Welfare Reform. The War of Welfare.

Here is a paper I wrote about welfare reform. This paper earned an "A" for my English 210 writing intensive class. I spent about 3 months writing this paper and I hope you enjoy reading it. Feel free to leave a comment here or share this post.

The War on Welfare

The United States welfare system is being abused by people who have learned to take advantage of the welfare system. From my own personal experience with welfare I was laid off from my job working as a coffee Barista in Waikiki. I applied for welfare in 1993 and as I write about welfare reform I can understand most of the serious problems within our system.  In the summer of 1993, I remember being told by the welfare case manager, “Don’t worry about actually finding a job.  Just put a bunch of businesses you find in the yellow pages on your unemployment card.”  At that moment I knew that the system was broken and needed significant reform.  The present system needs such serious and massive reform that can only be successfully overhauled by controversial and radical ideas.  These new radical ideas will challenge the free-will and morals of men and women, and although some may view my proposed reform outline as heavy-handed or cruel, radical ideas must be cultivated if Americans want to see true change.  Feeling compassion towards others is a natural human tendency, but generations of failed government policy trying to tackle the welfare systems problems have most Americans “giving up” and thus turned a blind uncompassionate eye to the plight of the needy.  Charitable handouts and donations can only do so much good when system abusers repeatedly take advantage of those who are providing the handouts.  The American tax payer can no longer bear the burden of having their tax dollars spent on social programs that cater to those individuals who are able to work but choose not to.  James L. Payne reports that Horace Greeley, founder of the New York Times "favored having the state redistribute income by taxing the wealthy and giving their money to the less well-off."  Although later in Mr. Greeley's life "He judged nine-tenths of them to be shiftless vagabonds and concluded that the best way to respond to a beggar was to refuse aid" (Payne 22,23).  Some benefit recipients have become dependent on their benefits and see their monthly stipend as free money from Uncle Sam.  These "welfare criminals" will go to any length of effort to maintain their way of life without any regard to those who really need the supportive federal assistance.  The money that can be saved from curbing internal and external corruption and abuse can be used to fund educational programs that are realistic.  These new programs will pave the way for future generations and put America back on track.  In my new reform policy the attention will be focused on those who are able bodied and can attain gainful employment.  This paper’s new reform policies will not focus attention to those who are physically or mentally handicapped or the elderly because they are unable to provide for themselves; however, this paper will illustrate what the current system is, the problems of the current system, how the current system can be reformed, and why the current system needs to be reformed.

The welfare system was created after the Great Depression in the 1930's. During the time of the Great Depression millions of Americans were out of work and many found themselves begging for food or standing in charity lines set up by local businesses.  About one-fourth of the country needed assistance, and the federal government answered the nations call to assist the needy. The Roosevelt administration created the Social Security Act in 1935.  That program was to provide aid to people who needed aid.  In the following years the governments role in social welfare expands to provide not only food, but to provide financial and medical assistance for those who have lost their job, are elderly, mentally and physically disabled, provide child services for single parents, and temporary housing for those who cannot call any one place "home".  The welfare system was to assist all citizens of the United States; however, some monies and benefits from the welfare system go toward citizens from other countries.  Since these citizens do not work for the United States they do not contribute to the tax base which funds the social welfare programs provided.  If we are to make this new program work then only persons who are able to work and pay taxes will have access to welfare benefits. 

The first type of welfare benefit is a monetary benefit.  Most people think about unemployment benefits as cash from the government even though there are other types of financial assistance available.  We will focus this part on unemployment benefits payments.  When a person loses their job they can apply for unemployment.  The decision to grant claims is made by a case manager at the Welfare office who must first determine if the person applying for benefits was terminated by the employer, voluntarily resigned, or laid-off from his or her job.  For most claim cases the first two reasons do not guarantee benefits although certain unscrupulous individuals still try to pursue the claim and do their best to convince the case manager to authorize benefits. 

