Trouble of the American Welfare State

7/30/2019 Trouble of the American Welfare State

1/6


2/6

Arnold2

In 1966 the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act

(PRWORA) replaced a welfare system that was collapsing on the basis to reduce the number of

people on welfare by bringing them into workforce and out of poverty. Under the PRWORA,

each state receives a single block grant (a lump sum of money). Then the state distributes the

money appropriate to each program such as TANF and SNAP. Each state has the power to

decide on how long the individuals would receive benefits from such programs, employment

status, community service, and adult supervision for individuals under the age of 18. (Doak 57-

58)

Under the TANF program, states decide on how much to give a needy family. It does not

have a gross income limit, but it varies by state on who is eligible. TANF recipients are expected

to work while they are receiving the benefits or spend a minimum number of hours per week

doing community service or training for a job. Welfare agencies make an initial assessment of

recipients work skills in order to help them find a job. The purpose of TANF as described by the

Congress is:

to increase the flexibility of States in operating a program that was designed to -

1. Provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their

own homes or in the homes of relatives;

2. End the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promotingjob preparation, work and marriage;

3. Prevent and reduce the incidences of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and

establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence ofthese pregnancies; and

4. Encourage the formation and maintenance of two parent families. (Nadasen,216)

The SNAP program, that used to be called the Food Stamp Program is administered by

the US Department of Agriculture, and is the largest food assistance program in the US. SNAP

issues an electronic debit card that is used to buy food that is prepared at home. (Doak, 74) By


3/6

Arnold3

law all SNAP recipients must work at least part time or be limited to three months of food

assistance. (Doak, 59)

The current criticisms and problems with TANF is that welfare recipients are a cheap

replacement for unionized public employees. Filling out the endless array of paperwork, or

failing to show up for even one appointment with a caseworker could be the end of welfare aid

for the individual.

Rewarded with federal dollars for reducing welfare rolls, states also adopted

formal diversion programs to discourage eligible recipients from applying for

assistance. Caseworkers, pressured by demands to keep people off rolls, required

applicants to as family or friends for help, or return for multiple visits before applying.

Caseworkers often failed to tell applicants and recipients about available benefits

(Nadasen, 81)

The objectives of self-sufficiency according to TANF also make the recipients work, or

participate in work-like activities thirty hours a week at any given month. Even if the recipient

doesnt have an actual job that pays, they must participate in community services or

volunteering. This makes it had for the recipient to make time to actually look for a job, given

that most recipients are single parents with no childcare provider available. The TANF program

actually makes the recipients dependent on state funds. (Patterson, 376-77)

The current criticisms and problems with the SNAP program are error in overpayments to

individuals by states (2 billion in 1995), and illegally selling food stamps for drugs, alcohol,

cigarettes, and so on, instead of using them to purchase food. (Haley, 56) Also, fraud occurs

when recipients do not report their income to the government, or case workers turn a blind eye to

this occurrence so they do not have to fill out extra paperwork.

In an economic point of view, the effect of government redistribution of income through

non-cash transfers, or subsidies, which provide specific goods or services rather than cash before


4/6

Arnold4

it is taxed. These non-cash transfers government transfers are prime examples of the SNAP and

TANF programs. These subsidies distort the markets supply and demand when the government

over or undercompensates individuals in the social welfare programs. The government must

accurately price these spillovers in order to correct market failure through subsidizing the correct

amount of funds. Politics come into play, when certain individuals or interest groups that hold

power in the media and seats in Congress and Senate can influence the votes with the promises

of more wealth redistribution and increasing the number of social welfare programs in the United

States. Once more subsidies are in place; they distort and create deadweight in markets.

Organizing these subsidies without the temptation for abuse is very difficult. Once in place,

subsidies such as the SNAP and TANF programs are very hard to get rid of, because now you

have dependents in the market who are demanding a supply of non-cash transfers by the

government.

In order to resolve the issue of the US government redistributing wealth from the rich to

the poor would be a hard needed look to reform, and raise higher standards for participants in

programs such as SNAP and TANF. For example we have made the recipients of the SNAP

program to have such convenience of having a pre-loaded debit card for purchasing food in order

to escape the embarrassment at the grocery store by getting in line with actual food stamp. The

leniency of what to actually buy, though SNAP which stands for Supplemental Nutrition

Assistance Program (with emphasis on Supplemental Nutrition) has gone out of control. A

possible solution for the recipients of the SNAP program would actually be to focus education on

healthy foods and allocating the SNAP cash only for fresh fruits, vegetables and non-processed

foods such as flour, milk, and eggs. Limiting the purchases to non-processed foods can allow the


5/6

Arnold5

individual to be proud of cooking for themselves as well as forming a healthy habit which can

lead out of dependency and into self-sufficiency.

Self-sufficiency means pride for the individual, thus allowing better care of families and

leading to healthy relationships. The dependency on public programs is not a good thing for an

extended period of time. This is why reform has to be made to teach self-efficiency by

eliminating dependency for social welfare programs. Americans need to get back to the basic

principle that there are no handouts for able bodied individuals, and if you dont work; then you

dont eat. The politicians in our government tell you that you are entitled, only because it exists,

and you are entitled to have it, even if you dont need it. This is providing the dependency on

someone else and not for you and leads out of self-sufficiency. The welfare state is socialism in

disguise, due to the government providing for the welfare or the well-being of its citizens

through non-cash transfers. If an able-bodied individual depends on the state for welfare, he/she

is giving away the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.


6/6

Arnold6

Works Cited

Doak, Melissa J. Social Welfare Fighting Poverty and Homelessness. Farmington Hills: Gale,

2012.

Haley, James. Welfare: Opposing Viewpoints. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press, 2003.

Nadasen, Premilla. Welfare in the United States. New York: Routledge, 2009.

TANF. Patterson, Elizabeth G.Harvard Law & Policy Review. Jul2012, Vol. 6 Issue 2, p369-

405. 37p

Trouble of the American Welfare State

Documents

Transcript of Trouble of the American Welfare State