June 2002

ECONOMIC EQUITY

Punishing Welfare Bill Passes House; Senate Action Expected Soon

By now, it should be clear to anyone that the Bush administration and many Republican (and a few Democratic) members of Congress do not want to end poverty, nor do they care about the well-being of poor women and their children.

A bill that requires poor mothers to work even more hours a week, limits their educational and training opportunities while seriously under-funding Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) programs was passed in the Republican-controlled House on May 16. By a vote of 229-197, representatives approved the Bush administration's punishing plan for welfare reauthorization in the Personal Responsibility, Work and Family Promotion Act of 2001 (H.R. 4737), sponsored by Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio). All but four Republican members (Kerns, Hostettler, Morella and Paul), helped by 14 Democrats (Barcia, Boyd, Cramer, Edwards, Hall of Texas, Holden, Lucas, Luther, Peterson of Minnesota, Phelps, Pomeroy, Shows, Taylor of Mississippi and Wu) supported this regressive legislation.

Allowed only one amendment, Democrats offered as a substitute for H.R. 4737 a more moderate bill sponsored by Rep. Ben Cardin (Md.), ranking member of the Human Resources subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee, that placed heavier emphasis on education and vocational training opportunities. It failed by 222 to 198. Several elements from the progressive TANF reauthorization Act (H.R. 3113), sponsored by Rep. Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii), that NOW and allies supported were included in the Cardin bill.

Block grant funding was kept at the same level ($16.5 billion) as was authorized in the 1996 act—which with inflation and a continuing recession will not be adequate over the five year period. In defense of level funding, Republicans claim that because welfare rolls have dropped 50% in the last five years less funding is needed. But most states are experiencing budgetary shortfalls and, in all probability, will have great difficulty in meeting what could be a doubling of their TANF caseload required to be in designated "work activities."

More Work for Poor Moms

The legislation increases required work hours from 30 to 40 per week, with 70% of states' TANF recipients to be employed in at least 24 direct employment hours (and the other 16 in "countable" work activities as defined by the states) per week by 2007. Even women with children under age six will be expected to work increased hours each week and with more work demands it is unlikely that poor parents will have the time to pursue GEDs, obtain vocational training or attend college. Currently, single parents (without a child under age 6) must work 30 hours (with a minimum of 20 hours in direct work), the remaining time in specified work activities (i.e., work experience, community services, on the job training, job search, job readiness assistance or vocational education (limited to 12 months)).

Child Care Funding Inadequate

Only $2.9 billion a year in child care funding was authorized, a fraction of the amount needed. One of the most common barriers to work encountered by poor parents is the lack of affordable, good quality child care services. Conservative government estimates place the need at between $8 and $11 billion—although NOW and other child care activists believe that even these estimates are low. The increased work hours translate to higher demands for infant care, toddler, after-school and summer care programs—for which critically insufficient federal and state funding will be available. Recent reports from around the country indicate that states are already cutting their funds for TANF support and child care services.

Marriage and Fatherhood Promoted

In addition, the legislation expands the emphasis on marriage promotion by establishing a $200 million grant program ($100 million federal dollars with state matching funds) for states to develop public advertising campaigns on the value of marriage, support high school courses, conduct relationship counseling and employ divorce reduction efforts, among other activities. Another $100 million in grants to states and localities is included for research, technical assistance and demonstration projects that promote the formation of two-parent families, reduce teen pregnancies and increase the ability of non-custodial parents to financially support and care fore their children. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to consider the possible risk of domestic violence in marriage promotion projects.

Marriage promotion and "responsible fatherhood" are identified in the bill as among the four main goals of TANF. The legislation would require every state to describe how they will promote marriage, the involvement of fathers and a reduction of non-marital births, including specific, measurable performance objectives. States may also spend money in these areas to allow individuals who are not TANF recipients to participate—which, of course, will mean fewer dollars for poor families.

NOW and many other organizations object to the inclusion of marriage promotion programs under TANF because of the coercive potential that they hold for poor women and for the invasion of personal privacy such policies imply. An even greater concern relates to the heightened risk of domestic violence as up to 60% of TANF recipients have experienced domestic violence in their lives. (Check http://www.nowldef.org for testimony on the marriage promotion provisions.)

The fatherhood involvement provisions establish new programs designed to promote "responsible parenting, encourage positive father involvement, enhance the abilities of unemployed or low-income fathers to provide material support for their families or to avoid or leave welfare by taking full advantage of education, job training and job search programs." In addition, assistance can be provided to help fathers effectively manage family business affairs, including household management, budgeting, and home maintenance while encouraging "healthy marriages" and "married fatherhood." It is noteworthy, that such programs would provide far more opportunities and special assistance to fathers than to poor mothers!

Several substantial grant programs are authorized, including competitive grant programs for public and nonprofit community organizations, as well as religious organizations, to carry out the activities noted above. The bill has no requirements that only low-income or TANF parents be served, but does require that the larger grant-supported projects consult with domestic violence and child abuse agencies. Additionally, grants for multi-state and multi-city projects are authorized and a third category for activities of "national significance" is established. The latter would relate to the promotion of father involvement, via a large media campaign, dissemination of information and provision of research and technical assistance. NOW fears that theses monies will end up with groups who promote custody-switching tactics and assist so-called fathers' rights activists in their quest to undermine domestic violence/child sexual abuse protections.