The second type of welfare benefit is that of nutritional sustenance or "food stamps."  I feel that we can all agree that no person shall be denied food because every person has a right to adequate food and water.  In fact, according to Dr. Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, said that food and water was a basic psychological need that must be satisfied before any person can satisfy their greater needs for security and comfort.  A prime example is trying to maintain a normal life with the pain of hunger lingering in your stomach.  A program first created in 1939 provided food to the impoverished by using a special stamp.  In 1969 the program would be called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.  These stamps were treated as cash when traded for food.  In more modern times the actual "stamp" was replaced by coupons, and then replaced by an Electronic Benefits Transfer or EBT for short.  EBT cards work just in the same manner as a debit card which ties their benefit amount to a bank account.  Since an electronic transfer of money is cheaper than printing actual coupons, the EBT system saved the government money. The EBT cards much like the paper coupon predecessor was abused because benefit holders would trade their benefits for cash.  There are cases of merchants who accept EBT cards as payment for goods that were not authorized to be sold as such.

The third type of welfare benefit is low income housing.  A branch of the government called Housing and Urban Development or HUD provides low-income housing opportunities to the same individuals who qualify for most benefits.  Low income housing was not meant to be a permanent solution to the problem of persons being displaced because they can no longer afford a home.   Even though low income housing is a temporary fix, some families living in low income housing have become dependent living in their low income government owned home.

The fourth type of welfare benefit is medical assistance in the form of Medicaid.  Medicaid is a government run program that provides low income persons with medical care.  Welfare recipients who qualify for these benefits may have to pay a small co-payment amount and the total care they receive is equal to what a person that pays for his or her own insurance may receive.  The money for these benefits does not go to the recipients but to the hospitals instead. This is not the same as Medicare as Medicare is for persons over the age of 65.

The 1996 welfare reforms under the leadership of President Bill Clinton set a new direction on how welfare is handled in America.  The new Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act helped individuals focus on getting his or her life back together and get back to work instead of taking advantage of the welfare system without seeking employment.  I understand that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act put limits on benefits to non-citizens but I will argue that no benefits should be provided to non-citizens.  A positive benefit is that immigrants who consider coming to America to ride on the “coat tails” of American generosity may rethink their plans for hoping America will provide them benefits if they fail.  George Bojas wrote in the International Migration Review “the welfare state creates a magnet that influences the migration decisions of persons in the source countries, potentially changing the composition and geographic location of the immigrant population in the United States in ways that may not be desirable. The potential magnetic effects of welfare raise questions about both the political legitimacy and the economic viability of the welfare state” (borjas). 

This new shift in thinking lead to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, also known as TANF, which essentially reworked the old welfare system originally instituted in 1935.  These new benefits put a five year lifetime limitation on collecting welfare benefits.  In essence, they forced those on welfare to seek gainful employment in exchange for their welfare payments.  A few years after the TANF introduction welfare case loads dropped over sixty-percent and millions of tax dollars were saved from waste.  I argue that this is a proven fact that the lazy and lethargic attitude toward work was only encouraged by a free government handout that went unchecked for decades.  For example, if people were self-motivated to improve their own lives then why are so many Americans facing obesity and poor health because of their own eating habits?  To address the critics who argue that my proposed welfare time limits should be abolished I provide the following counter-point.  Humans are inherently lazy, and given the opportunity to seek free money they would.  A case in point would be the true story of Rosie Watson of Lake Providence Louisiana who bragged about collecting $46,716 in welfare checks every year.  I believe that she was so dependant on her lifestyle that she even petitioned a doctor to declare her disabled.  “In her own case, she was turned down five times because doctors agreed she was not disabled.  “One commented, “Patient is determined to become a ward of the government.”  Finally, on appeal, an administrative law judge declared her eligible on grounds of stress.” (Payne 27).   There is another recent situation reported by the New York Times which states “a tempest hit Ohio’s Warren County after a woman drove to the food stamp office in a Mercedes-Benz and that she owned a $300,000 home loan-free” (N.Y. Times, A25).

If only these new rules could have been enacted much earlier the taxpayers of America could have shouldered a significantly less tax burden then they do today.  TANF proves that new reforms worked and showed America that hard handed reforms could be executed with successful results.  Even though reforms have lessened the case load and reduced the number on welfare there are many ways the welfare system is still being abused.  The following is a seven phase plan of reform.

