Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
As welfare reform turns 20, Catholics discuss its legacy

As welfare reform turns 20, Catholics discuss its legacy

Last updated on: August 24, 2016 at 6:13 pm by CNA Daily News

As welfare reform turns 20, Catholics discuss its legacy 2016-08-24T18:13:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Washington D.C., Aug 24, 2016 / 12:13 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Welfare reform was one of the biggest United States legislative events of the 1990s, but after 20 years what is its legacy from the standpoint of Catholic social teaching?

Catholic policy experts gave differing responses to the program.

“It’s complicated,” said John Carr, director of the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life at Georgetown University.

Meanwhile, John D. Mueller, director of the Economics and Ethics program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., thought it a “success, in general.”

August 22 marked the 20th anniversary of the passage of welfare reform, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act.

The new program – Temporary Assistance to Needy Families – was a major overhaul of the previous one, Aid to Families with Dependent Children. Democratic President Bill Clinton signed into law the bill passed by both houses of a Republican Congress.

Among the biggest changes of the 1996 law were the federal government delegating block grants to the states and letting them administer assistance, and the addition of work requirements for families receiving government assistance.

The supposed reason behind the reform was to move Americans from welfare to work, and ensure that people wouldn’t take advantage of the system by staying on it long-term, unnecessarily.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops initially opposed the 1996 law, in large part because it blocked legal immigrants from receiving welfare assistance. After the program was re-authorized in Congress in 2010, the conference released a statement on welfare reform expressing their support of and criticisms of certain aspects of the policy.

One of its successes in the last 20 years was that “in reality and in the public mind, it connected assistance to work, which is a good thing,” John Carr said. “Work is an expression of our dignity.”

However, he added, welfare reform and its work requirements “works a lot better in a booming economy than in a recession,” when good jobs are more scarce and harder to find.

John Médaille, an adjunct professor of theology at the University of Dallas who has authored books on business and economics, argued that welfare reform has not been a success in promoting flourishing two-parent families.

In many cases today, he said, both parents are working during the day thus inflicting a “split” on the family life.

“It doesn’t seem to encourage, economically, the formation of strong families, and [it] forces mothers into the workplace,” he said.

A key question, he asked, is “are families at the bottom end of the scale stronger or weaker than they were before welfare reform?”

“I certainly see no evidence that they’re stronger and a lot of evidence that they’re weaker,” he said.

Carr agreed that welfare reform “works less well for those at the very bottom, who have the most problems, obstacles, in their path to the workforce, and for children in those situations.”

A good economy must be built around work, a decent safety net, and opportunity, he insisted, adding that moving forward the conversation must especially focus on work, like job training and the creation of jobs that can sustain families.

“Those who can work, should work, and they ought to be able to make a living that supports a family,” he said, “and those who can’t work for a variety of reasons ought to be able to live in dignity, and that’s where a safety net comes in.”

From the standpoint of Catholic teaching on subsidiarity, welfare reform was indeed a success, John D. Mueller, director of the Economics and Ethics program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., told CNA.

Mueller defined subsidiarity as “the notion that each function of society should be undertaken by the social unit which is best suited to answer” a particular problem. Welfare reform, he said, “did encourage the sorts of hierarchy of ways of meeting needs” rather than a simple top-down federal approach.

“It got people off welfare into jobs, which had been doubted,” he added, because the Earned Income Tax Credit also came along at the same time. This tax credit was contingent upon people working and so was a way of “helping people help themselves” rather than something that would “make them less employable.”

Carr agreed that the reform “has been carried out in more flexible ways at the state level,” which is a “good thing.”

Both Médaille and Mueller agreed that welfare alone is not the best long-term solution for poverty. It makes “disadvantaged” persons “less employable,” Mueller said, while according to Médaille, “welfare creates dependency.”

In that sense of avoiding large-scale dependency on the government, Médaille said, “the motives were good” for enacting welfare reform.

Its flaw, however, was that it did not address the big questions of whether there are “enough jobs for all” and whether existing jobs “allow for the formation of families,” he said, which would involve true solutions to the problem of increasing welfare rolls.

“On both of those counts, the system we have fails,” he said. Jobs in areas of real need – infrastructure, social, cultural – are not being created “to bring the unemployment rate down to its frictional levels,” he said, and it is here that government could intervene and be the “employer of last resort” by creating jobs to build infrastructure, for example.

Instead, businesses are content to create low-wage jobs where workers receive government assistance on the side, he continued. Thus, the available jobs in the economy do not pay the income and benefits necessary to sustain a family, and welfare becomes a “subsidy to the rich,” he said.

“Those are the kind of issues I think reform ought to be dealing with,” Médaille insisted. “Instead of being the consumer of last resort, let [government] be the employer of last resort.”

Previous Post

August 24, 2016

Pope John Paul I to be honored with museum in northern Italy

Next Post

August 24, 2016 Earthquake in Italy prompts outpouring of support

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: Micah prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem.

Select your answer to see how you score.

TRUE FALSE