fare them well

tracking what’s changing for welfare, women and children

NYT says critics calling for change in child support for welfare families

New York Times

Picture Source: Sally Ryan for The New York Times

Against a doctor’s advice, Karla Hart, a mother of four, took a part-time job at a day care center in Milwaukee to help pay her bills.

She’s the face of a Dec. 1 story in the The New York Times on a state policy that blocks child support payments for parents on welfare.

The Times pulled a clipping from her monthly child-support statement to show why she puts her health on the line to pay her bills:

  • Paid by the father: $229.40
  • Amount deducted to repay federal costs of welfare: $132.18

According to the NYT, close to half the states pass along none of collected child support to families on welfare, while most others pay only $50 a month to a custodial parent, usually the mother, even though the father may be paying hundreds of dollars each month.

Critics say using child support to repay welfare costs harms children instead of helping them, contradicting the national goal of strengthening families, and is a flaw in the generally lauded national campaign to increase collections.

In an Oct. “fare them well” report, “Families benefit from ex-offender jobs,” a story from Indiana supported this notion. The entry highlighted a program in Indianapolis focused on giving recent ex-offenders jobs in order establish an income that could help pay child support as well as court fees.

Work Force Inc.’s mantra is one reason many welfare advocates are pushing for a bill introduced in the house last Feb., which if approved, would allow $50 from a non-custodial paycheck to immediately pass-through to a child, instead of being automatically extracted as restitution to the state for welfare costs.

It’s an outstanding journalistic example of the rising wave of voices speaking out against the prevent of pass-through.

Advertisements

December 3, 2007 Posted by | Bills Bills Bills, Other Opinions, Pass-Through, Politicking | , , , , | Leave a comment

Illegal immigrants at the top of welfare rolls

If you’re an American without a high-school education. you’re more likely to be on welfare or live in poverty.

Now one study says the same holds true for illegal immigrants.

“Allowing in legal immigrants mainly based on family relationships, and tolerating widespread illegal immigration, certainly has very significant implications for social services, public schools and taxpayer services,” said Steven A. Camarota, research director for the Center for Immigration Studies, which released the report Nov. 29.

The new report, “Immigrants in the United States 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population, lays out these factors:

Number of Immigrants Living in the U.S. 1995 - 2007

  • The nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached a record of 37.9 million in 2007.

  • Immigrants account for one in eight U.S. residents, the highest level in 80 years.

  • Of adult immigrants, 31 percent have not completed high school, compared to 8 percent of natives.
  • The proportion of immigrant-headed households using at least one major welfare program is 33 percent, compared to 19 percent for native households.

Both immigrants and illegal aliens are more likely to be poor and to use welfare programs than native-born Americans because they come to the country with lower levels of education, according to a new study based on U.S. Census Bureau data.

The Center has pushed for a crackdown on illegal aliens and a slowdown in legal immigration, and Camarota said his numbers show that the family-based system puts a strain on taxpayer-funded services.

But according to the Times, Angela Kelley, director of the Immigration Law Foundation, said the report didn’t capture the true American experience of immigration.

“Immigrants come to this country; they work hard; if they can get legal status, that improves their chances, they buy homes, they learn English, they intermarry—and it’s been the success story of this nation,” she said.

December 3, 2007 Posted by | Critiques & Critics, News & Numbers, Related Reports, Research | , , , , | Leave a comment

Rhode Island welfare needs exceed time limits

This month, for many welfare recipients in Rhode Island the time of the year that centers on giving is more about needing.

Nearly half of the state’s 10,755 families receiving cash assistance last year had been on welfare rolls for more than five years, according to data provided by the Department of Human Services. And nearly one quarter of the families had been on cash assistance for more than 10 years.

The problem is, the time limit for receiving aid under the state’s current plan is five years.

According to the Rhode Island Department of Human Services website, the state’s welfare program underwent sweeping changes a decade ago:

  • New Family Independence Program: There is now a five-year, lifetime limit on the receipt of cash benefits for adult members receiving benefits.
  • Old AFDC Program: Cash assistance was considered an entitlement and there was no time limit on the receipt of cash benefits.

Now Governor Donald Carcieri is considering cuts to the New Family Independence Program. According to The Providence Journal, “the governor suggested …on talk radio in recent weeks that he would propose cutting in half, from 60 months to 30 months, the time limit for Rhode Island families receiving cash benefits.”That’s two and a half years.

To show he means business, the Gov. Carcieri cut 483 jobs from the state payroll as of Nov. 16.

Want to speak out on these changes? Click on the “Reach out to Your Representatives” How-To.

December 3, 2007 Posted by | Politicking | , , , | Leave a comment