Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Welfare state debates
Welfare reform: Analysis of issues essay
Welfare reform: Analysis of issues essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Welfare state debates
Welfare reform: Analysis of issues essay
Welfare reform: Analysis of issues essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Conclusion Due to the economic setbacks of the early 2000s, local revenue was down which led to many states decreasing many of the “supplemental work programs” that supported TANF and the Work to Welfare program up until that time. There were many states that had used all of their surpluses they were able to save in the 1990s which also led to more cutbacks in the federal grants-in-aid to state, local and other federal domestic programs. Because of the cutbacks,
Her work was similar to what Karl Marx describes in his theory of alienation and exploitation. She was able to do her study on the working class by living the day to day life of a low wage worker and had great insight into their lives, except she limited herself by having added cash, a vehicle, and a rental deposit (Ehrenreich, B. 2001). After reading the first part of Ehrenreich’s book, and imagining what the low wage worker may think of the American economy I can truly believe they see the injustice between working classes rather than accepting the low paying life they are living. There truly is a huge difference between working classes, from how they work, get paid, treatment, feeling of self-worth, and everyday living
In the book “$2.00 A Day” authors Kathryn J. Edin and H. Luke Shaefer look into the lives of families who are living with an income of $2.00 day. The authors use storytelling throughout the book, but also interject into the stories to explain what policies are in place that perpetuate the circumstances that keep these families in such extreme poverty. The book focused on how the welfare policy reforms in 1996 created a shift in who primarily received assistance. Before the reforms in 1996, welfare “entitled families with children to receive cash assistance as long as they had economic need” (Edin and Shaefer, 2015, pg. 7). However, the 1996 reforms largely did away with this type of assistance by setting lifetime limits on programs cash welfare with programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
TANF stands for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. It is a federally funded grant program that allows states to create and administer their own assistance programs for families in need. TANF replaces the federal programs previously known as 'welfare, ' and enables states to offer a wide variety of social services. One significant change from the old 'welfare ' system is that TANF recipients must participate in work activities in or to receive benefits. This means that parents receiving TANF must be employed in some capacity, be working toward employment, or taking classes aimed at increasing their
The 1996 Welfare Reform Act abolished Federal Cash Assistance and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) programs, all of which many believed locked people in the perpetual cycle of state- assisted poverty. There were three research findings on the “efficacy of the 1996 reform, all gave a summary of the most influential studies conducted by US researchers. Nearly all reached the same conclusions: First, Welfare Reform under the Clinton administration did result in a significant shift into new employment by the long-term welfare recipients. Secondly, the overall strong growth conditions were linked to the U.S. during the late 1900s. Third, the growth in income and employment experienced by the American poor welfare to work transition
The TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, did have its initial intended impact. TANK was implemented as a new program under President Clinton to lower the dependency of families on welfare which is one of the sole reasons the government made the decision to switch from Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) to TANF. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priority [CBPP], “The national TANF caseload has declined by over 60 percent over the last 18 years, even as poverty and deep poverty (i.e., income below half the poverty line) have worsened” (2015). TANF received results that the federal government was looking forward to at the time. There are four goals that TANF is required to meet to contribute to the better life for families and children that fall below the poverty line: “(1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on
Hanley wrote this article in order to persuade his readers that welfare is a very crucial part of some people’s lives, and Donald Trump should not cut its funding. In order to achieve this, Hanley makes use of statistics and facts throughout the article explaining how beneficial social welfare truly is. He conducted research and credited most of his findings to historian Michael B. Katz of the University of Pennsylvania. In the article, he states that there was a 60% decline of people living in poverty between 1960 and 1980 due to social welfare. He also states that between these
This paper will be discussing the topic of TANF. I will discuss the pros and the cons of TANF and how it effects society. TANF is a cash assistance program for poor families with dependent children. It’s predecessor, the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program was part of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Social Security Act of 1935. TANF was created by Congress through the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as part of a federal effort to “end welfare as we know it.”
Some argue that the government is already doing too much for those in need, causing them to become less and less self reliant but there are so many areas in which the government struggles with setting recipients up for long term success. “ What most people seem not to understand is that even when single mothers work. They must pay either babysitters or daycare providers, and both are expensive” (NY Times, 2016, p. 2). Any reasonable parent would consider this and most likely it would cross their mind that almost all of the money they will be making that day will go straight to paying for a babysitter so it’s a lost cause. “Welfare should be not just about forcing women into the workforce, but also about helping them continue their education so that it might lead to a better job” (NY Times, 2016, p. 2).
It is obvious that only the kids want welfare but, why is that? Rose Mary states, “Once you go on welfare, it changes you. Even if you get off welfare, you never escape the stigma that you were a charity case” (188). This statement from her tells the reader her why to not accepting welfare. In this sense welfare is symbolizing negativity and disservice to the family.
The Welfare Reform is a program that was set up to aid and provide public assistance (Opposing Viewpoints). This type of assistance aids families who are in need of funds due to no income or very little income. Over the next years, the Welfare Reform Act has been slightly changed. Some changes have been an improvement to the program, while other changes did not make an impact on the individuals who receive this form of assistance. Critics of the welfare program have insisted the programs hinders people who receive this form of support.
*When first signed into action over 50 years ago by President Lyndon B. Johnson the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the one of the first steps the Unites States took to help with poverty in the country. Both acts were part of the War on Poverty that was created to improve the education, skills, health, and resources of those families and Individuals with low-incomes. The United States government believed that by providing individuals with resources “they would expand their productivity and ability to makes ends and enhance their economic outcomes”. (Chaudry,2016) When these acts several items were introduced to the individuals to help thru while they were found to at poverty level such as food stamps.
She states this reform was introduced 10 years prior to her article being written and then asks, “But, what happened to these women and children once they left welfare?” (Blank, 2006). She immediately answers, “It turns out that those who left welfare did well enough to surprise the skeptics, myself included, but it remains hard to identify all the reasons” (Blank, 2006). Before the reform took place and even some time after, Blank was not for the welfare program.
The economic downturn that befell American citizens during the 1960s impacted several households and impoverished multiple areas. With a staggering 19% poverty rate, poverty in the United States has become an alarming issue. In order to fight this battle of poverty and deplete the population, President Lyndon B. Johnson established a system of initiatives. Within these programs, the intent of reestablishing economic stability across the nation was presentable through the Head Start program, the Food Stamp Act of 1964, and the establishment of Medicare and Medicaid. Still, the question remains: how successful was this program known as the War on Poverty?
The article addresses the myth surrounding welfare. Americans common belief government's aid enhances corruption among poor people has its roots in the past —even Franklin Delano Roosevelt considered welfare “a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.” However, recent statistics highlights the beneficial’ effects of cash assistance for the poor. The welfare positively impacts the life of children, improving the quality of their nutrition and education. Moreover, in a moment of great economic recession the welfare is the only net that can support people in need.