What is the state of welfare programs in America today?

[Syrinx]

I still hear griping about all this supposed "welfare" going on in America. (As if "welfare" is a bad thing.) But didn't Clinton and his Republican congress pretty much shut down welfare programs in America? I know the very skimpy food-stamps program still exists, and SSI. But don't "welfare programs" consume a tiny, tiny portion of the federal budget these days?

[Madam Mossfern]

1. I am an Employment Specialist

for New Jersey's version of Welfare to Work.
The program is broken - is is bogged down with bureaucracy and politics.
Time for a complete overhaul. I still see generation upon generation of young welfare moms who know of nothing else. The cycle has not been broken- don't get me started!

[Syrinx]

2. can people get help if they need it?

I'm just curious about what programs are available to help people in need. As compared to thirty or forty years ago. I suspect it's much, much lower now. Am I correct about that?

[Madam Mossfern]

9. There are training programs

which I consider inadequate. Yes there are GED programs and childcare is provided, but not all the childcare is top quality. When welfare recipients are forced to participate in some of these programs, they often disrupt the classrooms and make it difficult for those who want to learn. We provide transportation, but then again it is inadequate in many cases. There is rent assistance and medicaid. I would say that there is help, but it is very difficult.

In my position I feel like a cross between a guidance counsellor and a truant officer. The Welfare to Work model I think was set up to break the cycle of young women (or in many instances, girls) having babies and then in turn their babies having babies- usually there is not father present and gang activity is rampant. Many recipients get into programs just for the childcare. This is a good thing in a way because I believe the only real way to break the cycle is by educating the children and instilling an different set of values. The bad part is that all too often, the childcare is sub-standard and the care giver may be a friend or relative who just plops the kid in front of the TV with unhealthy snacks. On the other hand, I have seen children in fantastic programs where they are learning reading readiness as early as three years old.

I'm running late for work now, sorry about the ramble, but there are so many issues.

[Raspberry]

3. A report came out the other day

that said something like 1 in 4 people receives Food Stamps. Welfare programs are nowhere near shut down. And--if you consider SSI a welfare program (it actually evolved from several welfare programs from way back when) it is seriously alive and well.

[Syrinx]

4. aren't there much stricter limits on food stamps now?

And I think I read that the average SSI recipient only gets like $225 a month. Nobody can live on that.

[Raspberry]

5. Do you mean limits on what can be purchased?

I don't know about that, and even if there are income limits, for 25% of the public to be on them they are certainly available to those in need.

Very few people actually live on SSI. Many people get those checks for their kids, who may have special needs. At one time, (don't know about now) people got SSI if their kids had a diagnosis of ADD.

Welfare reform back in the 90's was mostly about getting people off welfare and into the job market. There were limits placed on the total number of years that people could get AFDC. I think it also encouraged marriage (and statistically, children of married parents are much less likely to be in poverty.) MUCH $$$ was spent toward those ends. Some were good goals, but it did take a toll on many people.

[Syrinx]

6. no, I meant time limits

I don't even know what AFDC is. :)

[Raspberry]

8. No. No time limits

And AFDC is Aid to Families with Dependent Children. (It may actually be called something else by now.) This is the program that pays single moms. It used to be that women could get AFDC from the time their first child was born right up until their youngest child turned 18. The way the program was designed and administered, it really fostered dependency. A (relatively) young woman could find herself with no income, no job skills, no prospects, just because she no longer had minor children. The intentions were good, the results not so much.

I worked for our county DSS back in the mid-70's. We had one young girl, 17 years old, who had a baby. Suddenly she found herself with a cute little kid, a cute little apartment, a check that must have seemed humongous to a kid. Welfare programs bought her food, paid her medical expenses, and gave her some spending $$$. The social workers all looked at each other and admitted that it must have looked like a really good deal to this young girl and her friends.

[My Good Babushka]

12. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families has a time limit

of five years, and women only get 12 months off to care for her children, no matter how old they are.

[Madam Mossfern]

15. In New Jersey there are an additional two years allowed

so that makes seven. Then there are those who are "exempt" from the limit, either for health, psychological reasons or illiteracy. I have seen welfare recipients purposely do poorly on assessment tests to ensure that they can collect their benefits indefinitely. There have been very few TANF clients terminated.

We are also bogged down in "Fair Hearings" where a TANF client can challenge being sanctioned because of non-compliance. The process usually is that the client loses her benefits because she did not do what she was supposed to do, then calls the State for a fair hearing whereupon her benefits are restored pending the hearing. After a few months, the case is on the calendar and the judges who surprisingly know little about welfare laws, or can't be bothered tells the client that they need to comply in the future or they will be sanctioned again. So, the client complies for a month or two and then stops. The sanction process takes a few months at least while the client collects her welfare grant (usually a mere $322 per month) and the process starts all over again.

In the meantime, the young woman (usually) does not receive any meaningful training or education, the government spends millions of dollars on vendors who usually politically connected and the continued cycle remains.

It is the few young women who manage to make it through and actually persevere and gain employment and get off the system that make it more bearable to go to the office every day. Them, and all the wonderful babies I get to play with when they come in with their moms.

[unhappycamper]

7. Corporate welfare is chugging along just fine.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8502728

[bobbolink]

13. Thank you. I can't even reply to the rest off the "comments" here....

:hi:

[My Good Babushka]

10. The Clinton Reform was Monstrous

Corporations get subsidies to hire poor women, then they make sure they do not pay them any more than the subsidy was worth. They get free labor, the children are put into subsidized day care, they still get food stamps and medical care. Basically, taxpayers are delivering slave labor to corporations and wresting mothers away from their children. It's horrendous and unfair.

[bobbolink]

14. VERY good description. Clinton didn't even care enough to track these women and children to find

out how many became homeless, how many died.

He only says he should have done it earlier, because it was a "very good political move".

:puke: :nuke:

[zabet]

11. In the area I live in....

a great number of people scam the system and get help when they do not need it. They use old married names to hide property, and use their 'maiden' name to file for benefits is one of the ways they get around the system. I personally know people who scam this system......food stamps....medic-aid....housing...the whole nine yards....and also sell the meds they get for free for additional money. This person lives better than most working people and has plenty of money to throw away. The system needs to be scrutinized....the recipients need to be vigorously scrutinized.

[mdmc]

16. corporate welfare or human welfare?

one is fully funded..