Toronto Study Gets Tough on Welfare Policy

Maybe the United States can pick up some tips on productive public assistance from the neighbor to the north.

Over the past decade, more Canadians have gotten jobs, and the overall poverty rate has declined.

The Canadian Press writer Tobi Cohen says a study released in October by the C.D. Howe Institute, attempts to debunk the “doom and gloom” reports rampant about rising poverty rates.

In Reducing Poverty: What has Worked, and What Should Come Next, author John Richards finds that policies encouraging employment for low-income families, along with improved labor market conditions, have been key to reducing poverty in Canada.

The study points out how full-time working opportunities for a head of household can have a positive inter-generational effect that trumps the toughness of Canada’s welfare policy. For example,

The role model effect of a working parent increases the probability that children complete high school and avoid teenage pregnancy, two strong indicators of inter-generational escape from poverty. This effect exists even among lone-parent families where parental employment may reduce time for parenting.

Thus, the emphasis on employment, the study reports.

While it never hurts to have a comparative eye on issues effecting other communities, what implications could this study have on American policies on welfare?

Well, the study also identified several areas that need work:

• Greater focus on education and closing the disparity gap for grades K-12. “The importance of education in increasing employment and lowering poverty” is noteworthy the study reports.
• More attention for marginalized groups, such as Canada’s large Aboriginal population.
• Recognizing that more caseloads deal with persons with serious mental and/or physical disabilities, meaning that “social workers (must) simultaneously restrict access to welfare among the employable, and be generous to the disabled.”

With each of these problems, however, there was a dialogue begun, without suggestions on how to implement solutions for their conclusions.

STUDY: Falling Poverty Rates Reflect Social Policy Success: C.D. Howe Institute

Blogger says Mom with Mercedes not typical for welfare

Feeding children of low-incomes families in the United States is as simple as W-I-C.

For years, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children has provided food, education and social services to low-income participants at no cost. The WIC serves pregnant women, postpartum and breast-feeding women, as well as infants and children up to five years who have nutritional needs.

Each month, more than 8.1 million people receive WIC benefits in the form of grants provided by the federal government to each state. But not all WIC state agency policies are alike.

One parent fed up with the uneven policy of asking customers if they use WIC funds wrote about the policy in his blog. Average Bro says his wife was appalled that a cashier at Giant Food grocery store allegedly asked his African American wife if she was paying for the baby food piled in her hands with WIC funds. The woman had been to the store several times and says she’s never been asked this question.

Never.

Thing is, AverageBro found fault in the fact that he thinks his wife is anything but an “average” WIC mom. Rather, she was a model mom. He writes,

why in the hell would a cashier look at my wife an assume we’re in need of public assistance? My wife is a statuesque former college homecoming queen and beauty pageant winner. She also (pre-AverageBaby) was a bank vice president. She is educated and intelligent. She is home by choice, not by circumstance, because her husband (who is also intelligent and educated) can afford the luxury. She took the baby food outside and placed it in her Mercedes Benz. She drove the Mercedes Benz back to a half-million dollar home. But all the cashier saw when she looked at her was a welfare mother.

One man’s opinion, yes. But it is dangerous for The WIC says states choose stores based on “the prices of foods, the business integrity of the store’s owner, and the variety and quantity of foods available in the store.” It’s a concern that perhaps these stores are being chosen because of the notion of being near low-income households. To assume that every customer is a recipient of WIC just because of a certain neighborhood characteristics does not go far to lessen stereotyping of low-income families. What’s more, WIC stipulations mention little on a set, uniformed policy on asking customers about receiving benefits. If the standard varies from state to state, no doubt it varies from customer to customer.

WIC Fact Sheet

CEPR:Center for Economic and Policy Research

http://www.cepr.net/

The Urban Institute

http://www.urban.org