Ask the Scholar
Page 85 of 85
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
2/1/95
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
5.11:
There AN still 3 o n &
charges me ylan t MAKE
in this vension; most AM
miver.
Room
103D CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H.R.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. SHAW (for himself, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. GRANDY, Mr.
SANTORUM, and Mr. GINGRICH) introduced the following bill; which was
referred to the Committee on
A BILL
To amend title IV of the Social Security Act to provide
welfare families with the education, training, job search,
and work experience needed to prepare them to leave
welfare within 2 years, to authorize States to conduct
demonstration projects to test the effectiveness of policies
designed to help people leave welfare and increase their
financial security, and for other purposes.
1
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4
This Act may be cited as the "Welfare Transition and
5 Work Program Act".
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
2
1 SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
2
The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
TITLE I-AFDC TRANSITION AND WORK PROGRAM
Sec. 101. AFDC transition and work program.
Sec. 102. Community work experience program amendments.
Sec. 103. Work supplementation program amendments.
Sec. 104. Effective date; regulations.
TITLE I-DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
Sec. 201. Authority to grant waivers to provisions of social welfare statutes to
better enable providers of social services to promote self-suffi-
ciency.
TITLE ILI-MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS
Sec. 301. AFDC recipients required to undergo necessary substance abuse
treatment as a condition of receiving AFDC.
Sec. 302. Authority of State to modify certain AFDC income disregard rules.
Sec. 303. Enhanced match for expenditures for JOBS program available for all
personnel expenditures.
3 TITLE I-AFDC TRANSITION AND
4
WORK PROGRAM
5 SEC. 101. AFDC TRANSITION AND WORK PROGRAM.
6
(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 402(a) of the Social Secu-
7 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by inserting after
8 paragraph (28) the following:
9
"(29) provide that-
10
"(A) the State must have in effect a pro-
11
gram that-
12
"(i) provides qualified individuals with
13
the education, training, and work experi-
14
ence needed to prepare them for a life
15
without aid under the plan; and
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
3
1
"(ii) consists of-
2
"(I) a transition component,
3
which must include the job search
4
program established by the State
5
under section 482(g), and which may
6
include any other service, activity, or
7
program of the State that is referred
8
to in section 482(d)(1); and
9
"(II) a work component, which
10
may include a work supplementation
11
program operated by the State under
12
section 482(e), a community work ex-
13
perience program established by the
14
State under section 482(f), or any
15
other work program of the State that
16
is approved by the Secretary;
17
"(B)(i) as used in this paragraph, the term
18
'qualified individual' means—
19
"(I) on and after October 1, 1994, all
20
individuals eligible for aid under the plan
21
who applied for such aid on or after such
22
date;
23
"(II) on and after October 1, 1998,
24
all individuals eligible for aid under the
25
plan; and
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
4
1
"(ii) notwithstanding clause (i), the term
2
'qualified individual' does not include any
3
individual-
4
"(I) who is incapacitated;
5
"(II) at the option of the State, who
6
is making progress in a substance abuse
7
treatment program, unless this subclause
8
has been applied to the individual for 12
9
months;
10
"(III) during such 6-month period as
11
the individual may select, in which the in-
12
dividual gives birth to the first child born
13
alive to the individual after becoming eligi-
14
ble for aid under this part;
15
"(IV) during such 4-month period as
16
the individual may select, in which the in-
17
dividual gives birth to the second or sub-
18
sequent child born alive to the individual
19
after becoming eligible for aid under this
20
part;
21
"(V) who is the parent of a child who
22
was returned to the home of the individual
23
during the preceding 2 months after hav-
24
ing been removed from the home; or
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
5
1
"(VI) who is providing full-time care
2
for a disabled dependent of the individual;
3
"(C)(i) each qualified individual must par-
4
ticipate in the transition component, except as
5
otherwise provided in this subparagraph;
6
"(ii) a qualified individual may not be re-
7
quired (but may be allowed) to participate in
8
the transition component if, on the basis of de-
9
mographic criteria, the State finds that it is un-
10
likely that the individual will be a recipient of
11
aid under the plan during a significant length
12
of time;
13
"(iii) a qualified individual may not par-
14
ticipate in the transition component if the indi-
15
vidual has elected to participate in the work
16
component; and
17
"(iv) a qualified individual may not partici-
18
pate in the transition component after the first
19
24 months for which the individual is a quali-
20
fied individual;
21
"(D)(i) each qualified individual participat-
22
ing in the transition component must partici-
23
