[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 37 (Thursday, March 14, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E297-E298]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PRESERVING THE WELFARE WORK REQUIREMENT AND TANF EXTENSION ACT OF 2013

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. JOHN D. DINGELL

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 13, 2013

  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed to say that I must rise 
today in opposition to this legislation. Yet again, the House is taking 
programs that should enjoy bipartisan support--such as the Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families--and adding such partisan provisions that 
make it wholly impossible to support.
  In July 2012, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 
issued a memo outlining a program for states to consider that would 
allow for demonstration projects to test alternative job placement 
performance measures for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 
recipients. This was in direct response to the requests from at least 
29 states who wanted more flexibility on how they measured work 
participation. Many of these states requested a waiver so they could 
focus on more outcome-based measures, rather than job placement rates. 
The memo released by HHS outlines specific conditions that must be met 
by a state to receive a waiver: a clear and detailed explanation of how 
the alternative proposal would increase employment by 20 percent, as 
well as show that there are clear, measurable goals for work placement.
  Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues would have you believe that 
the Administration is gutting the work requirements under TANF. This 
could not be further from the truth. In fact it should be obvious to 
any honest man who is not blind that this proposal does not waive the 
work requirements. Rather, this is the Administration being responsive 
to the needs of the states and providing them with more flexibility to 
test which strategies they think will work best for their residents. 
This type of state flexibility is routinely called for by Republican 
colleagues in federal programs, and now that this Administration has 
embraced the concept, my colleagues want to claim that welfare 
recipients will be able to stay on welfare and not work. In my 
experience, when the Administration has heard your complaints and takes 
the steps necessary to address these complaints you claim victory.

[[Page E298]]

  TANF is a necessary and important program that will give families who 
are struggling a hand-up, not a hand-out. I wish I could vote to 
reauthorize it today. But I cannot support a baseless partisan measure 
targeting flexibility for the states to improve this program. As 
President Clinton said, ``The requirement was for more work, not 
less.''
  I urge my colleagues to reject this nakedly political legislation. 
Let's do the business of the American people in an honest, thoughtful, 
and proper way. I would remind my Republican colleagues that you are 
entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own 
facts. The facts are that the Administration's proposal would increase 
work requirements and increase the ability of Americans to get back to 
work.

                          ____________________