal size to 10 percent of the population. After that point, incorporation influences policy in a distinct manner. While incorporation

3800-437: The need for a social safety net, Democrats often invoked the culture of poverty argument. Proponents of the bill argued that welfare recipients were "trapped in a cycle of poverty". Highlighting instances of welfare fraud , conservatives often referred to the system as a "welfare trap" and pledged to "dismantle the welfare state". Ronald Reagan's oft-repeated story of a welfare queen from Chicago's South Side became part of

3876-511: The number of families receiving support increased from 162,000 to 1,875,000. After 1970, however, federal funding for the program lagged behind inflation. Between 1970 and 1994, typical benefits for a family of three fell 47% after adjusting for inflation. The idea that the welfare-receiving poor had become too dependent upon public assistance also encouraged the act. The idea was that those who were on welfare for many years lost any initiative to find jobs. Those on welfare realized that taking up

SECTION 50

#1732765201462

3952-532: The number of welfare recipients declined much more sharply than the poverty rate, with a national average of 56% reduction in welfare caseloads and 1% reduction in poverty. The number of children living in extreme poverty, defined as a household income below 50% of the poverty line, increased, with a sharper increase among African-American families. PRWORA redirected the responsibility for service provisions from federal administrations to state administrations, leading to greater inequality between states as one program

4028-487: The poor have left or been terminated from the program, with a national drop of 53% in total recipients. According to the House Ways and Means Committee, "The major goal of Public Law 104–193 [PRWORA] is to reduce the length of welfare spells by attacking dependency while simultaneously preserving the function of welfare as a safety net for families experiencing temporary financial problems". A major prong in this effort

4104-579: The post-war era. Additionally, all able-bodied adults without children and two-parent families were originally disqualified from obtaining AFDC funds. Court rulings during the Civil Rights Movement struck down many of these regulations, creating new categories of people eligible for relief. Community organizations, such as the National Welfare Rights Organization , also distributed informational packets informing citizens of their ability to receive government assistance. Between 1936 and 1969,

4180-401: The program, and extended benefits to "unemployed male parents with a work history". A number of states enacted so called "man-in-the-house" rules, which disqualified families if there was any adult male present in the household whatsoever. This was part of a broader attempt to discourage welfare dependency by the undeserving, in particular black families where the man didn't have work or where

4256-530: The program. Among other changes, a lifetime limit of five years was imposed on the receipt of benefits; the newly limited nature of the replacement program was reinforced by calling AFDC's successor Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Many Americans continue to refer to TANF as "welfare" or AFDC. TANF has remained controversial. In 2003, LaShawn Y. Warren, an ACLU Legislative Counsel, said that TANF gives states an incentive "to deny benefits to those who need it most. The solution to getting people out of

4332-611: The reduction or loss of their AFDC benefits. One economist was unable to find convincing evidence that welfare programs have a strong effect on the dissolution of marriages. But right or wrong, this argument was among the stepping stones leading to the modification of AFDC toward TANF. In 1996, President Bill Clinton negotiated with the Republican -controlled Congress to pass the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act , which drastically restructured

4408-400: The rule had the effect of breaking up marriages and promoting matriarchy: [T]he AFDC program tended to treat households with a cohabiting male who was not the natural father of the children much more leniently than those with a resident spouse or father of the children. This feature created a clear disincentive for marriage and also a clear incentive for divorce, because women who married face

4484-486: The safety net. It increased poverty, lowered income for single mothers, put people from welfare into homeless shelters, and left states free to eliminate welfare entirely. It moved mothers and children from welfare to work, but many of them are not making enough to survive. Many of them were pushed off welfare rolls because they didn't show up for an appointment, because they could not get to an appointment for lack of child care, said Edelman, or because they were not notified of

4560-461: The same piece of research to support the opposite view. The political atmosphere at the time of PRWORA's passage included a Republican -controlled House of Representatives and Senate (defined by their Contract with America ) and a Democratic president (defined by Bill Clinton 's promise to "end welfare as we know it"). In July 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services released

4636-466: The way that racial composition, welfare structure, and immigrant population determine how states include immigrants in welfare. Research shows that a larger percentage of African-American recipients leads to stricter rules governing initial eligibility, less flexibility in welfare work requirements, and lower cash benefits to welfare recipients. There is also a negative relationship between cash benefit levels and percentage of welfare recipients. In analyzing

SECTION 60

#1732765201462

4712-516: The woman had a relationship with men who didn't take care of the family. The "man-in-the-house" rule was struck down in 1968 by the Supreme Court in King v. Smith . Thereafter, families with males in the household were eligible for benefits if they were not deemed to be actual or substitute parents, although any financial contribution on the part of the male to the family was still considered