pate in activities under such component for an
24
average of not fewer than 10 hours per week
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
6
1
during the first 24 months of such participa-
2
tion;
3
"(ii) the State, in consultation with the
4
Secretary, must establish guidelines by which
5
determinations under clause (i) will be made,
6
and which, in the case of educational activities
7
under the transition component, must provide
8
that an individual who is enrolled full-time in a
9
program of study at an educational institution
10
(including a vocational or technical training
11
school), as determined by the institution, and is
12
making satisfactory progress in the program of
13
study, as determined by the institution, is to be
14
regarded as participating in the transition com-
15
ponent, in accordance with such rules as the
16
Secretary may prescribe (including rules gov-
17
erning how time spent in such a program of
18
study is to be converted into hours of participa-
19
tion in the transition component);
20
"(E)(i) the State must require each quali-
21
fied individual (or, in the case of a family which
22
has received aid under the plan by reason of
23
section 407, at least 1 parent (or, at the option
24
of the State, both parents) in the family) who
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
7
1
is not participating in the transition component
2
to participate in the work component; and
3
"(ii) any qualified individual participating
4
in the work component, may, with the approval
5
of the State, discontinue participation in the
6
work component and begin or resume participa-
7
tion in the transition component, subject to
8
subparagraph (C)(iv);
9
"(iii) the State may, at its option, exempt
10
a qualified individual, during 12 of the first 24
11
months for which an individual is a qualified in-
12
dividual, from the requirement to participate in
13
the transition component or the work compo-
14
nent if the individual is described in paragraph
15
(35) (A) and is in compliance with paragraph
16
(35)(A);
17
"(F) each qualified individual must cooper-
18
ate with the State in developing a plan which-
19
"(i) describes the respective respon-
20
sibilities of the State and of the individual
21
under the program with the goal of prepar-
22
ing the individual for work; and
23
"(ii) includes a written statement in-
24
forming the individual that, upon comple-
25
tion of the transition component, aid under
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
8
1
the State plan under this part will be dis-
2
continued unless the individual finds gain-
3
ful employment or is participating in the
4
work component;
5
"(G) at the end of the first 12 months for
6
which an individual is a qualified individual (or,
7
at the option of the State, more frequently), the
8
State must determine whether the individual is
9
making clear and substantial progress toward
10
preparing for work (as defined by the State in
11
consultation with the Secretary);
12
((H) if the State determines that a quali-
13
fied individual has failed to meet any require-
14
ment imposed under this paragraph-
15
"(i) in the case of the 1st such failure,
16
subclauses (I) and (II) of section
17
402(a)(19)(G)(i) shall apply until the fail-
18
ure to comply ceases;
19
"(ii) in the case of the 2nd such fail-
20
ure, subclauses (I) and (II) of section
21
402(a)(19)(G)(i) shall apply until the fail-
22
ure to comply ceases or 3 months, which-
23
ever is longer; and
24
"(iii) in the case of the 3rd such fail-
25
ure, the family of the individual shall not
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
9
1
be eligible for aid under the State plan
2
under this part, notwithstanding any other
3
provision of this part;
4
"(I) at the option of the State, the State
5
may impose a rule under which the family of an
6
individual shall not be eligible for aid under the
7
State plan under this part, notwithstanding any
8
other provision of this part, after the individual
9
has been required to participate in the work
10
component for a period (determined by the
11
State) of not less than 3 years; and
12
"(J) if a family becomes ineligible for aid
13
under the State plan under this part by reason
14
of subparagraph (H) (iii) or (I), the family shall,
15
for purposes of medical assistance under the
16
State plan under title XIX, be deemed to be a
17
recipient of aid under the State plan under this
18
part for SO long as the family is otherwise eligi-
19
ble for aid under the State plan under this
20
part."
21
(b) PAYMENTS TO STATES.-Section 403 of such Act
22 (42 U.S.C. 603) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
23 lowing:
24
"(o) (1) Each State which has been paid under sub-
25 section (1) for any fiscal year an amount equal to the lim-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
10
1 itation determined under subsection (k)(2) for the fiscal
2 year, and which operates a program under section
3 402(a)(29), shall be entitled to payments under paragraph
4 (4) of this subsection for the fiscal year in an amount
5 equal to the lesser of-
6
"(A) the sum of the applicable percentages
7
(specified in such paragraph (4)) of its expenditures
8
to carry out the program (subject to limitations pre-
9
scribed by or pursuant to such section or such para-
10
graph (4) on expenditures that may be included for
11
purposes of determining payment under such para-
12
graph (4)); or
13
"(B) the limitation determined under paragraph
14
(2) of this subsection with respect to the State for
15
the fiscal year.
