Background on TANF Reauthorization: Education, Training Absolutely Essential

April 18, 2003

We all know that the key to earning more and moving up the economic ladder is higher educational attainment and skills training. Low income women and women in the welfare-to-work process must have the opportunity to get that high school diploma, obtain a B.A. or earn a skilled trade certificate. Without those credentials, poor single mothers are doomed to receive a minimum wage or very low paying jobs with little or no benefits and few opportunities for promotion. In turn, their children will be limited in their lifetime opportunities for succeeding. We know from studies in recent years that many low income parents on welfare are not able to read or have not completed high school; others must be able to continue their college education in order to find any decent job in their areas.

So it is of extreme importance that NOW activists and supporters remind their senators that the TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) reauthorization bill must contain sufficient flexibility for states to allow recipients to complete high school and college degree requirements for the full period of training for certification in a skilled trade or professional capacity.

The dilemma is that the House-passed bill—essentially the same bill that George W. Bush is promoting—makes it almost impossible for poor women under TANF programs to have enough time available beyond weekly work-related requirements. Both the House bill and the administration call for a total of 40 hours required work and work-related activities and strictly limit time spent on education and training.

Need for Public Assistance Increasing

There are a number of alarming trends. Welfare rolls are growing in many states. Millions of people have lost their jobs over the last 24 months and unemployment is continuing to grow. The Economic Policy Institute, a labor-backed research organization, reports that total payrolls have fallen by 2.1 million workers, with private sector payrolls down by 2.6 million over the two-year period. Of direct concern to welfare reformers is the fact that 448,000 retail jobs have been lost since March, 2001—the steepest decline in the retail sector since the 1950's. (For other sobering data, see the web site of the Economic Policy Institute.)

Nearly all states have serious budget shortfalls and are making deep cuts in human services programs. State governments have shed more than 40,000 jobs in recent months. Many women in the welfare-to-work process were able to find entry level jobs in state and local governments, but their futures are uncertain. The new problem is that there is no safety net for poor workers who have "run out the clock" under welfare—that is, met the five-year maximum on benefits—when they lose a job and cannot find another.

This administration and the Republican leadership repeatedly assert that the welfare "reform" experience has been huge success. But no one knows whether that is true. Millions have left the welfare rolls, but how well they are doing economically and otherwise isn't clear. Some studies show that more children are living in poverty than before 1996, when the so-called welfare "reform" bill was passed. Many families no longer have access to a range of services (housing and transportation assistance, food stamps, Medicaid, etc.) that they depended upon. NOW suspects that the majority of poor women are working minimum wage jobs, with no health insurance or other benefits, juggling transportation and child care difficulties and quietly struggling to keep their heads above water.

House-Passed Welfare Bill is Punitive

In early February, the House of Representatives adopted the regressive Bush welfare proposal in H.R. 4, the Personal Responsibility, Work and Family Promotion Act of 2003, by a vote of 230-192—almost a straight party line vote. They turned back several progressive alternatives, including ones that NOW, NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund and our anti-poverty allies worked on with the late Rep. Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii). Rep. Mink's bill and another sponsored by leading Democrats that would have allowed more opportunity for education and training, provided more child care funding and other important improvements were defeated, again mostly along party lines.

This punishing House-passed bill would:

• Increase the work hour requirements to 40 per week, while limiting what activities count as "work;"

• Limit education and training for welfare recipients to three months out of every 24, and limit state flexibility that has allowed welfare recipients increased opportunities for education and training;

• Flat fund the TANF block grant to $16.5 billion per year and provide an increase of only $1 billion over five years in funding for child care—both amounts inadequate in the face of rising welfare rolls;

• Fail to restore benefits for legal immigrants—a truly objectionable policy;

• Include a reprehensible "super-waiver" proposal which would allow federal agency heads to override nearly all federal laws and rules associated with a number of low income programs, including: the Food Stamp program, public housing and homeless assistance programs, the Child Care and Development Block Grant program; The Social Services Block Grant; most workforce investment and job training programs funded under the Workforce Investment Act; the Employment Services, Adult education programs and TANF (Note: this is the latest right wing tactic to undermine the ability of Congress to assure that people receive necessary services);

• Include $300 million per year for state-sponsored "marriage and family formation" activities, plus mandatory reporting by states on how many poor mothers they've been able to pressure into marriage;

• Require "full family sanctions" that strip families with children of any benefits if the parent is unable to participate in work activities for two consecutive months, regardless of whether or not the state has chosen to enact such penalties in the past; and

• Allow up to five states to block grant the Food Stamp program any time during the 2003-2007 period. Although some sort of food assistance would still be required, states would have greater flexibility to distribute that assistance through coupons, electronic bank transfers and commodities. Like the super-waiver proposal, states could cut benefits to any group, including legal immigrants, or impose time limits and sanctions. Among the many problems with the block grant is the capping of funds which makes it impossible for many states to respond to economic conditions, or reach more eligible people.

Studies Show that Education Means More Money

A study, released in early April by the Chicago Commons Employment Training Center (ETC), indicates that women in the transition from welfare to work tend to be more financially successful if they receive a credential — such as a high school diploma, General Equivalency Diploma (GED) or occupational training certificate that shows they have mastered certain skills. Graduates of the Chicago Commons ETC who had a GED earned 135 percent of the pay of those without the degree. More strikingly, graduates who completed an industry-specific training program earned 180 percent higher wages than those earned by workers without a GED.

According to a release from the Commons, the findings suggest that current welfare policies limiting education and training — as well as legislation under consideration by the Senate — can restrict the earnings potential for women moving from welfare to work. According to federal law, states cannot count participation in GED classes or college toward their welfare-to-work goals (that is, counting toward the required weekly "work activity hours). As noted, the House welfare bill now before the Senate would severely limit individuals to a maximum of three months of vocations training during a two year period. Predictably, programs usually only offer general job readiness education — not education and training that would lead to career development and higher wages.

The average wage of people leaving TANF in Illinois for employment has been less than $8.00 per hour, according to state studies. By comparison, the average wage of graduates of the Chicago Commons program was $10.76 per hour — which is just below a self- sufficiency standard determined by the Chicago mayor's office. The study also noted that many women leaving welfare, having also attained further education or training, make more money but still not enough to sustain their families.

The recommendations from the Chicago Commons study are:

• Allow recipients more time to pursue education and training both before and after securing employment;
• Create more training programs that provide certification and do not require a high school diploma for enrollment;
• Link adult basic education programs to training programs so more people with lower skills gain access to such programs; and
• Train welfare caseworkers to encourage welfare recipients to complete post-secondary education.

Women's College Education Counts

The Center for Women Policy Studies (CWPS) recently completed an in-depth analysis of TANF implementation in all 50 states and found that nearly all states, plus the District of Columbia, provide for recipients to attain some post-secondary education, defining this as an allowable work-related activity. Under this approach, poor women can work part time and get their college education and still meet TANF requirements. This flexibility would not be permitted under Bush's proposal.

One drawback found in the CWPS study is that most states demand that TANF recipients' education be directly linked to jobs and also restrict college access to two years or less. You can download the report, "From Poverty to Self-Sufficiency: The Role of Postsecondary Education in Welfare Reform," free from CWPS's website.

Take Action!