[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 110 (Wednesday, July 24, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8668-S8671]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS

                                 ______
                                 
       ENDING WELFARE WITH COMPASSION

 Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, yesterday we debated a welfare 
bill that will have far-reaching impacts, and I'd like to draw your 
attention to the words used in the debate, and to a handful of them in 
particular. One word you heard is the word ``children.''
  For quite a while now, I have been amazed at how many debates happen 
on the Senate floor in which we do not hear this word, and do not spend 
enough time considering the actual children the word represents. It's 
ironic to me that so much of our attention in the welfare debate has 
been focused on children. I know everyone here cares; I know we have 
all strived, and tried to protect children. I want to be able to say 
we've done everything we can--and we almost have gotten over that line, 
but it is with great personal regret that I say I think we could have 
done just a bit more.
  The bill we sent out yesterday will change the lives of all children 
in this country, and could have dire implications for many of them. All 
of us were children, many of us have children, and some of us are 
currently raising children--I know this word is not exclusive or 
partisan.
  I just hope after today each of us will continue to use this word in 
other debates, and always keep children in our thoughts.
  Another word you've heard quite a bit is welfare. I think people in 
this country have varying levels of understanding about all the 
services we call ``welfare'' and what they do. But it's obvious from 
the bill we considered that many Americans these days share a wish to 
end welfare programs.
  In my view, the welfare reform debate here in the Senate will 
officially end with the final passage of this bill. I hope that it will 
finally be a bill we can all support. However, a whole new discussion 
must now begin--a discussion about the needs of children in families 
from any income category, and about how we as adults will create new 
opportunities for them.
  I think the welfare reform debate we've been having is really part of 
a larger discussion about something people often mention here--personal 
responsibility.
  I am in favor--and I've said this many times before--of asking 
Americans to remember not only their rights, but also their 
responsibilities. What we are asking from people in this country who 
are on public assistance, is to do every thing they can to contribute 
to our society and economy, in exchange for the help all other 
taxpaying citizens are making possible. Whether it's work, or training 
for work, we need people to end their own dependency on outside 
assistance and contribute to the work of this great Nation.
  But when we talk about personal responsibility, all Americans must 
recall those eloquent words from President John F. Kennedy on this 
topic. Each of us in this country must think about our own 
responsibility, whether we are on public assistance, or are calling for 
its reform.
  Whether you ask the American public generally, or people on public 
assistance themselves, you will hear about the problems with welfare. 
Welfare has created a cycle of dependence. Welfare sets up perverse 
incentives, which actually discourage work. Welfare has been around 
long enough for everyone to see its effects, but though it has helped 
many people, it has not turned around the prospects of thousands of 
poor people living in a rich Nation.
  As long as we all know what we mean by welfare, I agree with these 
statements, and I think we are obligated to change this system to 
address these problems.
  When I say we need to agree about what welfare is, I'm thinking of 
the many stereotypes, attacks and characterizations we hear. I think 
welfare has become a negative word in this country people use to beat 
up on poor women and children. And, if this week we have stopped 
supporting programs that create that kind of thinking, and started to 
support individual people in ways that will make them more independent, 
then we've made a good first step.
  I'm also thinking about the real picture--at least in my State--of 
who is on welfare. In my State, the most common profile is a single 
mother, age 29, with two children. Three-fourths of the time she is 
white, more than half of the time she became a mother as a teenager. 
Almost 60 percent of the time, her youngest child is more than 3 years 
old.
  We know that getting a woman who fits this description into a job is 
a little easier in my State than many others, but we also know we need 
different strategies to get many different types of people back into 
work, or into work for the first time.
  We know that each of these women has prior experiences that affect 
their reliance on public assistance. We know their experiences with 
work are important, as are their experiences with education and skill 
training, and other factors such as literacy, learning disability, and 
domestic violence. We need to remember this as localities design 
different strategies, or it just won't work.
  Despite all we know about our welfare system and people who are on 
public assistance, I think most of us still agree that what we have now 
isn't doing the job.
  So, the people of this country are demanding new tools that work 
better, and the demand has been heard here. The will of the Senate is 
to change, fundamentally, the way public assistance will work. I just 
worry that we have not adequately protected the ones who are not making 
the decisions--the kids.
  The effect of last night's Senate action will be to put the brakes on 
our current system of public assistance, so we can embark in a new 
direction. This will be difficult. People will need all of our help 
making this transition.

