Welfare Reform Needs Reform

These days, the big talk everywhere is of reform. First came the tax code, and now education, campaign finance, Social Security and energy policies; all are in line for overhaul by the new folks in Washington. And the “successful” model being used is welfare reform.

But has welfare reform really worked?

When Congress passed welfare reform in 1996, there were no credible data that could predict how the reforms would play out. The goal for many policymakers was simply to get families off welfare, not necessarily to improve their economic well-being.

By that standard, welfare reform has been a rousing success. However, there is growing evidence that few families are doing better financially than they did while on welfare, and some of our most vulnerable families are worse off.

Just like the recent tax cut and the reform movements that are being pushed today, welfare reform was based on ideology--1994’s “contract with America”--and not on research about the likely consequences.

Lawmakers took a radical gamble with welfare reform that ultimately succeeded for many families, thanks to what was then a booming economy.

In most states, welfare rolls have shrunk substantially, and many former welfare mothers are now employed, and proud of it. Still, countless families--even those of the newly employed--desperately struggle to make ends meet, and more children live in dire poverty.

A major problem is that some former welfare mothers can find jobs but can’t keep them.

Research shows that many former welfare recipients are mentally ill or victims of domestic violence. There are some days they just can’t get to work or can’t function at work, and eventually they lose their jobs.

Mothers of disabled or chronically ill children sometimes must choose between leaving their children with inadequate care so that they may go to work, or staying home with their children and losing their jobs.

And many former welfare recipients work the least desirable shifts in an increasingly 24/7 society, making reliable child care nearly impossible to find.

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, the major component of the welfare overhaul, wasn’t designed or implemented to be sufficiently flexible for these families. It imposes rigid time limits that prohibit most families from collecting welfare checks for more than two consecutive years.

Those limits have already wreaked havoc on some families. In the coming years, some families will lose their benefits forever when they reach the law’s five-year lifetime limit for assistance.

Recent studies show that many of the assumptions on welfare reform were not accurate, and that some of the expected problems were underestimated. For example, work requirements have been welcomed by many former welfare recipients, but working has not improved their economic security. Few find jobs that pay above the poverty level, and many can’t keep their jobs for long. Recent layoffs and an economic downturn are making the situation even worse.

If we enter a real recession, the deficiencies in the welfare law will become more obvious. More former welfare mothers will find it impossible to find or keep jobs and yet will be ineligible for welfare.

Welfare reform laws will come up for renewal in the coming months, at a time when the disappearing budget surplus puts pressure on Congress to cut welfare funds.

A bipartisan commission of researchers could provide guidance to make welfare programs more flexible and responsive to the needs of parents who are unemployed.

Unfortunately, the president’s Social Security commission reminds us how politicized such panels can be.

Our most vulnerable families need a stronger safety net. To help them, we need welfare policies that are reshaped by facts and new economic realities rather than the myth of success.