House Passes Bill to Step Up Welfare Work Requirements

The House on Thursday approved changes to the landmark 1996 welfare reform law, passing a bill that would require a larger percentage of a state’s aid recipients to take jobs and work longer hours.

Republicans praised the revisions as a boost to the welfare reform effort, which reduced welfare cases by more than half and moved hundreds of thousands of single mothers into jobs across the country.

“This legislation fulfills [President Bush’s] call to further improve the welfare system by encouraging even more welfare recipients to work,” said Rep. Wally Herger (R-Marysville), chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources.

But Democrats criticized the bill, saying that the nation’s weak job market and the fiscal problems facing many states made this the wrong time to make the welfare rules tougher.

“The economy is stagnating, states are in fiscal crisis, and our economy has lost more than 2.3 million jobs in the past two years,” said Rep. Robert T. Matsui (D-Sacramento). “Nonetheless, House Republicans would like to increase work requirements for poor families. It’s unbelievable.”

Eleven Democrats joined Republicans in a 230-192 vote to pass the bill, which closely tracks Bush’s proposal and mirrors a measure that passed the House last year. That bill stalled in the Senate, which has yet to develop its own revisions to the welfare reform law.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson urged the Senate to follow the House’s lead.

“We want to improve upon this highly successful program so we can help families complete the transition from the dependence upon a welfare check to the independence of a paycheck,” Thompson said.

The reform law expired Sept. 30, but Congress temporarily extended it to give lawmakers another chance to reauthorize it this year.

In its overhaul of the welfare system, Congress gave states block grants to run programs designed to remove recipients from welfare rolls. Caseloads dropped steadily in the first years after the law was adopted, but the numbers have flattened out in recent months, with 2 million families receiving benefits as of September 2002, according to Department of Health and Human Services data. About 454,000 of those families live in California, according to the data.

The House bill would keep many of the requirements of the 1996 law and maintain the total funding for the state block grants at about $16.6 billion a year. But it would increase gradually the percentage of a state’s caseload that must be working for benefits from 50% now to 70% in 2008.

The bill also would increase the number of hours that these recipients would be required to work or be involved in other scheduled activities, such as training, from 30 hours a week to 40 hours.

The hours that recipients would be required to be in jobs would increase to 24 hours, up from 20 hours. During the remaining 16 hours, recipients could attend schools or programs that provide job training, drug rehabilitation, parenting skills or other instruction.

Republicans said these changes were important to prod states to develop more aggressive programs to get welfare recipients into jobs.

“What this requires of people on welfare is to think of their whole week and how are they going to use the time in their week to create their future,” said Rep. Nancy L. Johnson (R-Conn.).

But Democrats argued that the new requirements would be costly for states, which would have to provide more child care, training and work programs.

“In 1996, we gave the states flexibility; this legislation takes it back,” said Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.). “The Republican measure is a step backward because it undercuts the ability of states to provide job training, education and child care for those leaving welfare.”

The welfare law provided $4.8 billion a year to fund child-care programs; the GOP bill would increase that by $2 billion over five years and give states new flexibility to use the block grant funds for child care.

Cardin sponsored one of two Democratic alternatives debated Thursday. His plan, which was defeated 225 to 197, would have provided $11 billion more for child care over five years and expanded the time recipients could be in job training.

It would have retained the current work hours but, like the GOP plan, would have increased to 70% the percentage of each state’s caseload required to be participating in work or work-related activities.

The other, more liberal, Democratic alternative would have provided $20 billion more for child care over five years. It was defeated, 300 to 124.

Before the vote, a letter from several Democratic governors urged the House to reject the GOP plan.

In a separate letter, California Gov. Gray Davis estimated that the bill would increase costs for the state’s welfare program by $2.8 billion over five years.

“Given that the states are facing their worst budget shortfalls in 50 years, it is absolutely critical that the federal government maintain the [program’s requirements] and provide adequate resources,” Davis said.

But Republicans argued that the states should have plenty of money to run their programs because the block grant amounts would be the same as they received when their caseloads were more than twice as large.

The GOP bill also includes up to $300 million annually for states to set up programs to encourage healthy marriages through counseling. The bill would continue a $50-million grant for states to promote abstinence from sex until marriage.