THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, September 21, 1996 TAG: 9609210016
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 56 lines
The disappearance of ``welfare as we know it'' is unlikely to be a pretty sight. Unquestionably, it will not be an orderly one.
There are legitimate worries that jobs will be too scarce in some places or some welfare recipients too overwhelmed with personal problems to successfully transition to work. The worst fear is that children will suffer greatly when their parents fail.
As more is learned about the nuances of the landmark legislation President Clinton signed last month, however, it's also becoming clear that there may be problems in the opposite direction. If the reform goes too far in some places, it may not go far enough in others.
Consider Washington, D.C., where about 74,000 people or 13 percent of the population currently receive Aid to Families With Dependent Children.
With passage of a new welfare law looming, officials at the Department of Health and Human Services last month approved a ``waiver'' that will allow poor families in the District to draw benefits for up to 10 years. The only requirement is that they make a ``good-faith'' effort to find employment.
The waiver makes a mockery of the reform legislation's intent. Nationwide, under the changes, most AFDC recipients will be expected to be working within two years and will have their lifetime benefits limited to five.
That the District plan is so much more lenient says two things. First, it is a reminder that there is flexibility in the new law, which is theoretically good. Secondly, it is evidence that some of the escape hatches are too broad.
Loopholes that undermine the intent of the law, as this one does, are bad policy. Staying on welfare shouldn't be a function of where an individual lives but what assistance he or she requires. And giving special treatment to the District's poor is calculated to breed cynicism about the fairness of the process.
The federal officials who approved the waiver apparently saw themselves as diking a flood of despair. Their fear is that the District's welfare population is far too large to match with available jobs. Percentage-wise, the case load is more than twice that in most states.
But the solution, making the District an island of largess in a sea of restriction, will do nothing to lessen that burden. The ``waiver'' only adds to existing incentives for the poor to migrate into the District. Currently, monthly AFDC payments for a family of three average $420 per month there. In Virginia, the figure is $291; in Maryland it is $373.
Having set out on this course of welfare reform, we should see it through. If it is to work, government will likely have to start providing more of a cushion for the working poor than is now envisioned. Earned-income tax credits and ongoing assistance with child-care and health benefits may be required.
But what we should not be doing is backing away from provisions linking welfare to work before they even are tried. Most welfare recipients, we believe, want to work. The challenge is to make sure that jobs exist for them, not to assume failure before we begin.
KEYWORDS: WELFARE REFORM by CNB