[[Page S8669]]

  This is not an ending; it is a beginning. We must remember that 
previous Senates designed our current system in response to problems of 
chronic poverty and joblessness in our past. Those problems have not 
gone away. But we need new solutions. We need to end welfare, or at 
least the negative welfare debate, as it stands. But the basic health 
and educational needs of children don't go away, just because of the 
votes we take here.
  The Senate debated many amendments, some of which passed, and some of 
which did not. As we debated these, I was preparing to support the 
bill. I wanted to amend the bill to improve it the point I could lend 
my support. As it turned out, each time we were able to pass an 
amendment, we seemed to lose another that had far-reaching impacts.
  I will highlight some of these amendments now because they are very 
important to whether we ultimately send a bill to the President he can 
sign. Some things that we fought for yesterday we should keep and 
improve as the bill moves forward:
  First, I have fought very hard along with my Democratic colleagues to 
stave off repeal of American's guarantee of health services under 
Medicaid. In my State, over a third of the people who get medical 
assistance aren't on welfare--they're in low-income working families.
  I want all people who are served by Medicaid to work, or be in 
training, or contribute what they can. We have many people in this 
country who are not on public assistance, who don't get health 
insurance where they work. I want to make that easier. All children, 
regardless of income, should be free from worry about health care 
coverage.
  But, in this bill as it came to the floor, the Senate put at risk the 
health care of hundreds of Washington State citizens, just as they are 
trying to get into the work force--where they face the prospect of 
minimal or no health insurance coverage.
  Fortunately, the Senate supported the Breaux-Chafee-Murray amendment 
continuing this health coverage. We need to support people, so they can 
make the transition, and can add to the economy instead of subtracting.
  Second, when this bill came to the floor, it still had potential to 
seriously damage the nutrition of many children and families in my 
State. About 250,000 children in my State now receive some food stamp 
benefit--and today we passed the Conrad-Murray amendment so that we do 
not to jeopardize the nutrition of these families while they make the 
transition from welfare to work.
  Third, when we think of child nutrition, we frequently think of our 
important program that helps provide school lunch and breakfast. A 
related program makes sure kids who need it also have access to meals 
in the summer--at their community center, at a school, or wherever 
children and adults gather for summer activities. This is the Summer 
Food Program. Under this bill, these children faced a 23-cent-per-meal 
cut to this service, which could have forced 60 percent of the programs 
in my State to close their doors.
  We know that children's hunger doesn't stop just because it's summer 
and they can't get school lunch. Children who rely on school lunch get 
from one-third to one-half of their daily nutrition from that meal. So, 
I offered and passed an amendment to seek improvement for the Summer 
Food Program. My goal is to keep more of the 25,000 children in 
Washington State in line for a nutritious meal.
  Fourth, we must provide educational opportunity to people if we are 
trying to get them off public assistance. To send people who cannot 
read out looking for jobs that are not there is just too much to 
expect. We must allow adults to complete their basic education or 
G.E.D. We must allow people to stay in training for 24 months--that's 
the length of most training programs. And we must let States have a 
larger percentage of people in training. The Simon-Murray literacy 
amendment does these things, and I'm happy the Senate chose to include 
it.
  I was also glad we held off amendments and efforts to use lack of 
education as an excuse to penalize people on public assistance. We've 
got to get them educated. States know how to do this and will achieve 
great things.
  Fifth, we must give parents the peace of mind that when they have 
taken their daughter or son to the child care center, that at least the 
minimum health and safety requirements are being followed. Also, 
parents want quality in child care, not just safety, so I'm glad the 
Senate bill's deficiencies on these two topics were remedied through 
amendments.
  There are other improvements, made by the majority party, made in 
committee, and made yesterday on the floor. I hope the final bill 
retains them. I hope I get a chance to support them out of the Senate, 
so the President can sign a bill that is very close to wide bipartisan 
agreement. Such a bill won't be overly detrimental to children.
  Unfortunately, there are other areas where this bill still just did 
not meet my internal test. With the kids in mind, I simply could not 
support the following:
  Item A: We are trying to shift from reliance on cash assistance. In 
Washington State, 186,000 children receive basic assistance under AFDC. 
Under a 5-year time limit, 60,203 children would be eliminated from the 
program, and that number would increase to 118,915 under a 2-year 
limit.
  What we do for these children instead of AFDC will make the 
difference in their well-being, because they are still going to need 
help after this welfare bill is signed. By rejecting attempts even to 
allow States to provide non-cash assistance to kids, we made this bill 
impossible to support. I want the conference committee, when looking to 
create a bipartisan bill--at a minimum--to include provisions to allow 
States the flexibility denied them by one vote in the Senate yesterday.
  Item B: Even with the Conrad-Murray amendment on food stamps, this 
bill cuts $4 billion deeper than the Senate-passed bill I supported. 
We've got to get people off public assistance, but the children must 
have food to eat, especially if the parents are in a struggle to change 
their entire way of life. The reality is, any deep cut to food stamps 
directly affects the children.
  Item C: The bill's effects will fall on women 75 percent of the time.
  Item D: Even legal immigrants face enormous challenges under this 
bill, and our communities will face similar challenges in assuring the 
public health because of it. These are people who are working toward 
citizenship, like all of our parents or ancestors. We should be firm 
about what we ask of people striving for American opportunity. But 
whatever we ask of these adults, we should have made allowances for 
their children, and so far, we have not.
  Item E: As many as 300,000 American children with disabilities will 
lose social security income assistance under this bill.
  Item F: The administration sent Chairman Roth a letter predicting as 
many as 1.5 million children could be thrown into poverty under last 
year's bill. We don't know the exact number for this bill, but we can 
assume it would be a bit lower and in the same ballpark. I have asked 
the administration for updated figures. I just could not support doing 
this when we did not have very clear answers about what will happen for 
those children whose parents cannot find success under the new system. 
We need to provide a few more handles for the kids of those Americans 
struggling to end this dependence.
  All of these facts are why this Senate must remain vigilant in talks 
with the House. I go on record saying that provisions in these 
essential areas--of noncash assistance, of child nutrition, of child 
health, of child care, of adult education and monitoring are make-or-
break issues for ensuring a workable final product. I support welfare 
reform. I thought yesterday's bill was going to be it. But, I could 
not, and cannot vote for a bill that fails children in this way.
  Many of you know that I supported the Senate welfare bill last year, 
and I wanted to do it yesterday. I am in favor of welfare reform, and I 
think we are very, very close. Let me emphasize this one more time. We 
have not debated the merits of limiting the time a person can be on 
welfare, because we agree there should be strict limits. What we have 
been debating is what we do while someone is on welfare to prepare that 
person to enter the work force. At the end of this debate, the answer 
is not clear one bit.
  The Senate must remain vigilant about the effects of this bill in the 
real