Child Support Policies Slightly Improved

Current TANF law requires that TANF recipients co-operate with paternity establishment and child support enforcement. Only a demonstration of good cause (including the threat of domestic violence or child abuse) can exempt a parent from being sanctioned if they do not comply. States may now retain child support monies collected on behalf of current and former TANF recipients' children as a reimbursement for states' expenditures in TANF support to those families. Advocates for poor moms have pressed for pass-through of all child support monies or an increase in a disregard of $50 (not taken into account when determining TANF eligibility). H.R. 4737 offers states an incentive to choose a pass-through and to disregard up to about $100 of child support per month, but pass-through of the entire amount of child support was not made mandatory. A fee of $25 for successful child support collection of $500 or more is imposed and a series of other modest changes in child support enforcement are adopted.

Anti-Violence Measures Downplayed

The Family Violence Option (FVO) which encourages states to screen and provide services for TANF recipients for problems with domestic violence is retained in the reauthorization bill, but it is not made mandatory of states as it should be. Despite extensive efforts by NOW, NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund and domestic violence victim advocates five years ago, implementation across states is uneven and in some cases not implemented at all. Congress twice approved a mandatory approach in 1996, but the provision was watered down in conference committee.

Legal immigrants remain excluded from the TANF program in H.R. 4737 which means that their U.S. born children are denied benefits. Caps on the proportion of the TANF caseload that can be enrolled in educational or vocational training activities are maintained as are time limitations, making it extremely difficult for poor women to attain the necessary skills, education and direct experience that they need to succeed.

No Screening for Barriers

One of the most egregious features of the legislation is that states are not required to screen TANF recipients for barriers to employment or provides services to aid recipients to overcome those barriers (drug abuse, depression, illiteracy, physical or mental illness or having a child with a disability). Further, the bill does not prohibit states from sanctioning individuals who cannot meet work requirements due to barriers. However, the bill contains provisions that require states to establish a self-sufficiency plan for all families receiving TANF could allow for addressing these barriers. But these plans can be prepared without consulting the recipient, caseworkers are not required to have any training for this task and no additional time is allowed in time limits for individuals to adequately comply

Waiver Authority Risks Protections

One of the commonly-used tactics of the Republican majority is to not allow much time for opponents to review proposed legislation or to be informed well in advance of the timing of important votes. An alarming provision in the TANF reauthorization bill was disclosed only a few days before the floor vote, assuring that very few people would have the chance to evaluate the proposal. Under this, states would be allowed to apply for what is termed a "super-waiver" that would exempt the state from many TANF requirements and from certain other federal laws and regulations. States could fashion their welfare programs in essentially any manner they want—reshaping or limiting their provision of Food Stamps, child care, job training, adult education, health care, homeless programs or public housing.

Loud objections from Democrats and anti-poverty advocates produced a modification of the super-waiver that prohibits waiver of laws regarding civil rights, discrimination, health or safety standards, labor standards under the Fair Labor Standards Act or environmental laws. Also, the waiver could not be used to transfer funds Congress appropriated for one program to certain other programs. Considering that more than 40 states are in a fiscal bind, the super-waiver would allow them to adopt any number of approaches to reducing aid to poor families. Moreover, anti-poverty and good government advocates are very concerned about the precedence that such broad-sweeping executive authority would have for the legislative branch's ability to promote responsible public policies to protect vulnerable groups. (For more information on the super-waiver: http://www.cbpp.org)

Full Family Sanctions Mandatory

As noted, H.R. 4737 requires that states develop "self-sufficiency" plans for all families receiving TANF, requiring work-eligible individuals to participate in activities in accordance with the plan. TANF caseworkers do not have to involve TANF recipients in the preparation of these plans and, in fact, other members of the family can have participation requirements imposed on them. Currently, states may impose full family sanctions (denying benefits) when a TANF recipient is not meeting work and other related requirements. But H.R. 4737 would require states to cut off all benefits to the entire family for at least one month, if an individual does not comply for an extended period of time. Children, clearly, will be hurt by this provision.

ACTION NEEDED: H.R. 4737 is an example of how much disrespect there is for poor women and their children and of the refusal of Congressional policy-makers to learn from the experience of the last five years. To sum it up: the House-passed bill contains insufficient TANF block grant funding to the states (many currently in fiscal trouble), unrealistic work requirements for poor parents trying to care for children and get their lives together, greatly limited opportunities for education and training, drastically under-funded child care assistance that undermines children's safety and learning opportunities, coercive marriage promotion programs for vulnerable women, more help for fathers than for poor mothers, and a sweeping executive waiver authority that imperils many protections in federal law relating to services for poor families.

Please call, email or fax your Senator with a strong message that the Republican welfare reauthorization bill is wholly unacceptable. Check the NOW website for talking points from the May Special Legislative Report and for the welfare reauthorization principles adopted by the NOW and the National Council of Women's Organizations. Use the NOW interactive political page to send your message. The Senate Finance Committee is expected to unveil their legislation soon and will attempt to finalize the bill beginning in mid- to late June.

This Legislative Update was compiled by the Government Relations/Public Policy Team at the National NOW Office. Call Jan Erickson, Government Relations Director, at (202) 628-8669, ext. 101, if you have any questions. To receive free copies of any bill, call your U.S. Senator or Representative at (202) 224-3121 or connect to http://thomas.loc.gov. This update is mailed monthly to NOW leadership; any member can receive the update for a yearly charge of $25. It is also sent to the NOW Action Alert email network and anyone may subscribe by sending the message to "subscribe now-action-list" (without the quote marks) to majordomo@now.org.