[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 138 (Monday, September 30, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11867-S11868]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WELFARE REFORM
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, several weeks ago, during the consideration
of the welfare reform bill, I came to the floor and expressed my views
on that legislation. At the time, I characterized the bill as an
unconscionable retreat from our Nation's more than 60-year commitment
to America's poorest children.
Unfortunately, I still believe that to be the case today. In the past
60 years, while we have disagreed and quarreled in this country on some
issues, all Americans, regardless of party or ideology, understood that
it was in our national interest to protect the most innocent and
defenseless of our people--the 9 million children who collect Aid to
Families with Dependent Children. Whether you are from Connecticut,
California, Maine or Mississippi, if all else fails, your National
Government would not rip the safety net from underneath a poor child's
feet.
With the passage of the welfare reform bill, I believe we have
abandoned that 60-year-old commitment. While the welfare reform
legislation may have been, in my view, a retreat, it is by no means a
surrender. A surrender would indicate that we are throwing up our arms
because the struggle is over. A retreat, on the other hand, means it is
a temporary setback, not the end of the battle. Unfortunately, the
battle is not going to be fought in the remaining hours of the 104th
Congress. But I pledge to my colleagues here that one of my first
priorities in the 105th Congress will be to propose legislation that
will correct what I consider to be major flaws in the welfare reform
bill.
Already I have instructed the General Accounting Office to begin
assessing the effect of the welfare reform bill so that Congress can
closely monitor its impact on America's welfare system and particularly
on our Nation's children.
While I disagree with many aspects of the welfare reform legislation,
its passage brings us to a new point, I believe, in how we deal with
poverty and social issues in this country. We are now waging this
battle on a new front and with a new set of parameters. The blame game
on welfare is over. The time has come to move beyond divisive rhetoric
and to find innovative ways to make this welfare legislation work for
America's poorest children. Simply passing the problem on to the States
and our local communities--as if they have all the answers and all of
the resources to grapple with this problem--is not a solution. It is,
as President Clinton has often stated, only the beginning. There is
still significant work to be done.
First and foremost, Mr. President, we must redouble our efforts to
create good-paying jobs for welfare recipients striving to end the
cycle of poverty and dependency. The bill that this Senate and this
Congress passed, while professing to move people from welfare to work--
a concept that I wholeheartedly endorse--failed to provide the funds
needed to reach that goal. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office
estimates that the bill is $12 billion short of funds needed to meet
the bill's stringent requirements.
Consider, for example, that if today every new job in New York City
was to be filled by a current welfare recipient, it would take 21 years
for all these people to be absorbed into the city's economy. Does any
Member of this body really think that millions of jobs offering good
wages with health benefits are suddenly going to appear out of thin
air? Absolutely not, particularly if we fail to focus on job creation
and providing greater funds for assistance, training, and education,
that give welfare recipients, in our cities and our States, the chance
to achieve the self-sufficiency this bill calls for.
As important as job creation is, Mr. President, to the success of
welfare reform, it will mean nothing if we do not allocate significant
resources to child care. While I was pleased to see that more funds
were provided for child care in the legislation than was originally
proposed, more is needed on this front.
If this bill is to be successful in permanently getting people off
welfare, as well as helping those already in the job market, working
parents must be sure that their children will be well taken care of.
The Congressional Budget Office again estimates that there is close to
a $1.4 billion shortfall in the child care funds for the working poor
and people in transition from welfare to work. This discrepancy has to
be addressed in the next Congress if this legislation is going to
succeed. So, too, must the provision allowing mothers with children
between the ages of 6 and 10 to be sanctioned and potentially lose
benefits if they cannot find or afford child care.
Remember, we tried to strike that provision, but we lost. And so
today, if you have children between the ages of 6 and 10, and you are
out trying to find work, the fact that you cannot find child care and
cannot marshal the adequate resources could cause you to lose all your
benefits. Again, I do not understand the wisdom of that. What happens
to 6- and 7- and 8- and 9-year-olds and 10-year-olds in this situation?
If their mothers cannot find child care, who is to take care of them?
What happens to these children? And yet, that is not provided for in
the legislation. My hope would be that this is one of the provisions we
would try and correct in the next Congress.
At the absolute least, we, as a nation, should be able to guarantee
to children under the age of 10 that they will not be left home alone,
to fend for themselves while their parents are out trying to make the
difficult adjustment from welfare to work. However, it seems that when
it comes to the discussion of welfare reform in this Chamber, there
seems to be a constant fundamental disconnect between rhetoric and
reality. The fact is, we simply cannot ask welfare recipients,
struggling to get by, struggling to make ends meet, struggling to raise
a family, to keep a job if Congress does not provide adequate child
care.
Of course, the issue of child care rubs both ways, for both working
parents and, of course, their young children. Obviously, child care is
about more than just helping working parents. It is about ensuring that
our Nation's poor children will not be neglected.