[[Page S8670]]

world outside these walls. The States, localities, and individual 
people in this country who have asked for this fundamental change 
must now take on the hard work and the responsibility they have 
demanded.

  States and local governments and--best of all--community groups of 
regular American citizens, are showing that much of the best work of 
government is done locally, with direct input from the people served.
  I have no doubt that States will work to get people on the path to 
success. Just to be sure, I am glad the Senate adopted the amendment 
Senator Kerry and I worked on, requiring States to take corrective 
action as soon as indicators show effects from this bill that increase 
child poverty.
  I just want to make sure we all understand--inside and outside this 
building today--exactly what we are doing here as we move ahead with 
this bill, and what that will mean. This bill today only tells the 
people what the Federal Government is not going to do any more. In its 
wake, we will be left with a clear picture of how much work all of us 
have left to do.
  Localities are clearly the best places to make many decisions in our 
Government. The Federal Government should be the place where national 
standards are set--so that a child in any State in this country gets 
what she or he needs to grow up healthy, educated, and able to 
contribute to society as an adult.
  Every child needs these things, and our country's economy and 
heritage cannot afford not to make this so. As we sent this bill out of 
the Senate, we have tried to retain as many national standards as 
possible, and even though we have had some success, we have failed on 
others--and we are going to have to come back here in January and get 
to work on new ways to improve the standards we have.
  If you ask any CEO of any company what this country needs to thrive, 
they will tell you we need more highly skilled, highly educated people 
making good decisions in the workplace, and we need less people out on 
the street doing crimes.
  I met with a high school assistant principal last week who has spent 
years working with children and young people with behavior problems, 
who do not do what adults want them to do. He has found successful ways 
of helping these students to learn how to behave in accordance with our 
expectations of them.
  But he said to me, and I think he is absolutely right: ``You can pay 
me now, or you can pay them later.'' Because our young people would 
much rather be an asset to our country than a liability, and the vast 
majority of them are. But, they are bright young people, all of them. 
And if they do not find success in school and the economy, they will 
find it by getting really good at breaking into your house.
  To avoid this, we must keep the Federal Government in the business of 
assuring standards, and must improve the ones we have today. On top of 
this, each and every American must invest the time and energy it takes 
to make sure every child is healthy enough to learn, and educated 
enough to contribute to her or his community.
  So, since we have passed this welfare reform proposal, we must be 
aware that America had problems before we voted yesterday, and we will 
have problems afterward, and that this is only the first step. If we 
really want a country where every child's well-being is secure, where 
every person can be a contributing member of our society and economy, 
where the world around us is healthy and beautiful and a great place to 
live--then we must start a discussion in every community and around 
every dinner table--a discussion that just has not happened lately in 
this Nation.
  What is important to us as Americans? What do we hold dear? What do 
our children mean to us, and what is each of us committed to do about 
it?