16
"(2) The limitation determined under this paragraph
17 with respect to a State for any fiscal year is the amount
18 that bears the same ratio to the amount specified in para-
19 graph (3) for the fiscal year as the average monthly num-
20 ber of adult recipients (as defined in subsection (k)(4))
21 in the State in the preceding fiscal year bears to the aver-
22 age monthly number of such recipients in all the States
23 for such preceding year.
24
"(3) The amount specified in this paragraph is-
25
"(A) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 1994;
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
11
1
"(B) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 1995;
2
"(C) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 1996;
3
"(D) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 1997; and
4
"(E) $1,500,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.
5
"(4) Each State which has been paid under sub-
6 section (1) for a fiscal year an amount equal to the limita-
7 tion determined under subsection (k)(2) for the fiscal year,
8 and which operates a program under section 402(a)(29)
9 during the fiscal year shall, in addition to any payment
10 under subsection (a) or (1), be entitled to payment from
11 the Secretary of an amount equal to-
12
"(A) 50 percent of the expenditures of the
13
State for administrative costs incurred in operating
14
the program during the fiscal year (other than per-
15
sonnel costs for staff employed in the operation of
16
the program); and
17
"(B) the greater of 70 percent or the Federal
18
medical assistance percentage (as defined in section
19
1118 in the case of a State to which section 1108
20
applies, or as defined in section 1905(b) in the case
21
of any other State) of the other expenditures of the
22
State incurred in operating the program during the
23
fiscal year.
24
"(5)(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (4), the Sec-
25 retary shall pay to a State an amount equal to 50 percent
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
12
1 of the expenditures of the State incurred in operating the
2 program under section 402(a)(29) during a fiscal year if
3 the State's participation rate (determined under subpara-
4 graph (B)) for the immediately preceding fiscal year is less
5 than-
6
"(i) 15 percent if the preceding fiscal year is
7
1994;
8
"(ii) 20 percent if such year is 1995;
9
"(iii) 30 percent if such year is 1996;
10
'(iv) 40 percent if such year is 1997;
11
"(v) 50 percent if such year is 1998;
12
"(vi) 60 percent if such year is 1999; and
13
"(vii) 70 percent if such year is 2000.
14
"(B)(i) The State's participation rate for a fiscal year
15 shall be the average of its participation rates for each
16 month in the fiscal year.
17
"(ii) The State's participation rate for a month shall
18 be the number, expressed as a percentage, equal to-
19
"(I) the number of individuals who participated
20
in the State's program under section 402(a)(29) in
21
the month; divided by
22
"(II) the number of individuals required to par-
23
ticipate in the program in the month (including indi-
24
viduals with respect to whom the State has exercised
25
its option to require their participation).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
13
1
"(iii) For purposes of this subparagraph, an individ-
2 ual shall not be considered to have satisfactorily partici-
3 pated in the program under section 402(a)(29) solely by
4 reason of the individual being registered to participate in
5 the program.
6
"(C) For purposes of this paragraph, an individual
7 shall be considered to have participated in the program
8 under section 402(a)(29) if the individual has participated
9 in accordance with such requirements, consistent with reg-
10 ulations of the Secretary, as the State shall establish.
11
"(D) If the Secretary determines that a State has
12 failed to achieve the participation rate for any fiscal year
13 specified in subparagraph (A), the Secretary may waive,
14 in whole or in part, the reduction in the payment rate oth-
15 erwise required by subparagraph (A) if the Secretary finds
16 that the State—
17
"(i) is in conformity with section 402(a)(29);
18
"(ii) has made a good faith effort to achieve the
19
participation rate; and
20
"(iii) has submitted a proposal which is likely
21
to achieve the applicable participation rates for the
22
current fiscal year and any succeeding fiscal year SO
23
specified."
24
(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.-Section 403(1)(3)
25 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 603(1)(3)) is amended-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
14
1
(1) in subparagraph (A)-
2
(A) by striking "and" at the end of clause
3
(v);
4
(B) by striking the period in clause (vi)
5
and inserting a semicolon; and
6
(C) by adding at the end the following:
7
"(vii) 30 percent if such year is 1996;
8
"(viii) 40 percent if such year is 1997;
9
"(ix) 50 percent if such year is 1998;
10
"(x) 60 percent if such year is 1999; and
11
"(xi) 70 percent if such year is 2000."; and
12
(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)(IV), by striking
13
"and 1995" and inserting "through 2000".
