Texas was built by hard working people to make it the greatest state in the nation. Push Texas to move welfare recipients off the welfare rolls and onto payrolls. It is time to recognize that the welfare system has been a failure, and from this massive investment the state received only more poverty. The welfare system is unfair to everyone: to taxpayers who must pick up the bill for failing programs; to society, whose mediating institutions of community, church and family are increasingly pushed aside; and most of all to the poor themselves, who are trapped in a system that destroys opportunity for themselves and hope for their children. It is time to implement a workfare approach proposal to fight poverty. It is a program based opportunity, …show more content…
That is why there is no major obstacles in achieving the policy agenda, the only proposed solutions during the hard times of the house market crisis, was the extension on welfare time for those who could not find jobs within the specified time. The Democrats platform differ from the Republican on the time allow for recipients to be enrolled on welfare. The Democratic platform during election was Welfare should be a second chance, not a way of life. They want to break the cycle of welfare by adhering to two simple principles: no one who is able to work can stay on welfare forever, and no one who works should live in poverty. They will continue to help those who cannot help themselves. They will offer people on welfare a new social contract. They'll invest in education and job training, and provide the child care and health care they need to go to work and achieve long-term self- sufficiency. They will give them the help they need to make the transition from welfare to work, and require people who can work to go to work within two years in available jobs either in the private sector or in community service to meet unmet needs. This will restore the covenant that welfare was meant to be: a promise of temporary help for people who have fallen on hard
Welfare can be defined as “systems by which government agencies provide economic assistance, goods, and services to persons who are unable to care for themselves” (Issitt). The United States welfare system is an extremely complex and unique entity that encompasses ideas and concepts from an abundance of different places. Many people believe the current system is an excellent resource for the population, while others believe the current welfare system requires reform and budget cuts to become effective.
It seems like the Welfare system treats its recipients with disrespect and shame to discourage them from joining the system. The people who made and run Welfare in the 1990s made Welfare into a blame game and forces recipients to solely blame themselves for their poverty. The moral prescriptions in individually getting rid of poverty according to TANF are the Work Plan/Family Plan. The focuses on work and family are contradictory because of how little time there is to get both goals done and each goal perpetuates the idea that it is the most important part of ending poverty. It seems like Welfare is more about getting people off of Welfare than eradicating poverty. There is a difference in the goals and that is reflected in how the recipients are treated and how Welfare is run.
There have been numerous debates within the last decade over what needs to be done about welfare and what is the best welfare reform plan. In the mid-1990s the TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Act was proposed under the Clinton administration. This plan was not received well since it had put a five year lifetime limit on receiving welfare and did not supply the necessary accommodations to help people in poverty follow this guideline. Under the impression that people could easily have found a job and worked their way out of poverty in five years, the plan was passed in 1996 and people in poverty were immediately forced to start looking for jobs. When the TANF Act was up for renewal earlier this year, the Bush administration carefully looked at what the TANF Act had done for the poverty stricken. Bush realized that, in his opinion, the plan had been successful and should stay in effect with some minor tweaking. Bush proposed a similar plan which kept the five year welfare restriction in place but did raise the budgeted amount of money to be placed towards childcare and food stamps. Both the TANF Act and Bush's revised bill have caused a huge controversy between liberal and conservative activists. The liberals feel that it is cruel to put people in a situation where they can no longer receive help from the government since so many people can not simply go out and get a job and work their way out of poverty. They feel if finding a job was that easy, most people would have already worked their way out of poverty. The conservatives feel that the plans, such as the TANF Act, are a surefire way to lower poverty levels and unemployment rates as well as decrease the amount o...
In the summer of 1996, Congress finally passed and the President signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", transforming the nation's welfare system. The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act sets the stage for ongoing reconstruction of welfare systems on a state-by-state basis. The combined programs will increase from nearly $100 billion this year to $130 billion per year in 6 years. Programs included are for food stamps, SSI, child nutrition, foster care, the bloss grant program for child- care, and the new block grant to take the place of AFDC. All of those programs will seek $700 billion over the next 6 years, from the taxpayers of America. This program in its reformed mode will cost $55 billion less than it was assumed to cost if there were no changes and the entitlements were left alone. The current welfare system has failed the very families it was intended to serve. If the present welfare system was working so well we would not be here today.
