Economic Security and Welfare Reauthorization
The upcoming debate about reauthorization of the 1996 federal welfare law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), will present an important opportunity to examine how well families receiving welfare assistance, particularly those from different communities or those with special needs, have fared under recent welfare changes. Although there has been extensive discussion about the law's effects, little has been done to assess the law's impact from a civil rights perspective. Too little is known about the effect of recent welfare policy changes on different racial and ethnic communities; the role of discrimination in determining access to welfare programs and services, or jobs; and differences in the types of supports needed by different low-income women and families of color. More fundamentally, scant attention has been given to developing targeted strategies for communities with unique needs to ensure that all families receiving welfare assistance have the best opportunity to move from poverty to economic security.
Any discussion about welfare reauthorization must, at a minimum, include steps to:
- Improve collection and analysis of accurate data about recent welfare changes. There is not enough information or analysis about how well different communities, particularly different racial and ethnic communities, have fared as states have implemented changes to their welfare programs and services. Many clients and families have left welfare, but there is uneven information about what has happened to them. Even with the limited information that is available, there is evidence in some states of differences in welfare leaver and sanction rates along racial and ethnic lines. These differences cannot be addressed without accurate data about what is really happening to welfare clients.
- Ensure vigorous enforcement of civil rights and employment laws. Every state should have in place a clear and effective mechanism for handling complaints involving civil rights and/or employment violations. Further, the Department of Health and Human Services and states should monitor closely how welfare programs are administered and implemented so that specific problems can be detected and remedied. There also must be ongoing, required training of all staff to ensure that laws and rules are well-understood and communicated accurately to welfare clients.
- Identify targeted strategies for communities with unique needs. Every state should have in place an effective process for assessing welfare clients and evaluating the needs of the different communities it serves. In some states, for example, eligible clients with language barriers or disabilities have faced a range of obstacles in trying to access muchneeded services. Not only must states root out these potentially discriminatory practices, but they also must be able to provide adequate assistance to clients with diverse needs. Enabling clients to participate in English as a Second Language classes that can count towards work requirements, identifying work options where reasonable accommodations can be made for clients with disabilities, adopting strategies to move clients into nontraditional careers that often offer higher wages — states should pursue a variety of these and other strategies to respond to the unique needs of different clients.
- Include grassroots advocates and welfare clients in evaluating the effectiveness of recent welfare changes. Rarely are the individuals and families most affected by recent welfare changes included in discussions about welfare implementation or program evaluation. It is essential that these voices are a part of welfare reauthorization discussions to ensure that we have a clear picture of the experiences of current and former welfare clients under new welfare programs.
The Leadership Conference believes that any conversation about welfare reauthorization must be grounded in an accurate, comprehensive understanding of what has been happening to welfare clients in different communities. We urge the Administration to take these and other steps to ensure that welfare programs operate fairly, and to put welfare clients and their families in the best position possible to make a permanent transition from welfare to economic stability.