14 SEC. 102. COMMUNITY WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM
15
AMENDMENTS.
16
Section 482(f)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42
17 U.S.C. 682(f)(1)(B)) is amended—
18
(1) in clause (i)-
19
(A) by inserting "(I)" after "(B)(i)"; and
20
(B) by striking "(as determined by the
21
State)" and inserting "in the transition compo-
22
nent of the program under section 402(a)(29)
23
who is required to participate in the program
24
established under this subsection"; and
25
(C) by adding at the end the following:
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
15
1
"(II) Each participant in the work component of the
2 program under section 402(a)(29) who is required to par-
3 ticipate in the program established under this subsection
4 may not be required to work in any month for a number
5 of hours that exceeds 35 (or 30, if the State requires the
6 participant to engage in a job search program established
7 by the State under subsection (g)) and
8
(2) in clause (ii), by inserting "who is a partici-
9
pant in the transition component of the program
10
under section 402(a)(29)" after "an individual".
11 SEC. 103. WORK SUPPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AMEND-
12
MENTS.
13
(a) AUTHORITY OF STATES TO ASSIGN PARTICI-
14 PANTS TO UNFILLED JoBs.-Section 484(c) of the Social
15 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 684(c)) is amended by striking
16 the last sentence.
17
(b) AUTHORITY OF STATES TO USE SUMS THAT
18 WOULD OTHERWISE BE EXPENDED FOR FOOD STAMP
19 BENEFITS TO PROVIDE SUBSIDIZED JOBS FOR PARTICI-
20 PANTS.-
21
(1) IN GENERAL.-Section 482(e)(1) of such
22
Act (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(1)) is amended-
23
(A) by inserting ", and the sums that
24
would otherwise be used to provide participants
25
in the program under this subsection with food
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
16
1
stamp benefits under the Food Stamp Act of
2
1977," before "and use"; and
3
(B) by inserting "and the food stamp ben-
4
efits that would otherwise be SO provided to
5
them" before the period.
6
(2) SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO EMPLOYERS AND
7
INCLUDED IN WAGES OF PARTICIPANTS; MINIMUM
8
EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION.-Section 482(e)(3) of
9
such Act (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(3)) is amended by add-
10
ing at the end the following:
11
"(E) Each State operating a work supplementation
12 program under this subsection shall enter into an agree-
13 ment with the employer who is to provide an eligible indi-
14 vidual with a supplemented job under the program, under
15 which-
16
"(i) the State is required to pay the employer
17
an amount specified in the agreement as the sub-
18
sidized portion of the wages of the eligible individ-
19
ual; and
20
"(ii) the employer is required to pay the eligible
21
individual wages which, when added to an amount
22
that will be payable as aid to families with depend-
23
ent children to the individual if the individual is paid
24
such wages, are not less than 125 percent of the
25
sum of-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
17
1
"(I) the amount that would otherwise be
2
payable as aid to families with dependent chil-
3
dren to the eligible individual if the State did
4
not have a work supplementation program
5
under this subsection in effect; and
6
"(II) if the State elects to subsidize jobs
7
for participants in the program through the res-
8
ervation of sums that would otherwise be used
9
to provide such participants with food stamp
10
benefits under the Food Stamp Act of 1977,
11
the amount paid to the State by the Secretary
12
of Agriculture that represents the cash value of
13
the food stamp benefits for which the household
14
of the eligible individual is a member is eligible
15
under such Act.
16
"(F) For purposes of computing the amount of the
17 Federal payment to a State under paragraph (1) or (2)
18 of section 403(a), for expenditures incurred in making
19 payments to individuals and employers under the State's
20 work supplementation program under this section, the
21 State may claim as such expenditures the maximum
22 amount payable to the State under paragraph (4) of this
23 subsection.
24
"(G) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a State may
25 use for any purpose the sums reserved under paragraph
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
18
1 (1) which are not used to subsidize jobs under this sub-
2 section attributable to savings achieved by operation of
3 subparagraph (E)."
4
(3)
CONFORMING
AMENDMENT.-Section
5
482(e)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(3)(A))
6
is amended by striking the 2nd sentence.
