Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small]

Center for Law and Education

14 Appian Way, Larsen Hall, 6th Fl.
Cambridge, MA 02138
(617) 495-4666

236 Massachusetts Ave., NE

Washington, DC 20002 (202) 546-5300

Center for Law and Social Policy

1616 P St., NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 328-5140

Center on Social Welfare Policy

and Law

95 Madison Ave., Room 701

New York, NY 10016

(212) 679-3709

1029 Vermont Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20005 (202) 347-5615

SPECIALIZED LITIGATION AND SUPPORT CENTERS

*Disability Rights Education & Defense

Fund

2212 Sixth St.

Berkeley, CA 94710

(415) 644-2555

1616 P St NW., Suite 100

Washington, DC 20036

(202) 328-5160

*Farmers' Legal Action Group, Inc.

1301 Minnesota Bldg.

46 E. 4th St.

St. Paul, MN 55101

(612) 223-5400

Food Research and Action Center (FRAC)

1319 F. St., NW, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20004

(202) 393-5060

Indian Law Support Center, Native

American Rights Fund

1506 Broadway

Boulder, CO 80302

(303) 447-8760

1712 N St., NW

Washington, DC 20036-2976

(202) 785-4166

310 K St., Suite 708

Anchorage, AK 99501 (907) 276-0680

Michael Leonard, Executive Director
Lucy Moss, Staff Attorney & Managing Editor
Sharon Data, Staff Attorney
Barry Sturm, Staff Attorney
Ellen M. Liebman, Staff Attorney
Robert E. Serafin, CALR Project Director
Katherine Stevenson, Librarian
Joan Kashycke, Legal Records Clerk
M. Nazim Khan, Financial Officer
Anne Forbes Wangman, Production Editor
Michelle Nicolet, Copy Editor
Patricia Gordon, Secretary
Vicki D. Broom, Secretary
Murtle Mae English, CALR Secretary
Virginia Vejar, Order Dep't Clerk

Nancy Carey, CALR Clerk

Debra Marks Davis, Order Dep't Clerk
Wayne E. Merrill, Order Dep't Clerk
Zelda Barnett, Receptionist

Law Clerks: Alfonso Casal, Laura Clukey,
Leslie Marley, Mary F. Petruchius,
Richard Ruggiero

[blocks in formation]

The Clearinghouse encourages submission of articles from legal services field staff and others. Manuscripts should be typewritten, double-spaced, with the footnotes double-spaced at the end of the article. Articles intended for the Management of Legal Services section should be sent to the Management Department Editor, National Clearinghouse for Legal Services, Inc., 407 South Dearborn, Suite 400, Chicago, IL 60605.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the opinions or policy of the organizations by which they are employed or the National Clearinghouse for Legal Services, Inc. Annual Subscription price: free to attorneys and paralegals practicing in LSC-funded programs; $95 for subscriptions outside the Continental United States; $75 to all others. Back issues are available at a cost of $6.00 per copy. Copyright © 1987 by National Clearinghouse for Legal Services, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN 0009-868X

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Toward Reform of the
of the Welfare
System: Is Consensus Emerging?

by Paula Roberts and Rhoda Schulzinger

0

I. Introduction

When people refer to the "welfare system," they usually mean programs designed to help poor families with children. These generally include Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), food stamps, Medicaid, and, for some, the supplemental security income (SSI) program. Currently, many very poor families are ineligible for AFDC and Medicaid. In fact, in 1984, barely half of the poor children in America received AFDC.' Even if a family is lucky enough to qualify for AFDC, benefits are meager. For example, in January 1986, a family of four in Alabama could receive a maximum grant of $147 per month; a similar family in Maryland could receive no more than $395 each month.2 Even with the addition of food stamps, few families receive a combination of benefits sufficient to move them out of poverty. Moreover, the purchasing power of benefits has declined: in the typical state, benefits are now 33 percent lower than in 1970, after adjustment for inflation.3

As a result, despite what are perceived to be large federal expenditures, poverty is widespread in America. For some groups, it is unconscionable. For example, in 1984, children who lived in single-parent, female-headed families had a poverty rate of 54 percent. Children living in black families

4

Despite what are perceived to be large federal expenditures, poverty is widespread in America.

Paula Roberts and Rhoda Schulzinger are attorneys at the Center for Law and Social Policy, 1616 P St., NW, Suite 350, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 328-5140. Funds for this research paper were provided by the Max and Anna Levinson, Ford, and Charles H. Revson Foundations. The opinions expressed are solely those of the authors.

1. HOUSE SELECT COMM. ON CHILDREN, YOUTH, & FAMILIES, SAFETY NET PROGRAMS: ARE THEY REACHING POOR CHILDREN?, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. 27 (1986).

2. Id. at 44.

3. Congressional Research Services, unpublished data.

4. CHILDREN'S DEFENSE FUND, A CHILDREN'S DEFENSE BUDGET 338 (1986).

[blocks in formation]

Public opinion polls show that most Americans would like to see the federal government eradicate this poverty. Yet, while there is consensus on this goal, there is deep division on how to attain it. In the past, this division has prevented the achievement of welfare reform. In the last year, however, politicians, policymakers, and academics representing different. disciplines and political viewpoints, alarmed at the increase in poverty, have begun to suggest ways to reform the social welfare system. Some of these ideas may actually be implemented. If they are, low-income people will be profoundly affected. For this reason, advocates need to be aware of the proposed changes and what they could mean.

This article is intended to provide a beginning framework for analysis. It starts with a brief overview of the economic realities, philosophical perspectives, and social experiments that have combined to re-ignite interest in welfare reform. Next, it reviews the major proposals now being circulated. Then, it examines the political climate for indications of the possibility that reform can be achieved in the near future. Finally, it contains a bibliography of materials with which advocates may wish to become familiar. Those seriously interested in welfare reform can use this as a starting point for their own work. The authors have also prepared a chart outlining the major proposals, which is available from the Center for Law and Social Policy.

II. The Basics of the Debate

A. Economic Issues

Any meaningful discussion of welfare reform must start with a consideration of America's current economic status. On the bright side, taxes, inflation, and interest rates are down. Per capita income and the number of new jobs in the economy are

5. Id.

6. Lewis & Schreider, Hard Times: The Public on Poverty, PUB. OPINION, June/July 1985.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »