The Bush Administration has now provided guidelines for what qualifies as work for those now or in the future who might currently receive money or other aid from participation in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program-commonly known as “welfare”.
From now on, you can no longer qualify for this program simply by reading the “Seven Habits of Highly Effective People” to fulfill the necessary work requirements. Nor does bed rest count as qualification, which apparently is used in some states as a medical excuse, one which is apparently abused. Nor will you be able to meet the work requirements simply by running errands for friends.
In other words, the Bush Administration is saying that a good many states are abusing their privileges in setting guidelines as to what qualifies as work, and there is evidently a wide range across the states. In many, caring for an invalid family member qualifies as work. In many it does not. The Bush Administration guidelines is supposed to provide a comprehensive synchronized set of requirements for all the states, which is probably a good thing.
There can be little doubt that welfare, though well intentioned when first conceived, quickly became a boondoggle as well as, possibly, a vote buying scheme. It got worse throughout the years, and became for a long time one of the Repulican Partys favorite whipping tools against the Democrats, along with “crime on the streets”.
Thanks to Bill Clinton and The Republican Congress, who fought tooth and nail with each other over the scope of the welfare reforms which both promised to enact (Clintons version for the most part won out, though this conflict temproarily was at least partially responsible for the infamous government shut down of 1995), the welfare rolls have now shrunk from the then 4.4 million families receiving government assistance to now less than 2 million families.
As part of the new guidelines, ten different categories of work will now be defined. This will include on-the-job training and unsubsidized employment, in addition to community service. As it stands now, the difference in work requirements that exist state to state make if difficult to determine which states do a better job of phasing recipients back into full time employment.
Any state that fails to meet these new guidelines risk lossing up to five per cent of their funding. It needs to be higher, but at least this is a good start. The threat of funding cuts is probably the best incentive to insure that workers will work their asses off to help people phase off welfare-as oppossed to keeping them on it forever.