  Every American must be part of the discussion to determine what we 
can each do, now, to make things better in this country. What can each 
person, in front of each television set, or in each car, or in the 
stands at each sporting event, do to get America on the right track? 
What can each person who gets any assistance from her or his 
Government--be it a welfare check or a paved road or a tax incentive or 
a safe hamburger or a bank that will not one day close its doors--what 
can each person do today to join us in making this country great?
  People on this floor often talk about the old days, a simpler time, 
when things were better. Well, I am here to tell you that Americans 
today are just as capable of solving problems as any past generation--
it is the American spirit that is going to make this happen.
  People at home are now watching the Olympics, where the best athletes 
in our Nation will compete against athletes from the rest of the world. 
And they will win gold medals for their efforts, and for our Nation. 
These people are heroes, and we should all rally around them. But we 
can not forget the other heroism in this great country that we have 
seen in the old days and that we see today--the heroism of the American 
spirit.
  Thousands of people in this country grew their own food during World 
War II, in victory gardens, to diminish the drain on our resources. 
They collected every piece of metal they could find, so our brave men 
and women could have the best tools with which to win the war. They 
went, especially the women, out of their homes and into the factories 
to work for this country.
  Hundreds of thousands of Americans, like my parents and grandparents, 
gave of themselves, through the Great Depression, through war, through 
the war on poverty in the sixties, for our shared future.
  Many of them have not stopped giving. There are senior citizens in my 
State who go to school every week to help children and to help each 
other to learn about and work with computers. There are hundreds of 
young people, sixth-graders and college students, going into the 
community with hard work and good ideas. There are also kids who are 
truly heroic for just making it to school each day, or for not letting 
a bad family situation crush their hopes for the future.
  I want to caution you all that the American people have spoken and 
demanded change to public assistance, but they still want Government to 
play a role in helping people when they need help, and the American 
people are capable of speaking again, loudly and angrily, if we do not 
make this work.
  We have sent a bill out of the Senate. We put the House on notice 
that this bill needs to be bipartisan, and needs to be the best bill 
possible under the circumstances, when it comes to children. I have 
made several attempts to improve this bill, and I will tell you, it can 
still use improvement.
  I appreciate that the majority party has sought compromise in some 
areas, that they have made some improvements. But again, it is the 
nature of this debate that we are not foreseeing all the possible 
effects of this bill. We are entering uncharted territory. We must 
remain vigilant. And we here in this body must call upon every one of 
our constituents to join the fight to make this work for the people 
around them.
  We are leaving the discussion about welfare reform. We are entering a 
discussion about different ways to make sure all children are healthy, 
despite the income of their family. Poor health, illiteracy, antisocial 
behavior--these are not the exclusive domain of the poor--all Americans 
are subject to the ravages of these problems, especially our children.
  We are entering a time when we need to focus on creating opportunity 
for our children, and meeting their basic needs--health, nutrition, 
education, so as adults they will contribute positively to the economic 
and social structure of this country.
  Our country, compared to other industrialized nations does a very 
shabby job of assuring the basics. If we are no longer going to do it 
through public assistance in the same way we have done--then we need to 
find new ways to do it.
  I do not think this bill brings promise for the people it will 
affect. We have improved it for sure, but it could be better. But the 
fact is, the bill will soon be the law of the land. In the face of 
this, I challenge each American to help us put something in place to 
protect children, as we tear apart this system that has created such 
dependency.
  Especially where children are concerned, this bill cannot be allowed 
to come back worse from the conference committee. It is our moral 
obligation

[[Page S8671]]

to hold the children as harmless as we can, no matter what we are 
asking of their parents.
  After yesterday, I expect that all Senators will join in this new 
discussion--of what we must do to assure basic standards of health, 
education for children and all Americans.

                          ____________________