[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 75 (Friday, May 24, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S5648]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  NOTE

  On page S5598 of the Record of May 23, the statement of Mr. Bond on 
the introduction of S. 1816, the Wisconsin Works Act, was inadvertently 
attributed to Mr. Grassley. The permanent Record has been corrected to 
reflect the following.
                                 ______

      By Mr. Bond (for himself, Mr. Coats, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Gramm, Mr. 
        Ashcroft, Mr. Craig, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Gregg, 
        Mr. Santorum, Mr. Faircloth, and Mr. Nickles):
  S. 1816. A bill to expedite waiver approval for the ``Wisconsin 
Works'' plan, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


                    The Wisconsin Works Act of 1996

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a measure that 
will assist the President of the United States in carrying out a 
promise he made to the people of Wisconsin that he would approve the 
Wisconsin Works program. There have been some problems getting welfare 
actually acted on. I had a very nice letter from the President last 
year for the work that we did on the welfare reform bill. But that 
measure got vetoed and so did a subsequent measure.
  Now, the President has said that he supports the welfare reform 
demonstration project in Wisconsin, known as Wisconsin Works. Well, 
today, on behalf of myself, Senators Coats, Abraham, Gramm of Texas, 
Ashcroft, Craig, Coverdell, Grassley, Gregg, Santorum, Faircloth, and 
Nickles, I am submitting a very brief bill, which, in substance, says 
that when waivers are submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Health 
and Services to conduct a demonstration project known as Wisconsin 
Works, those waivers shall be deemed approved.
  We have heard many stories about the need to reform welfare, Mr. 
President, and one of those stories that has been repeated recently is 
that of an experiment in Sedalia, MO, where applicants for food stamps 
were sent to an employer. Many of them took jobs, which is good. It 
moved them off public assistance. Those who were turned down because 
they were not capable could stay on public assistance. Those who 
refused to show up were taken off of the food stamp rolls. So there was 
an incentive for those who did not want to work. Two people went for 
the job, but they were turned down because they tested positively for 
drugs.
  Under existing Federal law, the State of Missouri could not sanction 
those people, even though they were turned down for a job because they 
tested positive for drugs. The simple point of that is that that 
creates the most perverse of incentives--the incentive for people who 
are on public assistance and who do not want to have to take a job to 
get on drugs and they can stay on the public assistance rolls.
  That is the kind of thing that needs to be changed. That is why we 
need welfare reform. Today, Mr. President, I am simply acting to 
expedite one of the many waivers now pending from the States, which has 
been delayed, I understand from the Governors, an average of 210 days. 
This measure, if and when adopted, will deem the waivers submitted by 
the State of Wisconsin to be approved.

                          ____________________