The first phase of my welfare reform policy is mandatory drug testing for all benefit recipients and case managers.  No person in the United States can doubt that substance abuse is on the rise because there is a sharp increase in addicted persons seeking treatment.  The Associated Press reports "Nationwide, the admission rate for treatment of methamphetamine or amphetamine addiction rose from 28,000 in 1993 to nearly 136,000 patients in 2003" (Associated Press).  Those who are addicted may have lost everything they own or are on the verge of losing everything when they apply for assistance.  I don't need to remind anyone that illegal drugs also destroy families and lives.  The new reforms will identify those that are on drugs and force treatment to those who are addicted so that they may continue to receive benefits and will be a better and more productive member of society.  Drug testing will be random and without notice because this is part of the success of keeping recipients off drugs and placing a greater penalty on taking drugs.  One could argue that we shouldn't force people to take drug tests because drug testing violates their rights and treats them as criminals.  I argue that a person that tests positive for drugs is traditionally unreliable and if their drug problem grows out of control may resort to crime to fuel their drug habit; furthermore, some employers require a drug test because they want to know if this employee would be a liability, and the American people are tired of paying for other peoples liabilities.

Here is how the drug testing for benefits rule will work.  When new applicants apply for benefits he or she will be asked to perform an immediate urine analysis.  The processing of the sample will follow the same guidelines and procedures as any employer drug screen test.  If a person tests positive for illegal drugs then they must submit and complete a drug treatment program at the expense of the government before becoming eligible for benefits or forfeit their application for benefits.  If they refuse then all benefits will be denied until they complete a treatment program at their expense.  The reason for mandatory substance abuse testing is that persons addicted to drugs collecting welfare will be more inclined to spend their benefits on illegal drugs rather than sustenance for themselves; furthermore, drug addicts will not make the best use of tax payer money and most likely sink deeper into poverty with almost no chance of recovery.  If those who collect benefits test positive for drugs while on welfare then they will immediately forfeit all benefits and be prohibited from applying for welfare for one year and must successfully complete a drug treatment program at their expense.  Drug screening is the critical first step in my new welfare reform plan.  This step is not about saving money but putting money into the hands of those who sincerely need the money. 

            The second phase of reform is a measure that we must implement which is a work-for-benefits plan.  In plain language a person cannot collect any welfare benefits if he or she has not worked.  The reason behind this plan is to curb how much money is being taken from the system and not put back in the system.  An example would be the State of Hawaii, in which the Honolulu Advertiser writes “the average taxes employers pay will soar almost 12-fold, from $90 annually this year to $1070 in 2010” (Honolulu).  How the work-for-benefits plan will operate is a person that works a total number of taxable work hours will earn that individual future credits toward welfare.  The credits are not based on hourly wages and the credits will be translated into actual days of welfare support not welfare benefits available.  So a person who spent more of their lifetime working will be eligible for a longer period of benefit days.  These credits cannot be exchanged, traded with other participants, or redeemed for cash and no additional money is required from businesses.  In this method we satisfy the fairness of “who is able to collect and for how long.”  A merit based system is necessary because welfare no longer wants to provide the impression that welfare is simply free money to be handed out in times on economic hardships.  Workers must be reminded that healthy work ethics is what makes our economy strong and gives a person his or her sense of self worth. 

Abuse of the welfare system can also come from within the system itself.  Case managers that work in the welfare system will continue to be screened for substance abuse as they are now.  Case managers, many who are under-paid and over-worked, may seek to supplement their income by authorizing benefits in exchange for cash "kick backs".  The government will impose severe criminal penalties for case managers who succumb to corruption.  Since we have also put the case managers under a microscope the new reforms must also provide case managers with ways of combating on the job stress; furthermore we must also encourage mental and physical health. 

Not all states provide the type of care I am proposing in the new reforms.  In the State of Hawaii for example, case managers are provided insurance that allows for mental health days off and subsidized care.   New reforms will reduce workloads by hiring more case managers, provide partial reimbursement for counseling, and encourage physical health.  The work load for case managers will be reduced by the number of benefit recipients who will fail the mandatory drug screen as described previously, and less cases will also ease the burden on case managers. Reduction in cases will result in a faster approval or disapproval for qualified individuals who seek benefits and increase the quality of work output.  Case managers are human beings and imperfect.  They are subject to stress not only from work but from external influences such as family and friends.  They will be encouraged to visit their own psychologist on their own time and the case manager will be partially reimbursed by the government.  There is no doubt that mental health is important not only for the case manager but for the people that these cases represent.  The new reforms will also add workout rooms to offices that handle cases.  Exercising in the workplace gives the case managers an outlet to improve their overall well-being, reduces stress levels, and prepares the mind to think quicker and make better decisions.  In support of exercise the Mayo Clinic reports “Physical activity stimulates various brain chemicals that may leave you feeling happier and more relaxed than you were before you worked out” (exercise).

