Welcome to the world of American Indians and the reservations from 1860 to
the present. 

 

REH

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of D & N
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 9:49 PM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: [Futurework] US welfare

 

From:
http://prorevnews.blogspot.ca/2012/08/federal-work-program-is-actually-form.
html

Natalia


August 29, 2012


Federal work program is actually a form of unconstitutional indentured
servitude
<http://www.adaction.org/pages/issues/all-policy-resolutions/social-amp-dome
stic/issues-brief-no.-13-welfare-reform.php>  


>From a presentation by Dr. Gwendolyn Mink to Americans for Democratic Action

The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program with the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. TANF changed welfare in two
fundamental ways. First, it severely constricted poor families' access
<http://www.adaction.org/pages/issues/all-policy-resolutions/social-amp-dome
stic/issues-brief-no.-13-welfare-reform.php>  to income assistance. Second,
it required recipients to surrender rights and personal autonomy as a
condition of receiving assistance.

TANF chokes off access to welfare by repealing the entitlement to benefits
and by imposing stringent lifetime time limits.The repeal of the entitlement
means that, even if one meets all of the eligibility criteria for welfare,
one is not guaranteed a benefit. The imposition of time limits means that
after 60 cumulative months, one is no longer eligible to participate in the
federal welfare program even though one has played by the rules and even if
one's family continues to need income support. 

The second major change under TANF has to do with the terms of participation
in the welfare system. Those terms require recipients' submission to a
rigorous disciplinary regime armed with expanded coercive power to engineer
their lives. Rules familiar to welfare policy since the 1960s - rules
promoting wage work, paternity establishment, and child support enforcement
- acquired new force in 1996 statutory provisions and in ensuing
administrative guidelines that spell out harsh punishments for applicants
and recipients who do not comply. The stiffened welfare rules forward two
principal policy goals. One is to compel labor market attachment among poor
mothers notwithstanding the care needs of their children. The other is to
pressure poor single mothers
<http://www.adaction.org/pages/issues/all-policy-resolutions/social-amp-dome
stic/issues-brief-no.-13-welfare-reform.php>  to form heterosexual, marital,
two-parent families.

TANF forwards its labor market goals by requiring recipients to be engaged
in one of certain specified "work activities" in order to continue
<http://www.adaction.org/pages/issues/all-policy-resolutions/social-amp-dome
stic/issues-brief-no.-13-welfare-reform.php>  to receive benefits. The work
requirement stresses getting a job, any job, regardless of whether the job's
wages and benefits are sufficient to support a family. Codifying the value
of work for work's sake, the work requirement specifically impedes
recipients' participation in education or skills preparation and
enhancement, two endeavors that would make movement into the labor market
more secure economically and more remunerating for participants.

With its "work first" discipline, TANF pays very little attention to how
work outside the home might, in fact, win economic security. Recipients are
impeded or discouraged from preparing for jobs at living wages, in fact,
while jobs at living wages are not guaranteed to recipients who comply with
work requirements. Moreover, the social supports that make wage work
affordable for those who work for low wages are not assured. 

The work requirement is enforced by sanctions, or punishments. An adult
recipient who does not engage in required outside work activities can have
her family's benefits cut or terminated. 

There are a whole host of problems with TANF, not the least of which is that
it does nothing to promote economic opportunity or to reduce poverty. , , ,

Compulsory labor market participation under TANF is troubling also because
work rules and sanctions injure recipients's Constitutional rights. TANF
impairs vocational liberty, for example, in that it legitimates only labor
market work as work that has any kind of social value. Moreover, in its
insistence that any-job-will-do, as long as it's in the labor market, TANF
violates the vocational liberty to perform care giving work for one's own
family in one's own home. In both respects, TANF vitiates the 13th
Amendment's prohibition on slavery and indentured servitude. It also singles
out poor, mostly unmarried, mothers in a separate caste, barred by statute
from putting care giving above wage earning.

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to