[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 14, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 14, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                 THE PRESIDENT'S WELFARE REFORM PACKAGE

  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, today will be a very historic day because 
today will be remembered, I think, as the day the President has come 
through on a campaign promise to end welfare as we know it. Today, the 
President of the United States will introduce his welfare reform 
package.
  We all remember during the campaign one of the things that 
distinguished candidate Bill Clinton from many of the previous 
Democratic candidates was his willingness to tackle difficult and tough 
issues. And one of those issues that he was very forceful and very 
articulate on was his commitment to end welfare as we know it.
  There is a lot of agreement on welfare, Mr. President, in this 
country. Nobody likes it. Nobody thinks it works very well. If you talk 
to people who are more fortunate, who are actually paying for our 
welfare programs through their tax dollars, they will tell you they do 
not think their tax dollars are being well spent. Then if you talk to 
people who are the recipients of welfare, they would agree with that 
taxpayer, that welfare does not serve their needs very well at all.
  So there is a general agreement, I think, in this country, no matter 
where you happen to sit, whether you are a recipient of welfare or 
whether you are paying for welfare, that the welfare system in this 
country is not working like Americans would like to see it work.
  After you have agreement by most Americans that it is not working, 
you then have a lot of disagreement on what should be done about it. 
There are many conservatives who think that we should spend much less 
money on welfare without making any fundamental changes in how welfare 
works. They would argue just spend less money and that will solve the 
welfare problem.
  There are liberals on the other hand, Mr. President, who too often 
simply argue or have argued for more money to be spent in the welfare 
programs without making any fundamental changes in the welfare system 
as we know it.
  I think both of those approaches are clearly wrong. Both of those 
approaches represent the arguments that we have had for decades in the 
past on how to change the welfare system. In fact, neither side was 
arguing for real fundamental change--to try to change the welfare 
program from a program that gives out a check to a program that allows 
the recipients to earn a check by working for it.
  Mr. President, President Clinton's proposal today represents 
fundamental changes in the welfare system as we have known it for the 
past several decades. It is a major step in the right direction. Some 
will argue that it is too much too soon, while others will argue it is 
not nearly enough and it should be done much more quickly.
  I think the concept of trying to phase in these fundamental changes 
that the President's program is attempting to accomplish is the right 
way to approach this problem. It is, hopefully, the type of approach 
that will allow both Republicans and Democrats to come together and 
join forces and quit the arguments about nothing being done and come 
together with a positive approach toward solving the problem.
  I think the people who have worked with the President very closely in 
this area, particularly his assistants and advisers--Bruce Reed, David 
Ellwood, and Mary Jo Baines--have really taken the time and effort to 
meet with all types of groups and interest groups, State program 
people, welfare recipients, and Members of Congress and, yes, they have 
met with Democrats and, yes, they have met with Republicans to try and 
see where everybody is coming from, to try to put together on paper a 
proposal that has a real opportunity to pass and get signed into law 
this year. And also, at the same time, I think they have looked at a 
program that will get the job done. They are to be given a great deal 
of credit, and the President is to be given a great deal of credit for 
insisting that this new proposal be done and introduced in this 
Congress and, hopefully, adopted and signed into law in this Congress.
  First of all, the President's proposal calls for term limits. Some 
say, no, term limits are bad and you are going to cut people off of 
welfare. I think I work better when I think there is a time limit 
within which I have to get something done. I think we are all like that 
if we know there is no deadline for turning in a school paper, or 
finishing work on a piece of legislation, or ending debate here in the 
Senate if we know we can go on forever and ever. I think the same thing 
is true about welfare.
  The President has proposed that all new welfare recipients born in 
1972 or later, who would be under 22 years old in 1994, would be 
subject to these new time limits on receiving welfare benefits. They 
know they will have to be involved in a program to seek job training 
and education and get their high school diploma, because after 2 years, 
they are going to be cut off of the welfare rolls. I will guarantee you 
that if someone knows there is a time limit within which they have to 
accomplish something, the chances are that they are going to be more 
diligent, more active, and more aggressive in training themselves and 
taking advantage of those benefits that are being offered in order to 
put them into a position of getting off of welfare and start earning a 
check instead of just getting a check.
  The program that the President has proposed also calls for new, tough 
sanctions on welfare parents who refuse to play by these new rules. It 
is not enough just to have new rules if you do not have an enforcement 
mechanism. The proposal says clearly that people in these programs must 
stay in school, work, must look for work, or attend job training. If 
they do not, they are going to be subject to suspension from welfare 
and run the risk of losing half of their grants. That is going to be a 
real strong incentive for people who participate in the program to get 
off of welfare instead of staying on. It ends welfare as a way of life 
and introduces the concept that people should work for a check and that 
the Government cannot continue to just give them a check.
  It also calls for a great deal of State flexibility. We in Washington 
clearly do not know all of the answers to all of the problems. The 
President's proposal gives great flexibility to the States to design 
the type of program that best fits their particular needs. What works 
in Louisiana may not work in New York, and what works in New York may 
not work in California, and you can say that for every State. So we do 
not need a national bureaucratic set of regulations when it comes to 
different types of requirements under the welfare program. Let us set 
the broad guidelines but let the States design the work programs and 
the training programs that can best fit their needs.
  In addition, it calls for strong child support enforcement mechanisms 
at a time in our country's history when we see the breakdown of the 
family, more and more divorces in families, and we see more and more 
children being born every day into families without a father, with a 
single parent, maybe do not know where the father happens to be, or 
paternity has not been proven. We absolutely have to address this 
problem on a national level.
  Under the President's proposal, we will be required to name and to 
help find a child's father before receiving benefits. Hospitals will be 
required to establish paternity at birth when the child is born in 
their facility. For fathers who refuse to pay, wages will be withheld 
from their paychecks where they are working, and professional and 
occupational driver's licenses will also be suspended. There are going 
to be some tough enforcement mechanisms that will go into effect under 
the Clinton welfare reform proposal.
  In order to try and get absentee fathers to recognize their 
obligation to support the child they have fathered, the legislation 
will allow the States to require the absentee parents to participate in 
work programs. We have never been able to address the question of 
absentee fathers. We have a handle on mothers because we can say: You 
are not going to get the welfare check unless you participate in the 
program. But for every mother, there is obviously a father somewhere 
whom we have not been able to reach out to and bring in and say: Yes, 
you have an obligation and you must work and, yes, you must pay for 
this child support. It is not just the burden of the mother or the 
burden of the Government to take care of your children. Absentee 
fathers will have a real responsibility to participate in helping to 
solve this problem.
  So we will hear a lot of debate. Liberals will say: It is too strict, 
too soon, too much requirements. Conservatives will say: It is not 
enough, and the only thing we need to do is cut off the money and the 
problem will be solved.
  Well, we have tried that for decades, Mr. President, and that 
obviously has not proved to be the answer. The President has come up 
with a step-by-step approach to this problem, and it is one that I 
think merits our consideration. As a member of the Finance Committee 
which has jurisdiction over legislation of this nature, I say that we 
intend to move as aggressively as we possibly can. Our chairman, 
Senator Moynihan, had made an incredibly important contribution to 
welfare reform in the late 1980's with the Family Support Act. Under 
his leadership and with the help of Members on both sides of the aisle, 
we have the ability to make a difference.
  I think the President's proposal is a very important step, a very 
important recommendation. All of the essential ingredients of real 
reform are contained in this proposal. I commend it to all of my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
  I yield the remainder of my time.
  Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Thurmond] 
is recognized.

                          ____________________