7
(4) EMPLOYMENT CASHOUT OF FOOD STAMP
8
BENEFITS.-Section 16 of the Food Stamp Act of
9
1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025) is amended by adding at the
10
end the following:
11
"(1) If a State agency of a State that makes the elec-
12 tion described in section 482(e)(3)(E)(ii)(II) of the Social
13 Security Act informs the Secretary that an individual who
14 is participating in the work supplementation program car-
15 ried out under section 482(e) of such Act is a member
16 of a household that participates in the food stamp pro-
17 gram and all the members of the household receive bene-
18 fits under a State plan approved under part A of title IV
19 of such Act-
20
"(1) the Secretary shall pay to the State an
21
amount equal to the value of the food stamp benefits
22
the household is eligible to receive under this Act;
23
"(2) the State shall expend the amount in ac-
24
cordance with section 482(e)(3) of the Social Secu-
25
rity Act to make a payment to the individual in lieu
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
19
1
of food stamp benefits the household would receive
2
but for the operation of this subsection;
3
"(3) for purposes of-
4
"(A) sections 5 and 8(a) of this Act, the
5
amount shall be excluded from household in-
6
come and resources; and
7
"(B) section 8(b) of this Act, the amount
8
shall be considered as the value of an allotment
9
provided to the household; and
10
"(4) the household shall not receive food stamp
11
benefits from the State agency for the period during
12
which the member continues to participate in the
13
work supplementation program.".
14 SEC. 104. EFFECTIVE DATE; REGULATIONS.
15
(a) EFFECTIVE DATE.-
16
(1) IN GENERAL-Except as provided in para-
17
graph (2), the amendments made by this Act shall
18
take effect on October 1, 1994.
19
(2) STATE OPTION FOR EARLY APPLICABIL-
20
ITY.-If a State formally notifies the Secretary of
21
Health and Human Services of its desire operate a
22
program of the type authorized by the amendment
23
made by section 101(a), during any period which be-
24
gins after the date of the enactment of this Act and
25
ends on September 30, 1994, with respect to 1 or
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
20
1
more groups of individuals selected by the State who
2
are eligible for aid under the State plan approved
3
under section 402 of the Social Security Act, and
4
makes such changes in the plan as are required in
5
order to operate the program in accordance with the
6
amendment (except that, in lieu of the definition
7
contained in subparagraph (B)(i) of the amendment,
8
there is substituted a definition which describes such
9
group or groups) then-
10
(A) except as provided in subparagraph
11
(B) of this paragraph, the amendments made
12
by this Act (with such exceptions) shall apply to
13
the State during the period; and
14
(B) subsection (0)(4)(B) of the amendment
15
made by section 101(b) of this Act shall be ap-
16
plied to the State for the first 12 months of
17
such period by substituting '85 percent' for 'the
18
greater of 70 percent or the Federal medical as-
19
sistance percentage (as defined in section 1118
20
in the case of a State to which section 1108 ap-
21
plies, or as defined in section 1905(b) in the
22
case of any other State)'.
23
(b) REGULATIONS.-Not later than 1 year after the
24 effective date of this Act, the Secretary of Health and
25 Human Services shall prescribe such regulations as may
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
21
1 be necessary to enable States to establish and operate pro-
2 grams of the type authorized by the amendment made by
3 section 101(a).
4
TITLE II-DEMONSTRATION
5
PROJECTS
6 SEC. 201. AUTHORITY TO GRANT WAIVERS TO PROVISIONS
7
OF SOCIAL WELFARE STATUTES TO BETTER
8
ENABLE PROVIDERS OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO
9
PROMOTE SELF-SUFFICIENCY.
10
(a) INTERAGENCY WAIVER REQUEST BOARD.-
11
(1) ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE.-In order
12
to provide a focal point within the Federal Govern-
13
ment for the development and coordination of waiver
14
requests designed to improve opportunities for low-
15
income individuals and families, there is established
16
an Interagency Waiver Request Board (in this sub-
17
section referred to as the "Board") which shall pro-
18
vide advice to the Chairman of the Board (in this
19
section referred to as the "Chairman") in carrying
20
out this section.
21
(2) MEMBERSHIP.-
22
(A) PERMANENT MEMBERS.-The Board
23
shall consist of 8 permanent members, as fol-
24
lows:
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
22
1
(i) A Chairman appointed by and
2
serving at the pleasure of the President.
3
(ii) The Secretary of Agriculture (or
4
the designee of the Secretary).
5
(iii) The Secretary of Health and
6
Human Services (or the designee of the
7
Secretary).
8
(iv) The Secretary of Housing and
9
Urban Development (or the designee of the
10
Secretary).
11
(v) The Secretary of Labor (or the
12
designee of the Secretary).
