The biggest change that occurred in 1996 was the way in which federal money was distributed to the states. Instead of rewarding states by giving them more money for every welfare recipient they sign up, the states were given block grants based on overall population with incentives to move people from welfare to work.
Some people are under the misguided impression that when the number of caseloads went down the country saved money. It should have, but it didn’t. Tucked into the 1996 reforms was a liberal boondoggle called “maintenance of effort.” That means that as long as there is anyone left on welfare, states received the same amount of money as they did before, with additional money added each and every year. They just had to find more creative ways to spend it. Make sense? Of course not, but that is the way the liberal mind works.
With the economic stimulus package, we will go back to rewarding states for increasing their caseloads. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, one of this country’s leading experts on poverty, says this is actually worse than the old AFDC programs because, under the new system, the payoff to the states is greater. Unfortunately, the education and work requirements, which always had big loopholes, will go by the boards because the incentives for states to move people from welfare to work are gone.
This is not simply wrong. It is cruel! When the education and work requirements are not enforced, when every need is provided by the state, the individual loses his or her incentive to find work. The longer the individual remains unemployed, the more doubts that individual has about his or her ability to succeed. After a while, these doubts are replaced by fear and, in an effort to cope, fear is replaced by an attitude of acceptance or even entitlement.
The negative effects on children raised by a welfare recipient are legion. Furthermore, these children are more likely to be dependent on the state when they reach adulthood. They become trapped in the system, and taxpayers are trapped into supporting them.
During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama praised those 1996 reforms. Now we know that this was just another cheap political stunt.
via The president’s plan to stimulate poverty.