When we debated the welfare reform bill, we came just short of the
necessary votes of providing vouchers for children whose families reach
the 5-year limit. To my colleague's credit, from the State of
Louisiana, Senator
[[Page S11868]]
Breaux, who tried to include these vouchers so that at the end of the 5
years--whatever else you do to the parents, you do not visit that
problem on the children. We lost that vote on a narrow decision here in
the Senate.
Under the welfare bill which became law, States are prohibited--they
are prohibited--from even providing vouchers for children from block
grant funds. That we punish children because of the actions of their
parents, no matter how irresponsible they may be, is, in my view,
abhorrent. By not providing adequate protections for poor children, we
risk doing just that.
Additionally, Mr. President, the next Congress must work to address
issues of concern for food stamp recipients and legal immigrants. These
food stamp cuts will be disproportionately borne by families with
children. In fact, these families will absorb two-thirds of these
cutbacks.
Also, as we speak, Mr. President, legal immigrants are being cut off
from their food stamp benefits and SSI insurance as well. Many have no
idea what is about to happen to them. The poor, the elderly, the
disabled will simply lack the means to care for themselves, and, what
is worse, they have no grace period to prepare for these changes.
Mr. President, to give you an idea of the practical impact of these
provisions, I want to bring to my colleagues' attention the plight of
some 2,000 Cambodians, legal immigrants--legal immigrants--who live in
my home State of Connecticut. Of those 2,000 Cambodians, at least 250
of them suffer from concentration camp syndrome, from living under the
murderous Khmer Rouge. Due to this legislation, they will lose access
to SSI, food stamps, and health care benefits. What is worse, many of
them do not meet the criteria for naturalization. The local Khmer
health advocates estimate that people may well die as a result of this
elimination of care.
Mr. President, is this how we treat the downtrodden and vulnerable
legal immigrants we brought to this country because of the
circumstances they faced in Cambodia? The number may not seem high,
only 250 out of 2,000, but these are people we brought to America
because we wanted to give them a better chance and to get away from the
murderous regime of the Khmer Rouge. And now we are going to cut them
off from SSI benefits and health care? I do not understand the logic of
that.
These people played by the rules. In many cases, we brought them
here. They pay taxes. And yet we voted to cut off essential care to
these people, as well as millions of others. Who would have imagined
that those Cambodians who bravely fled their nation's killing fields
would now find themselves being told by the greatest democracy the
world has ever known, ``We're not going to help you out on basic health
care needs.''
Mr. President, these are mean-spirited provisions masquerading as
budget cuts. Nearly every Member of this body is a descendant of
immigrants. By failing to correct the flaws in this bill, we risk
repudiating America's legacy of immigration which has defined our
Nation for more than 200 years.
Let me also say, Mr. President, that one of the most important
aspects of this bill is our constant vigilance in monitoring the impact
of this legislation. Language in the welfare reform bill allows
Congress to closely study how the bill is implemented. This body must
ensure that the States remain accountable to the spirit of this
legislation.
For example, recent press reports indicate that States will receive
credit for moving welfare recipients to work simply by dropping them
from welfare rolls. That is not reform. That is abandonment of our
national priorities. And Congress must ensure that it does not happen.
That is why I have already talked to the General Accounting Office,
as I mentioned at the outset of these remarks, about monitoring the
major areas of this legislation. I will ask the General Accounting
Office to examine the impact of the reductions, terminations of cash
benefits, and food assistance on the well-being of children.
Also, Mr. President, I believe we need to look closely at the
financial impact of this legislation on counties and cities who, under
the welfare reform bill, bear new and more difficult burdens. We must
be sure that we are not giving them unfunded mandates that they cannot
afford to carry out. We must also monitor how States plan to implement
changes in the Food Stamp Program that are allowed under this new
legislation.
Additionally, Mr. President, I will ask the General Accounting Office
to determine if adequate resources are being devoted to child care for
the working poor and parents leaving welfare for work. These are just a
few of the issues on which we as a nation, I think, are entering
unchartered territory. In fact, a recent article in the New York Times
notes that, not only is data ``skimpy'' on the impact of welfare reform
measures, but also research results are largely ``ambiguous,
contradictory, confusing, or nonexistent,'' to quote that article.
This lack of empirical data underscores the need for this coming
Congress to keep a close eye on how welfare policies are being
implemented across the country. It is my hope, Mr. President, that when
we reconvene in January we will address some of these critically
important questions.
For those of us who both opposed and supported this legislation, we
have a solemn responsibility to move beyond rhetoric and ensure that we
fulfill the mandate to move Americans from welfare to work, from
dependency to self-sufficiency, and from hopelessness to opportunity.
My hope is, Mr. President, the coming Congress will focus a lot of
its energy and time on these questions so that we might correct some of
the shortcomings of the welfare reform bill that was passed in this
Congress.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I yield myself up to 5 minutes from the
leader's time on this side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________