13
(vi) The Secretary of the Interior (or
14
the designee of the Secretary).
15
(vii) The Attorney General of the
16
United States (or the designee of the At-
17
torney General).
18
(viii) The Director of the Office of
19
Management and Budget (or the designee
20
of the Director).
21
(B) LIMITED PURPOSE MEMBERS.-In ad-
22
dition, for the purpose of carrying out the duty
23
of the Board to provide advice to the Chairman
24
with respect to a particular application for
25
waivers under this section, or with respect to
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
23
1
the implementation of the reforms proposed in
2
the application, the Board shall include the
3
head of each department or agency (or the des-
4
ignee of the head) having responsibility for the
5
administration of a program which the applica-
6
tion proposes to reform.
7
(3) VACANCY.-A vacancy in the position of
8
Chairman shall be filled in the manner in which the
9
original appointment was made.
10
(4) COMPENSATION OF CHAIRMAN.-
11
(A) BASIC PAY.-
12
(i) IN GENERAL.-The Chairman shall
13
be paid at a rate equal to the rate of basic
14
pay payable for level II of the Executive
15
Schedule.
16
(ii) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-Sec-
17
tion 5313 of title 5, United States Code, is
18
amended by adding at the end the fol-
19
lowing new item:
20
"Chairman, Interagency Waiver Request
21
Board."
22
(B) TRAVEL EXPENSES.-The Chairman
23
shall receive travel expenses, including per diem
24
in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with sec-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
24
1
tions 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States
2
Code.
3
(5) APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION OF
4
PERSONNEL.-The Chairman may appoint and fix
5
the compensation of personnel as may be necessary
6
to assist the Board in carrying out the responsibil-
7
ities of the Board, in accordance with chapter 51
8
and subchapters III and VIII of chapter 53 of title
9
5, United States Code.
10
(6) PROHIBITION AGAINST ADDITIONAL COM-
11
PENSATION OF FEDERAL OFFICERS OR EMPLOY-
12
EES.-Members of the Board who are full-time offi-
13
cers or employees of the United States (other than
14
the Chairman) may not be provided additional pay,
15
allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on
16
the Board.
17
(7) MEETINGS.-The Board shall meet not less
18
than twice annually at the call of the Chairman.
19
(8) POWERS.-
20
(A) ASSISTANCE OF OTHER FEDERAL EN-
21
TITIES.-The head of each Federal department
22
or agency who is a permanent or other member
23
of the Board shall make available to the Board
24
such assistance as the Board may require to
25
carry out the activities of the Board.
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
25
1
(B) USE OF UNITED STATES MAILS.-The
2
Board may use the United States mails in the
3
same manner and under the same conditions as
4
other departments and agencies of the United
5
States.
6
(C) ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, BEQUESTS,
7
AND DEVISES.-The Board may accept, use,
8
and dispose of gifts, bequests, or devises of
9
services or property, both real and personal, for
10
the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of
11
the Board. Gifts, bequests, or devises of money
12
and proceeds from sales of other property re-
13
ceived as gifts, bequests, or devises shall be de-
14
posited in the Treasury and shall be available
15
for disbursement upon order of the Chairman.
16
(9) ANNUAL REPORTS.-The Board shall trans-
17
mit annually to the Congress a report containing a
18
detailed statement of the activities of the Board dur-
19
ing the year covered by the report.
20
(b) APPLICATION FOR WAIVERS.-Any entity that is
21 receiving or is eligible to receive Federal funds or other
22 Federal assistance under a program referred to in sub-
23 section (h) may submit to the Chairman an application
24 which contains—
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
26
1
(1) a proposal to reform the conduct of the pro-
2
gram (and, if appropriate, any other such program)
3
by the entity;
4
(2) a written statement, from each other non-
5
Federal officer or entity to which the Federal funds
6
or assistance would otherwise be provided (either di-
7
rectly or through intervening levels of grantees or
8
other recipients) under the program or programs,
9
that such other officer or entity approves of the pro-
10
posal and will cooperate in the implementation of the
11
proposal by the entity;
12
(3) a list of the provisions of law or regulation
13
which prevent the entity from implementing the pro-
14
posal; and
15
(4) a request that the Chairman, and the offi-
16
cer or officers of the Federal Government respon-
17
sible for the administration of the program or pro-
18
grams proposed to be reformed, waive the applica-
19
tion of such provisions of law or regulation, to the
20
extent necessary to enable the entity to implement
21
the proposal.
