In 1988, Congress enacted the Family Support Act that combined an emphasis on education and training to help move Welfare recipients into jobs. As a governor, Bill Clinton was a strong proponent of the Family Support Act, but he campaigned for the presidency on a pledge to "end welfare as we know it." In 1994, the Work and Responsibility Act was passed. It also put more money into education and training for welfare recipients but had a limit of two years. This act was phased in slowly, starting with recipients that were born after 1971. “This phase-in had three advantages: it sent a message of personal responsibility to the younger generation; it gave states time to expand their ability to provide the necessary training and work opportunities;
Hays found that initially most welfare workers were optimistic and even excited about the changes. Most workers felt that the Act represented real progress and allowed for positive changes which would positively impact the lives of their clients. Hays spoke to one welfare who said that welfare reform “offered the training and services necessary to 'make our clients' lives better, to make them better mothers, to make them more productive.'” But as she was soon to find out, welfare reform, while it did have a positive impact on the lives of some welfare clients, made the lives of most clients more difficult, not to mention the stress that it caused for the welfare workers who had to deal with the often confusing and illogical new rules.
In 2012, President Obama introduced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program for young people who had been residing in the United States at least five years prior to the bill’s passing. DACA was the most significant provision from the Obama administration that aimed to help undocumented youth be integrated in the American society. It protected them from deportation and allowed them to obtain a state identification, work permit, and Social Security number. The immigrant communities celebrated this bill as it had been a long time since there was a significant change in the country’s immigration policy. However, the current administration and government pose a serious threat to the beneficiaries of the DACA program as well as
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.
The Troubled Families Agenda (2012) came about in response to Social need as it is a central concern of the welfare system, introduced by the coalition government. There are various types of need; Baldock (2012) introduced four types of need, these being Felt, Normative, Expressed and Comparative. Firstly, Baldock defined felt needs as what an individual believes they ‘need’ this can often be unrealistic and subjective to what the individual may want instead of need. Secondly normative, this is how an expert or professional identifies a need compared to a set of standards. Moving on to Expressed need, Baldock believed that this was where a felt need became a demand, it does not necessarily imply that people need it but are becoming demanding.
Pros and Cons of the Equal Rights Amendment. The Equal Rights Amendment began its earliest discussions in 1920. These discussions took place immediately after two-thirds of the states approved women's suffrage. The nineteenth century was intertwined with several feminist movements such as abortion, temperance, birth control and equality.
This essay will first address the statute used and interpretation of the threshold test by the courts, and then focus on cases involving vulnerable children to assess whether the statute in The Children Act 1989 is sufficient in protecting these children from harm. I will look at the argument in favour of the current approach taken by the courts, and the counter-argument in favour of changing the current approach. The arguments are delicately balanced and the law is always developing, so it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court resolves this issue in future.
Foster care needs to be reformed, especially when it comes to private agencies. Many people seem to overlook the issues embedded within the foster care system; all it does is take care of children, right? Wrong. Private agencies pervert the system with the nightmares they create. Foster children already feel unwanted and neglected because of the abandonment from their birth parents; private agencies provide them with conditions that further solidify their disbelief of care and love. Money comes first in the eyes of these agencies, followed by the need of control. This “control” can easily become abuse. It would only be sensible for a higher authority to intervene and put an end to these profound
“FERPA [Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act] essentially means you have no right, as a parent, to know what or how your children are doing in school.” Michele Willens says this in her article, “College Students Have Too Much Privacy” about the FERPA act that was passed in 1974. It was originally put in place to protect the privacy of students, but it also keeps information private from the student’s parents, or current gauardians. Because so many parents waste money on college students that might miss classes or even drop out without them knowing, the FERPA act needs to be reformed.
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.
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts once said, “It’s a sordid business this divvying us up by race.” (Will “Blood”). In 1978 an act was passed in congress to preserve Indian tribal populations; it allowed tribes to terminate adoptions and place Indian children in Indian homes. The Indian Child Welfare Act has many positive impacts, including the promotion of strong Native-American identity, but there are also drawbacks, such as the lack of concern for the children’s safety and how they’re used as pawns to keep the tribes intact, no matter what the cost is for the kids.
Being raised in a single-parent lower class home, I realize first-hand the need for welfare and government assistance programs. I also realize that the system is very complex and can become a crutch to people who become dependent and complacent. As a liberal American I do believe that the government should provide services to the less fortunate and resources to find work. However, as able-bodied citizens we should not become complacent with collecting benefits and it is the government’s job to identify people who take advantage of the system and strip benefits from people who are not making efforts to support themselves independently. I will identify errors that exist within the welfare system and several policy recommendations to implement a change that will counteract the negative conditions that currently exist.
The history of welfare has been a short story. This is a short summary of welfare history from Micheal Katz’s article The American Welfare State. AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) was around the 1970’s, and it was the first modern welfare division but after a reform in the 1990’s TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) rose out of the remains of AFDC. After the reform the people on welfare went down, momentarily, but the poverty rate stayed steady. Since then there have not been many changes (Katz).
Ideological, social, political, and economic factors of a given period play key roles in developing and maintaining any social welfare policies in which the area of child welfare is not an exception. Throughout the history of child welfare legislation in Canada, Acts have been passed and modified according to the changing concept of childhood and to the varying degree of societal atmosphere of each period.
Lyndon Johnson was the next president to make significant advances in social welfare. He launched his War on Poverty, aimed at turning America into a Great Society, one without homeless on the streets or hungry children. In order to accomplish these goals he established liberalized requirements for government money. Over the next thirty years, Johnson’s dreams of a society without poverty were not realized. Time showed his programs did more harm than good, raising the nation debt to staggering proportions. In 1996, Bill Clinton signed a Welfare Reform bill as passed to by a Republican Congress. Reform in 1996 meant cutbacks in aid to the peopl...