4788-771: The world of work. It gives structure, meaning and dignity to most of our lives". After the passage of the bill, Gingrich continued to press for welfare reform and increasing employment opportunities for welfare recipients. In his 1998 book Lessons Learned the Hard Way , Gingrich outlined a multi-step plan to improve economic opportunities for the poor. The plan called for encouraging volunteerism and spiritual renewal, placing more importance on families, creating tax incentives and reducing regulations for businesses in poor neighborhoods, and increasing property ownership for low-income families. Gingrich cited his volunteer work with Habitat for Humanity as an example of where he observed that it

4864-411: Was workfare , whereby poor individuals, typically single mothers, had to be employed in order to receive assistance. Thompson later served as Health and Human Services Secretary under President George W. Bush . Passage of PRWORA was the culmination of many years of debate in which the merits and flaws of AFDC were argued. Research was used by both sides to make their points, with each side often using

4940-509: Was "not accurate" and "inflames old resentments", giving it a "Pants on Fire" rating. CNN also reported that assertions that Obama was "taking the work requirement off the table" was false. In response to Republican criticism, Kathleen Sebelius , the Secretary of Health and Human Services , pointed out that multiple states, including some with Republican governors, had asked Congress to allow waivers. A central pledge of Clinton's campaign

5016-404: Was a historic reversal of the entitlement welfare represented by AFDC. If the 1996 reforms had their intended effect of reducing welfare dependency, a leading indicator of success would be a declining welfare caseload. TANF administrative data reported by states to the federal government show that caseloads began declining in the spring of 1994 and fell even more rapidly after the federal legislation

5092-490: Was an entitlement program, the shift from AFDC to TANF introduced the idea of having to qualify for welfare through employment. Research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found, however, that work requirements do not cut poverty as advocates for work requirements would hope. The CBPP found that increased employment weakened over time after the work requirements were put in place. They also found that "stable employment among recipients subject to work requirements proved

5168-504: Was approximately $ 2 trillion, so this represents around 0.6%. Further, CBO estimated that unspent balances would grow from $ 7.1 billion in 1998 to $ 25.4 billion by 2005. The law's effect goes far beyond the minor budget impact, however. The Brookings Institution reported in 2006 that: "With its emphasis on work, time limits, and sanctions against states that did not place a large fraction of its caseload in work programs and against individuals who refused to meet state work requirements, TANF

5244-630: Was created under the name Aid to Dependent Children ( ADC ) by the Social Security Act of 1935 as part of the New Deal . It was created as a means tested entitlement which subsidized the income of families where fathers were "deceased, absent, or unable to work". It provided a direct payment of $ 18 per month for one child, and $ 12 for a second child. In 1994, the average payment was $ 420/month. The federal government required contributions from individual states, and authorized state discretion to determine who received aid and in what amount. In 1961

5320-475: Was enacted in 1996. Between 1994 and 2005, the caseload declined about 60 percent. The number of families receiving cash welfare is now the lowest it has been since 1969, and the percentage of children on welfare is lower than it has been since 1966." The effects were particularly significant on single mothers; the portion of employed single mothers grew from 58% in 1993 to 75% by 2000. Employment among never-married mothers increased from 44% to 66%. A 2017 study in

5396-578: Was in 2002 when the Senate Finance Committee approved a bill to reauthorize legislation to restore some of the benefits stripped by the act. The bill reauthorized federal funds for TANF and healthcare services. The House, however, failed to authorize the bill. Opponents of entitlement welfare services introduced the idea of work requirements for previous entitlement programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Instead of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) which

5472-435: Was more rewarding for people to be actively involved in improving their lives—by building their own homes—than by receiving welfare payments from the government. PRWORA established TANF as AFDC's replacement. The Congressional findings in PRWORA highlighted dependency, out-of-wedlock birth, and intergenerational poverty as the main contributors to a faulty system. In instituting a block grant program, PRWORA granted states

5548-457: Was replaced by 50. States were given control over the amount of money dedicated to social safety net programs. States also gained the ability to impose rules and restrictions on how people could access and use social services. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated in March 1999 that the TANF basic block grant (authorization to spend) would total $ 16.5 billion annually through 2002, with

5624-412: Was the largest cash-benefit entitlement program in the United States. The first tests for persistent effects on income and household financial health under PRWORA were the recession caused by the 2001 tech bubble crash and the 2008 economic meltdown caused by the housing bubble and the instability of the financial markets. During these two periods of economic problems, the enrollment in TANF followed

5700-498: Was to improve child support collection rates in an effort to move single parent families off of the welfare rolls, and keep them off. According to the conference report, "It is the sense of the Senate that — (a) States should diligently continue their efforts to enforce child support payments by the non-custodial parent to the custodial parent, regardless of the employment status or location of the non-custodial parent". One component of

5776-497: Was to reform the welfare system, adding changes such as work requirements for recipients. However, by 1994, the Clinton Administration appeared to be more concerned with universal health care , and no details or a plan had emerged on welfare reform. Newt Gingrich accused the President of stalling on welfare and proclaimed that Congress could pass a welfare reform bill in as little as 90 days. Gingrich promised that

#461538