22
(c) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.-
23
(1) EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.-
24
The Chairman shall--
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
27
1
(A) evaluate the proposal contained in any
2
application submitted in accordance with sub-
3
section (b), and make recommendations with re-
4
spect to the proposal; and
5
(B) transmit the application and rec-
6
ommendations to the officer or officers referred
7
to in subsection (b) (4).
8
(2) INTERAGENCY COORDINATION.-The Chair-
9
man shall provide for the coordination of all actions
10
under this section with respect to an application
11
submitted in accordance with subsection (b) that
12
proposes the coordinated implementation of reforms
13
to 2 or more programs referred to in subsection (h).
14
(d) AGENCY REVIEW.-Within 45 days after an offi-
15 cer of the Federal Government receives an application
16 transmitted pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(B), the officer
17 shall review the application and notify the Chairman of
18 the opinion of the officer as to-
19
(1) whether the program, as proposed to be re-
20
formed, would-
21
(A)(i) help certain individuals for whom
22
long-term assistance is necessary to meet basic
23
human welfare needs and improve their living
24
conditions in the most efficient and effective
25
way possible; and
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
28
1
(ii) help able-bodied individuals and their
2
families, on a temporary basis, meet basic
3
human welfare needs and improve their living
4
conditions in the most efficient and effective
5
way possible;
6
(B) help individuals and families acquire
7
skills necessary to-
8
(i) improve their living conditions sub-
9
stantially;
10
(ii) maintain and strengthen family
11
relationships; and
12
(iii) attain or retain the capability for
13
maximum self-support and independence;
14
or
15
(C) promote individual initiative and per-
16
sonal behavior consistent with progress toward
17
self-sufficiency and a strong family life;
18
(2) whether the program, as proposed to be re-
19
formed, would reasonably meet the needs of the in-
20
tended beneficiaries of the program; and
21
(3) whether granting the requested waiver
22
would unnecessarily or unreasonably affect individ-
23
uals or families adversely.
24
(e) FINAL ACTION BY CHAIRMAN.-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
29
1
(1) WAIVER AUTHORITY.-The Chairman may
2
approve an application submitted in accordance with
3
subsection (b) and grant the waiver or waivers pro-
4
posed in the application if-
5
(A) each officer to whom the Chairman
6
transmitted the application pursuant to sub-
7
section (c)(1)(B) has provided the Chairman
8
with the notification required by subsection (d);
9
and
10
(B) the Chairman has determined that-
11
(i) the program, as proposed to be re-
12
formed, would meet the requirements of
13
any subparagraph of subsection (d) (1) and
14
reasonably meet the needs of the intended
15
beneficiaries of the program; and
16
(ii) granting the requested waiver
17
would not unnecessarily or unreasonably
18
affect individuals or families adversely.
19
(2) CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.-The Chairman
20
may condition approval of the application on the ac-
21
ceptance by the applicant of specified modifications
22
to the application.
23
(3) LIMITATION.-This subsection shall not be
24
construed to authorize the Chairman to waive the
25
application to any State of a provision of law or reg-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
30
1
ulation applicable to a program if the waiver would
2
result in net payments by the Federal Government
3
to the State under the program for a fiscal year in
4
excess of the net payments which would otherwise be
5
SO made to the State.
6
(f) REVOCATION OF WAIVER.-If, after granting a
7 waiver under subsection (e) (1), the Chairman finds that
8 the applicant has failed to carry out the program in ac-
9 cordance with any applicable provision of law or regula-
10 tion, or has failed to implement the reforms proposed in
11 the application for the waiver, the Chairman may revoke
12 the waiver in whole or in part, effective at such time as
13 the Chairman deems appropriate.
14
(g) SPECIAL RULES.-For purposes of this section:
15
(1) INDIAN TRIBES DEEMED TO BE STATES.-
16
In the case of a program referred to in subsection
17
(h) under which assistance is provided with respect
18
to an Indian Tribe, the Indian tribal organization is
19
deemed to be the State.
20
(2) BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LEGAL
21
SERVICES CORPORATION DEEMED TO BE A FEDERAL
22
OFFICER.-The Board of Directors of the Legal
23
Services Corporation is deemed to be the officer of
24
the Federal Government responsible for the adminis-
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
31
1
tration of the program referred to in subsection
2
(h)(67).
3
(h) PROGRAMS SUBJECT TO WAIVER AUTHORITY.-
4 The programs referred to in this subsection are the fol-
5 lowing:
6
(1) The program of medical assistance under
7
title XIX of the Social Security Act.