This year in the United States, thousands of undocumented illegal immigrants entered the United States. “Argument against undocumented immigration is that local, state, and federal governments are burdened with increased costs through their utilization of educational and social systems such as primary and secondary education, health care programs, emergency rooms, welfare, and other anti-poverty programs to which they do not contribute through taxes (Beccera).” Financially strained social services funds are being spent on illegal immigrants, overcrowded schools are filled with undocumented children, and illegal immigrants take majority of low wage jobs. Something has to be done to remedy these problems in Texas.
The United States is often referred to as a ‘reluctant welfare state.’ There are various reasons for this description. One of the primary reasons for this is the differences and diversity of the political parties which are the motivating forces that control government. The Liberal Party, for instance supports government safety nets and social service programs for those in need. “Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all.” ("Studentnews," 2006) They believe it is the responsibility of government to ensure that the needs of all citizens are met, and to intervene to solve problems. The responsibility of government is to alleviate social ills, to protect civil liberties and sustain individual and human rights. Liberals support most social and human service programs; such as TANF, including long-term welfare, housing programs, government regulated health care, Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and educational funding. Their goal is to create programs that promote equal opportunity regardless of gender, age, race, orientation, nationality or religion, along with many others. Liberals believe that government participation is essential and a means to bring about fairness and justice to the American way of life.
In today’s America, there are many people who would either be disgusted at the very mention of Welfare or be highly grateful for its existence. I believe that in order for welfare to be more effective in America, there must be reform. From the time of its inceptions in 1935, welfare has lent a helping hand to many in crisis (Constitution Rights Foundation). However, at present many programs within the system are being abused and the people who are in real need are being cheated out of assistance. The year after the creation of welfare unemployment was just about twenty percent (Unemployment Statistics). The need for basic resources to survive was unparallel. Today, many people face the same needs as many did during the 30s. Some issues with
Only the Democratic Party is prepared to guide America towards this future. Under the watchful guidance of President Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party, America is finally moving in the right direction. In 1996, we, the Democratic Party, adopted and enacted a platform that reinvigorated the American spirit of opportunity, responsibility, and community within our national character. Along with the hard work and determination of the American public, this nation has achieved an unprecedented level of prosperity. Currently, the American economy is on a record-setting pace that is continuously strengthening our economic security.
Since the Welfare reform law was introduced in 1996 it has impacted American society greatly. The new welfare policy, named the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), replaced the Aid to Family and Dependent Children (AFDC) program; they have five known differences that only affect the ones who need the assistance. Critics argue that the TANF has negatively impacted the society while some argue that it has not. Linda Burnham, author of “Welfare Reform, Family Hardship & Woman of Color,” asserts that “welfare reform has increased the hardship faced by many women leaving welfare for work and their movement into low-wage jobs, exposes them to higher level of housing insecurities, homelessness, food insecurity, and hunger.” She also argues that women of color “are especially vulnerable to the negative impact of welfare reform” (38).
Welfare has been a safety net for many Americans, when the alternative for them is going without food and shelter. Over the years, the government has provided income for the unemployed, food assistance for the hungry, and health care for the poor. The federal government in the nineteenth century started to provide minimal benefits for the poor. During the twentieth century the United States federal government established a more substantial welfare system to help Americans when they most needed it. In 1996, welfare reform occurred under President Bill Clinton and it significantly changed the structure of welfare. Social Security has gone through significant change from FDR’s signing of the program into law to President George W. Bush’s proposal of privatized accounts.
Texas has had a consistent poverty problem. According to the Texas Tribune, 17.2 percent of Texas’ population was still living in poverty as of 2014 compared to the 15% national average. Even though 58% of poor households are employed. Fortunately Texas provides many social services and welfare programs to help those in poverty such as TANF, Medicaid, and SNAP.
