[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 53 (Tuesday, April 29, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S3783]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            TEXAS WAIVER FOR WELFARE SERVICES CONSOLIDATION

  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I wanted to raise an issue today and in the 
process urge the administration to move ahead and grant a waiver to the 
State of Texas to consolidate their office whereby they provide access 
to services like AFDC, food stamps, WIC, Medicaid, and other public 
service programs.
  In an effort to innovate and save money, the State of Texas, under 
the leadership of our Governor, has come up with the idea of allowing 
public/private partnerships, such as EDS and the Texas Department of 
Human Services and Lockheed/Martin and the Texas Workforce Commission, 
to bid for the opportunity to move toward a more efficient provision of 
welfare services in out State.
  The bottom line is the State of Texas has put together a proposal to 
use private technology with the public sector to unify the eligibility 
and application processes for a number of welfare benefits. The State 
of Texas can save $200 million a year in State taxpayer funds that can 
be used for education or for public assistance or for law enforcement, 
and they have asked the administration to sign off on a waiver to let 
the State adopt this procedure, saving $200 million, and the President 
has steadfastly refused to grant a waiver. Over and over and over 
again, we are seeing delays from the White House.
  If the White House does not move ahead and grant this waiver so that 
Texas can operate its AFDC and Medicaid programs efficiently, then 
Senator Hutchison and I are going to have to move on the floor of the 
Senate to pass a law to mandate that this waiver be granted.
  It is outrageous for the President to continue to give speeches about 
welfare reform, to talk about giving States the ability to innovate and 
to try new methods to provide better services and to save costs, save 
money, and then turn right around and refuse to grant a waiver that 
would dramatically improve the efficiency of the system in Texas that 
would make it easier for people who are truly needy to get assistance.
  What is the issue? By moving to a public/private partnership and 
saving $200 million, some State bureaucrats and the unions who 
represent them are afraid they might lose their jobs. Even though Texas 
could save $200 million and even though millions of beneficiaries would 
benefit from greater efficiency, the President is afraid to take on a 
special-interest group by granting this waiver. In this case the 
special-interest group is organized labor.
  This is exactly the kind of activity we encouraged in our welfare 
reform bill which passed on a bipartisan basis. This is exactly what 
the President says every time he speaks on welfare reform. The State of 
Texas is trying to be efficient and save money, and they cannot get the 
White House to say yes or no.

  Basically, what I am saying to the White House today is this: say yes 
or no, and get on with making the decision. If you are not going to 
allow the State of Texas to carry out the mandate of welfare reform, if 
you are not going to allow them to save money, if you are not going to 
allow them to operate their programs efficiently, then the Congress is 
going to have to act to grant this waiver.
  It makes absolutely no sense for the administration to refuse to say 
yes or no. This is a clear-cut question: Is the power of special 
interests within the White House so dominating and so overwhelming that 
when a State tries to operate under the new welfare reform bill, when a 
State tries to save $200 million annually of the taxpayers' money, and 
when a State tries to improve services by bringing the private sector 
into the process, it is prevented from doing so? Should we let one 
special interest keep all those good things from happening? That is the 
question that the President is going to have to answer in deciding 
whether to grant this waiver. I want to urge the President to grant the 
waiver and to do it soon.
  I yield the floor. I thank the Senator from Georgia for yielding the 
time.
  Mr. REED addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 5 minutes as if in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REED. I thank the Chair.

                          ____________________