[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 207 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2444-E2445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK 
                        OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                         HON. NEIL ABERCROMBIE

                                of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 21, 1995

  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the welfare 
reform conference agreement. Instead of addressing the causes of 
poverty, this bill penalizes people for falling on hard times.
  Yes, Mr. Speaker, we do need to change the welfare system; but it is 
cruel and mean-spirited to dismantle altogether the safety net and 
basic services for poor families and disadvantaged children.
  The Republicans' answer to welfare reform is to deny basic assistance 
to lawful immigrants who pay Federal taxes, pit foster children against 
victims of domesitc violence for the same scarce funds, eliminate 
assistance to disabled kids, and cut programs to reduce child abuse.
  The reductions in basic programs for low-income children, families, 
and elderly and disabled people contained in the conference agreement 
on welfare reform total nearly $80 billion over 7 years, compared to 
what the programs would cost under current law.
  As a result of these reductions, the legislation would increase 
poverty among children. An Office of Management and Budget [OMB] 
analysis found that the welfare conference agreement would add 1.5 
million children to the ranks of the poor.
  Furthermore, these figures understate the bill's overall impact on 
child poverty. These figures reflect the legislation's impact just on 
children whose incomes would exceed the poverty line without the 
legislation but who would be pushed below the poverty line by the 
legislation. Yet, the conference report also would have a second major 
effect on child poverty--it would make large numbers of children who 
already are poor still poorer. According to the OMB study, the depth of 
child poverty would be increased by one-third.
  The deep benefit reductions in the welfare reform conference report 
extend far beyond single-parent families on welfare. The large food 
stamp benefit cuts affect the working poor, the elderly and disabled 
poor, and welfare recipients alike. The changes in the SSI program 
adversely affect large numbers of low-income disabled children as well 
as elderly poor individuals. Changes and reductions in the child 
protection area will result in fewer services for abused and neglected 
children. These changes have little to do with reducing out-of-wedlock 
births or moving welfare families to work.
  Unfortunately, certain members of the Republican Party 
have perpetuated the myth that welfare recipients do not want to go to 
work, leading to a feeling of resentment toward recipients by the 
American public. This is simply not true. Forty percent of single 
mothers combine work and welfare or cycle between these two income 
sources while on welfare. The majority of people who cycle on and off 
welfare have substantial work experience--on average about 6.5 years.

  However, there are many barriers facing poor American families that 
prevent them from holding down a permanent job. The primary barriers 
are lack of medical coverage and lack of adequate child care services. 
Single-parent families, making up the vast majority of families on 
AFDC, cannot leave welfare because many jobs do not offer health 
insurance. AFDC recipients lose their Medicaid benefits when they 
accept a job and there is no safety net coverage to fill this important 
need if their new job does not include health insurance. In addition, 
in every State, including Hawaii, there are waiting lists of up to 
several years for guaranteed child care for the children of poor 
families who seek work after welfare. Welfare reform should ensure that 
these two major barriers are addressed.
  Furthermore, many AFDC recipients do not have adequate education or 
job skills to find a job which would earn them a family wage. Most jobs 
available to unskilled and uneducated head of households pay the 
minimum wage, currently $5.25 an hour in Hawaii. With a minimum-wage 
job, an individual in Hawaii would earn approximately $10,000 each 
year. This is not adequate for a family to survive. It is also 
important to remember that our economy does not generate enough jobs 
for all the people who want them. Today approximately 8 million 
Americans are currently unemployed and looking for work. Criticizing 
families on welfare without keeping in mind the limits of the job 
market condemns them for the failings of the economy.
  Many welfare reform advocates have suggested that by eliminating 
benefits or enacting punitive measures we can solve the problem of 
welfare dependence. Welfare reform including punitive measure such as 
cutting off recipients at 2 years or cutting off benefits for 
additional children would be devastating to poor families in America. 
According to recent studies, welfare programs are not the reason for 
rising births to unmarried mothers. Similar 

[[Page E2445]]
studies reveal that welfare recipients are not motivated to have 
additional children by the prospect of additional benefits. The fact is 
that, on average, families receive only up to $69 per month for an 
additional child. This is not even enough to cover the cost of diapers 
for a new baby. In Hawaii an additional child brings in only $147 in 
additional cash assistance.
  Current AFDC payments are not windfall benefits. In Hawaii, an AFDC 
family of three receives $712 in cash assistance each month. This 
amount is reflective of the high cost of living in Hawaii when compared 
to other States. In Alabama, for example, three-person families receive 
$164 in cash assistance each month. I challenge any critic of welfare 
recipients to live comfortably on this income. Furthermore, AFDC 
benefit levels have declined by 42 percent in the last two decades. The 
average monthly benefit for a mother of two children with no earnings 
has shrunk in constant 1992 dollars from $690 in 1972 to $399 in 1992. 
In addition it is estimated that welfare recipients now lose up to a 
dollar in benefits for each dollar earned in a new job. Welfare 
recipients need the same incentives to work that other Americans have. 
We must end welfare as we know it by crafting a fair and just system to 
empower recipients to achieve permanent self-sufficiency without 
punishing them for being poor.

  I believe that the people of Hawaii and all Americans recognize that 
government has a role to play in ensuring that our families maintain an 
adequate quality of life and have access to basic human needs. We 
understand that by simply eliminating benefits for poor families we do 
not eliminate their needs. Most importantly, we cannot forget who is 
receiving the AFDC benefits. Over 66 percent of all recipients of AFDC 
are children and 100 percent of the adults receiving AFDC are caring 
for children. Thirty-five percent of all AFDC families include a child 
under age 3. If we remove the minimum safety net completely we will be 
abandoning our children. We know that family poverty harms children 
significantly and places young children at risk. Ultimately society 
will suffer for the abandonment of families and States will have to 
shoulder the burden of homelessness, crime, family violence, substance 
abuse, and health problems. We should improve the lives of the American 
poor by changing the welfare system in a positive, not a punitive, 
effort.

                          ____________________