Welfare is intended for families or individuals that are in need of assistance with no or little income. For those who do not know, Welfare funds come from hard working individuals that are required to pay taxes. Now we wonder, are the tax payers’ hard earned money going to the right deserving recipients? Welfare fraud is on the rise in this country. Many are taking advantage of the system taking away the help that is meant for people that truly needed help to provide for their families or people that need assistance until they can stand on their own feet. Statistics clearly show that “785,000 to 1.2 million families are illegally receiving welfare benefits. At the average rate of $11,500 per year, this means taxpayers are being scammed out of roughly $9 to $13.5 billion dollars every year” (User, par. 4) that is $13.5 Billion dollars of the tax payers hard earned money that is going to the wrong people that do not deserve it. What are the types of Welfare fraud that are being committed in the United States that our government needs to pay close attention to? To start, hopeful recipients will intentionally give false information about their household income to qualify. Some will sell their food stamps also known as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP). Also, illegal and misuse of Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) is one of the problems our Welfare System is facing today. All three are considered illegal and these type of activities need to be stopped immediately. People that are in need should be given the assistance they desperately ask for. The System should re-assure tax payers that their hard earned money is going to the right recipients and is not going into the wrong hands.
The money was cut from programs that assisted the poor, such as: Children’s Health Insurance Program and food stamps. I believe the lack of assistance programs, such as the aforementioned programs; have effectively increased poverty percentage nationwide. These programs benefit many families in poverty as providing food at low cost and insurance for the children. Other programs similar to those that provided housing for families in poverty, were also cut drastically, thus increasing the difficulty for individuals seeking to qualify for said programs. What, then, can be done differently to reduce the amount of poverty in Texas? Revenue should be increased through tourism and re-distribute its income towards industries. Texas has always been a state of tourism; many tourists come to see the river walk, the Alamo, as well as the other major cities in this State. Along with tourists, Texas has the capabilities and natural resources to attract businesses to this state. It is important to attract development and jobs to Texas, as it will benefit the state economically, while also provide more jobs and open doors to those people struggling in poverty. Increasing the industrialization of Texas may be the beginning to effectively decrease the poverty
The prospect of the welfare state in America appears to be bleak and almost useless for many citizens who live below the poverty line. Katz’s description of the welfare state as a system that is “partly public, partly private, partly mixed; incomplete and still not universal; defeating its own objectives” whereas has demonstrates how it has become this way by outlining the history of the welfare state which is shown that it has been produced in layers. The recent outcomes that Katz writes about is the Clinton reform in 1996 where benefits are limited to a period of two years and no one is allowed to collect for more than five years in their lifetime unless they are exempted. A person may only receive an exemption on the grounds of hardship in which states are limited to granting a maximum of 20% of the recipient population. The logic behind this drastic measure was to ensure that recipients would not become dependent upon relief and would encourage them to seek out any form of employment as quickly as possible. State officials have laid claim to this innovation as a strategy that would “save millions of children from poverty.” However, state officials predict otherwise such as an increase in homelessness, a flooding of low-waged workers in the labour market, and decreased purchasing power which means less income from tax collections. The outcomes of this reform appear to be bleak for many Americans who reside below the poverty line. How does a wealthy country like America have such weak welfare system? Drawing upon Katz, I argue that the development of the semi-welfare state is a result of the state taking measures to ensure that the people do not perceive relief as a right and to avoid exploiting the shortfalls of capitalism ...
...hose that need them it is impossible. If the government is going to provide things it needs money to do so, and where does that money come from, taxes. Therefore the medication, housing, food and other benefits allotted to those on the welfare system are paid for by masses who actually do work and make something of themselves. Those receiving those benefits either don’t see or don’t care about the cost it puts on the rest of society, and fall into the hole of letting life come to you on the silver platter at the cost of someone else. Hard work is something considered antique, a thing of our grandparents with too many willing to forsake it for a life that isn’t of the highest quality but is of the lowest effort. The rise of the welfare state spells the end of America as we know it, the end of the “land of opportunity” and the beginning of the land of poverty.