The third phase of welfare reform policy is an overhaul in public housing and how public housing is managed.  The present problems with public housing is public housing has moved from a temporary placement to permanent status housing for most individuals who live there; in addition, there are those who illegally live there with relatives and friends, and some may even have unreported income that allows them to purchase items of excess when that money could be diverted to paying rent in an apartment of their own.  I interviewed a case manager who wishes to remain anonymous.  She manages cases for an emergency homeless shelter on the west side of Oahu.  She told me that the average wait for a unit in affordable public housing is seven years; however, if they check themselves into an emergency shelter the average wait time is only three years.  She also reports that many of them cover up additional sources of income that these people earn from other jobs, because reporting additional income makes them less likely to get into a public housing unit. 

Currently there are no time limits on public housing which means that a person could live in public housing for many years without being asked to leave as long as he or she follows the rules.  In my new reform plans there would be a limit on living in public housing because other people are in need of public housing and the waiting period should be shortened.  This is why I propose a three year maximum housing allowance for individuals and a six year maximum housing allowance for families.  Society must work together to properly transition people out of public housing and into the work force.  The new reform plans will encourage self-confidence and self-worth.  We cannot expect anyone to return to work if they are uneducated and unmotivated.  Enhanced job skills programs and personal and professional development is how individuals on welfare can return back to the job market.

The fourth phase of welfare reform is public education programs in each public housing complex.  Most recipients now may have at best a high school education.  Education is paramount and must be encouraged at all age levels.  Persons need to be reminded that there are hundreds if not thousands of individuals who may be applying for the same position and education and motivation will give them the tools to succeed.  To facilitate education; every public housing project will have an education center on the property that will serve day and evening classes to accommodate those who may have an inflexible schedule.  Participation is required because people cannot be relied upon to take the initiative to attend these classes by themselves if left in public housing.  This step also enforces the concept that public housing is for those who are in dire need of assistance and will do what is required to escape poverty.  The educational portion of these classes will teach courses in math and English at the Senior high school level, and office related computer applications such as word processing and spreadsheet design.  Although attendance at these education classes are a requirement as part of living in public housing, anyone receiving welfare and not living in public housing can attend the educational classes.

The fifth phase of welfare reform is personal and professional development for those people on welfare.  During this phase they will learn job interview skills so that they are properly equipped to handle tough interview questions and resume building workshops.  Another important and fundamental aspect of the class that will be taught is work place ethics and conflict resolution.  Persons transitioning from unemployment back into the workforce may encounter hurdles such as how to handle a manager or boss that may be younger than them, coworkers who have a poor work ethic, or they could experience pressure from work itself and may quit or be terminated and end up back where the started.  There will be a class on personal finance that will teach them how to manage their money, how credit and lending works, and require them to create and maintain a savings account because savings accounts reinforce proper money management.  Some case managers in emergency shelters require residents to have a savings account to stay in the shelter and I feel that this is a great idea.  If benefit recipients are properly educated about money management then they will be more likely to manage their finances better when they transition out of public housing.  Training will be ongoing while they are living in public housing.  There will also be different levels of advanced training and certification for training for a small fee to offset the cost any additional materials.  Tax credits will be provided to employers who volunteer time to teach classes at the public housing education centers and these employers may also participate in job fairs that will be planned for the public housing communities.

