[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 101 (Wednesday, July 10, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1236]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             WELFARE REFORM

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 10, 1996

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my Washington 
Report for Wednesday, July 3, 1996, into the Congressional Record.

                 Welfare Reform: Necessary and Possible

       Welfare reform remains a major priority for Hoosiers. I am 
     disappointed that partisan bickering has prevented enactment 
     of meaningful welfare reform that would encourage work and 
     parental responsibility and meet the basic needs of poor 
     children.
       The good news is that many states, including Indiana, have 
     been successfully experimenting with ways to reform the 
     welfare system. I believe that states should be given 
     flexibility to adopt innovative reforms. Welfare reform on 
     the national level is still necessary, and state successes 
     can serve as models as Congress prepares once again to 
     consider welfare reform.


                             state efforts

       Forty states have been granted waivers of federal 
     regulations in order to proceed with their own reforms. In 
     1994, Governor Bayh requested several waivers so that Indiana 
     could implement a broad package of reforms. With my strong 
     support, the Clinton Administration granted them.
       Hoosiers who receive Aid to Families with Dependent 
     Children (AFDC) must now sign a personal responsibility 
     agreement, which requires them to make sure their children 
     receive immunizations and stay in school. No cash benefits 
     are provided for children born more than 10 months after 
     their parents go on welfare, and cash benefits are stripped 
     from anyone who commits welfare fraud. Teenage mothers who 
     receive welfare must live with their parents or in another 
     adult-supervised setting.
       Most importantly, the Indiana plan focuses on moving 
     welfare recipients into work through the IMPACT job placement 
     program. Persons who enroll in IMPACT pledge that they will 
     seek a job and accept any reasonable employment offer and 
     acknowledge that the state will cease cash AFDC benefits 
     after two years. In return, the state aims to remove barriers 
     to employment by helping IMPACT enrollees to locate available 
     jobs and providing training, child care, transportation, and 
     health care.
       The Indiana plan provides incentives for employers to hire 
     welfare recipients. For example, once welfare recipients 
     start a job, their AFDC benefit may be diverted to their 
     employer, who can use these funds for business development 
     and employee benefits. The state also provides funds for on-
     the-job training of former welfare recipients. Indiana 
     provides one year of transitional child care and Medicaid 
     benefits to families who have moved off the welfare rolls and 
     into work.
       The results one year after implementation of these changes 
     are encouraging. From January through September of 1995, the 
     number of households receiving AFDC dropped by 20%. Welfare 
     recipients are being placed into jobs at a rate of 1,000 per 
     month. Since 1993, the number of AFDC recipients has fallen 
     30%--the greatest decrease of any state in the nation. 
     Indiana now has another request pending for further waivers 
     of federal regulations.


                         principles for reform

       Without doubt, welfare reform is urgently needed. Welfare 
     still too often conflicts with bedrock American values: it 
     discourages work, promotes out-of-wedlock childbearing, 
     breaks up families, and fails to hold parents responsible.
       Most Hoosiers want to help people in genuine need. They are 
     willing to aid people who cannot work because of disability, 
     or who face dire economic distress through no fault of their 
     own. What they oppose is assisting people who are capable of 
     working but unwilling to do so.
       The key goal in welfare reform must be to promote self-
     sufficiency and responsibility without punishing innocent 
     children for the mistakes of their parents. That means that 
     from the moment someone applies for welfare, the emphasis 
     must be on moving that person into a job and eliminating any 
     obstacles that stand in the way. Those who need training to 
     move into the workforce should receive it. Sometimes it's a 
     matter of providing basic instruction on how to write a 
     resume, interview for a job, or locate job prospects. A time 
     limit on welfare benefits for those able to work can be a 
     useful incentive. Work must pay more than welfare.
       Far too many non-custodial parents fail to provide 
     financial support to their children. I have cosponsored a 
     bill which would make it easier to track down delinquent 
     parents and withhold child support payments from their 
     paycheck.
       The lack of high-quality, affordable child care is a major 
     problem for many parents, especially those seeking to pull 
     themselves out of poverty. It is a difficult problem to 
     address because child care is expensive and the need is so 
     great. But we must make efforts to ensure that no one is on 
     welfare simply because they cannot find child care. Providing 
     basic health and child care to families for a while after 
     they leave the welfare rolls can be a good investment if it 
     helps families successfully make the transition to long-term 
     financial independence.
       I oppose efforts to raise taxes on working families on the 
     edge of poverty, as some in Congress have proposed. I also do 
     not think that cuts in welfare should be enacted in order to 
     provide tax breaks to the well-to-do. Welfare reform should 
     stand on its own merits, apart from the budget debate. We 
     must ensure that welfare provides an adequate safety net 
     during an economic downturn, when more people are likely to 
     need it.
       I am also concerned that some proposals would dramatically 
     limit poor children's access to health care and nutrition 
     programs. Unhealthy, malnourished children have a lesser 
     chance to grow into healthy, self-supporting adults. As a 
     nation we will pay dearly if we fail to meet the basic health 
     needs of children.
       There is really more consensus on welfare reform than the 
     political rhetoric suggests. But because welfare reform is 
     such a potent political issue, with each side looking for the 
     advantage, the agreements have been obscured. It's almost as 
     if politicians from opposite parties are afraid to admit they 
     agree on a lot of these issues.
       Saddest of all is that the ultimate victims of a failed 
     welfare system are children. Their needs, which should be the 
     constant focus of the welfare reform debate, have sometimes 
     been lost. I am convinced that if cooler heads prevail we can 
     enact worthwhile reforms. I will work to tone down the 
     rhetoric and turn up the pressure to reform welfare this 
     year.

                          ____________________