[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 62 (Tuesday, May 13, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H2491-H2492]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             WELFARE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee] is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning, and 
certainly to ask the President to disallow portions of the State of 
Texas welfare reform plan that includes the Texas Integrated 
Eligibility System, TIES, or which would allow the State to privatize 
the eligibility determination for social services.
  All of us remember very vividly the vigorous debate on welfare reform 
that this Congress engaged in. At the crux of that issue was the 
ability to help Americans move from welfare to work. It was a 
recognition, as I recognized in my own 18th Congressional District, 
that many of those on welfare wanted to move from welfare to work, and 
looked forward to the additional job training and opportunity to be 
able to work and contribute to their own livelihood.
  In the State of Texas alone, it has 690,000 recipients of its Aid to 
Families and Dependent Children, and 1.4 million recipients of food 
stamps as well. The process that we presently use in the Texas 
Department of Human Services. Many professionals, social service 
professionals and social workers, have worked in that effort for many, 
many years. In the process of welfare reform, not only does Congress 
but the State itself and the legislature and the Governor recognize 
that we could do it better. We do not disagree with that, that we could 
make it more efficient, more effective, and certainly more responsive.
  The TIES Program does not do that. It puts in a profit mode with a 
private company the whole concept of eligibility determination. That 
means when a mother or a dependent who needs welfare comes to an 
office, they deal with a cold and uncaring professional, someone whose 
basic motive is profit, and may be given incentives for how many 
individuals you deny in getting the need that they have to have.
  In the 18th Congressional District alone, there are 109,596 women, 
infants, and children who receive WIC services, a basic nutrition 
program that has proven itself to be supportive of the early growth of 
our children. This means that in Harris County, TX, there are 12,917 
pregnant women, 5,259 breast-feeding mothers, 9,448 postpartum mothers 
who have recently given birth who may be in need of these social 
services, and 29,000 infants and 52,000 children. It is inappropriate 
to leave their destiny in the hands of a computer.
  Even just recently the Legislature in the State of Texas said that 
they were concerned that the executive branch might have gone too far 
in implementing what we authorized in the welfare reform bill. This 
legislation makes it clear that the legislature retains authority to 
make these decisions, and makes it clear in statute that the intention 
is to pursue privatizing only

[[Page H2492]]

the automation part, not the intake part, not the sensitivity part, and 
not to, overall, castigate the thousands of State employees who over 
the years have been particularly sensitive to the intake process, 
asking the hard questions and trying to find solutions to those who 
have problems and who need welfare.
  Finding out eligibility is not only in numbers and statistics, it is 
funding out the problems, the source of the need, why this person is in 
your office, who else can help them, why do they need to be on welfare. 
Maybe they only need to be on for a short period of time. A machine and 
a private company with an incentive for profit only cannot make this 
system work.
  There may be some effort this week to add to the supplemental 
appropriations bill an amendment to approve this privatized system 
under the Texas welfare reform package. This should not be approved, 
for we should have a vigorous debate on the best way to provide 
efficient, safe, and productive services to the least of those who are 
in need in our country. Welfare reform, yes, but a totally incentive-
based program profit-motivated, to the detriment of women and children 
and the elderly who need our care and consideration, that is absolutely 
wrong.
  I would hope, first of all, that my colleagues will vote against any 
amendment that would offer to approve this system, and I would ask the 
President to disallow this particular provision, for it does not answer 
the question of efficiency in automation, but it really responds to the 
question of profit and profit incentive, and it eliminates, as I said, 
thousands of very valuable State employees who are trained 
professionally to answer these questions and concerns of the most 
needy.
  We can have welfare reform. Let welfare reform be the kind of welfare 
reform that responds to the needs of all Americans.

                          ____________________