The sixth phase of welfare reform is metering of water and electrical usage for each public housing unit.  For example, a report I downloaded from the Hawaii Public Housing Authority reported that the State of Hawaii paid a combined total of $6.5 million dollars in 2007 for just water and power; in addition, I have also read about situations where public housing units are being used for illegal activities such as the manufacturing of drugs like methamphetamine.  Since each unit will be metered managers of public housing units will know if one or more units is drawing more water or electricity than allowed.  If a unit is excessively consuming resources above a normal baseline percentage then a inspector will conduct an unannounced visit.  The inspector will determine if there are any leaks in the system or simply too many electronic devices being plugged in; consequently, if the inspector determines that the excess consumption is caused by the tenant then the tenant will be charged a penalty which must be paid.  The problem with public housing in Hawaii is that public housing has been acutely abused by those who use their unit to promote illegal activities and there is a lack of staff that monitors the property.  Because of this rampant abuse a bill was introduced by the State of Hawaii House of Representatives in 2009.  The description of House Bill 359 reads "Requires mandatory reporting for criminal property damage, drug dealing or drug use, and terroristic threatening.  Requires the housing authority to evict tenants who violate rules" (HB 359, 9). 

The seventh phase of welfare reform is installing a surveillance system that monitors the walkway, common areas, and perimeter of the public housing complex.  The surveillance system will reduce illegal activities on the outside perimeter of the public housing units and reduce crime.  A proven method is already working in Newark, New Jersey.  Katherine Santiago, a reporter for the Star-Ledger, interviewed Keith Kinard, an executive director for the Newark Housing Authority.  Katherine report reports "There are also visible changes in how the different housing complexes, from Riverside Villa to Kretchmer, look now, Kinard said. People feel safe to sit outside and not get bothered by drug dealers" (Santiago). 

There will always be criticism for any drastic plan of action and I would like to address and answer some hypothetical questions that may arise.  One possible hypothetical outcome is the stigma of being labeled “on welfare” will decrease.  Since my plan involves people on welfare staying off drugs and adhering to a back-to-work program, others will view them as someone who is willing to do what is necessary to return back to work.  Persons on welfare will return to work with a focused direction and with a new set of morals.  Although one could argue that even in a near perfect situation some corruption will still occur, I argue that new enforcement and rules is more than a significant improvement from what the system was before.

Another hypothetical argument is that people would rather decide to become homeless than subject themselves to the new set of rules.  I argue that the new policy was designed to ensure that only the people who truly needed assistance would receive assistance.  A Welfare public relations representative will let tax payers know that their money is being used effectively and with very little waste.  A re-skilled and re-tooled self confident person on welfare will be more likely to stay at his or her job and less likely to want to quit.  They will place their value on their employment and be an inspiration to those around them.

America is on the pivot of change.  If we want to be successful then we must also be unafraid to make dramatic, highly controversial, and broad sweeping changes.  In the age of multi billion dollar financial bailouts that seemed to have no positive benefit, for the millions of Americans who are suffering now is the moment that we can leverage our own present for a better future.  Not only should the old welfare framework of our predecessors be razed, but the new generation who wants America to succeed should rise to the challenge to build a new comprehensive system to treating the basic human condition of simply being human.

Works Cited

Borjas, George J. "Welfare Reform and Immigrant Participation in Welfare Programs." International Migration Review Winter 2002: 1093-1123. SIRS Researcher. Web. 16 Nov. 2009.

DeParle, Jason, and Robert Gebeloff. "Food Stamp Use Soars Across the Country, and Stigma Fades." New York Times 29 Nov. 2009, National ed., Nation sec.: A1-A25. Print.

"Exercise: 7 benefits of regular physical activity." Mayo Clinic medical information and tools for healthy living. 25 July 2009. Web. 2 Oct. 2009. .

"House Bill 359." State of Hawaii House of Representatives. Web. 2 Oct. 2009. .

MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS. Web. 22 Nov. 2009. .

"Meth treatments rise sharply over last decade." MSNBC.com. Associated Press. Web. 2 Oct. 2009. .

Payne, James L. The High Value of Welfare Benefits Keeps the Poor on Welfare. Michigan: Greenhaven, 2003. Print.

Rep. Financial Statements. Hawaii Public Housing Authority, 30 June 2007. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .

Santiago, Katherine. "Surveillance cameras at Newark public housing credited with reducing crime." NJ.com. Web. 1 Oct. 2009. .

Wiles, Greg. "Jobless Fund Diminishing." The Honolulu Advertiser 29 Nov. 2009, Home Final ed., sec. A: A1. Print.