8
(2) The Maternal and Child Health Services
9
Block Grant Program under title V of the Social Se-
10
curity Act.
11
(3) The program established in section 330 of
12
the Public Health Service Act (relating to commu-
13
nity health centers).
14
(4) The program established in section 1001 of
15
the Public Health Service Act (relating to family
16
planning methods and services).
17
(5) The program of cash and medical assistance
18
to refugees and Cuban/Haitian entrants under sec-
19
tion 412(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
20
(8 U.S.C. 1522(e)) and through the exercise of au-
21
thority under section 501(a) of the Refugee Edu-
22
cation Assistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422).
23
(6) The program established in section 329 of
24
the Public Health Service Act (relating to migrant
25
health centers).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
32
1
(7) The program of aid and services to needy
2
families with children under part A of title IV of the
3
Social Security Act.
4
(8) The child welfare services program under
5
part B of title IV of the Social Security Act.
6
(9) The supplemental security income program
7
under title XVI of the Social Security Act.
8
(10) The program of foster care and adoption
9
assistance under part E of title IV of the Social Se-
10
curity Act.
11
(11) The food stamp program, as defined in
12
section 3(h) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7
13
U.S.C. 2012(h)).
14
(12) The school lunch program carried out
15
under the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
16
1751 et seq.).
17
(13) The special supplemental food program for
18
women, infants, and children carried out under sec-
19
tion 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42
20
U.S.C. 1786).
21
(14) The nutrition programs carried out under
22
part C of title III of the Older Americans Act of
23
1965 (42 U.S.C. 3030e et seq.).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
33
1
(15) The school breakfast program carried out
2
under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
3
(42 U.S.C. 1773).
4
(16) The child and adult care food program
5
carried out under section 17 of the National School
6
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1766).
7
(17) The Emergency Food Assistance Act of
8
1983 (7 U.S.C. 612c note).
9
(18) The summer food service program for chil-
10
dren carried out under section 13 of the National
11
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1761).
12
(19) The commodity supplemental food pro-
13
gram authorized by section 4(a) of the Agriculture
14
and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C.
15
612c note).
16
(20) The special milk program carried out
17
under section 3 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
18
(42 U.S.C. 1772).
19
(21) The program of rental assistance on behalf
20
of low-income families provided under section 8 of
21
the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
22
1437f).
23
(22) The program of assistance to public hous-
24
ing under title I of the United States Housing Act
25
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
34
1
(23) The loan program under section 502 of the
2
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472).
3
(24) The program of interest reduction pay-
4
ments pursuant to contracts entered into by the Sec-
5
retary of Housing and Urban Development under
6
section 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.
7
1715z-1).
8
(25) The program of loans for rental and coop-
9
erative housing under section 515 of the Housing
10
Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1485).
11
(26) The program of rental assistance pay-
12
ments pursuant to contracts entered into under sec-
13
tion 521(a)(2)(A) of the Housing Act of 1949 (42
14
U.S.C. 1490a(a)(2)(A)).
15
(27) The program of assistance payments on
16
behalf of homeowners under section 235 of the Na-
17
tional Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z).
18
(28) The program of rent supplement payments
19
on behalf of qualified tenants pursuant to contracts
20
entered into under section 101 of the Housing and
21
Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s).
22
(29) The loan and grant programs under sec-
23
tion 504 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
24
1474) for repairs and improvements to rural dwell-
25
ings.
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
35
1
(30) The loan and assistance programs under
2
sections 514 and 516 of the Housing Act of 1949
3
(42 U.S.C. 1484, 1486) for housing for farm labor.
4
(31) The program of grants for preservation
5
and rehabilitation of housing under section 533 of
6
the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490m).
7
(32) The program of grants and loans for mu-
8
tual and self-help housing and technical assistance
9
under section 523 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42
10
U.S.C. 1490c).
11
(33) The program of site loans under section
12
524 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490d).
13
(34) The program under part B of title IV of
14
the Higher Education Act of 1965.
15
(35) The program under subpart 1 of part A of
16
title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
17
(36) The programs under the Head Start Act
18
(42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.)
19
(37) The program under part C of title IV of
20
the Higher Education Act of 1965.
21
(38) The program under subpart 3 of part A of
22
title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
23
(39) The programs under the Carl D. Perkins
24
Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act.
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
36
1
(40) The programs for migrant children under
2
sections 1201 through 1203 of the Elementary and
3
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2781-
4
83).
5
(41) The program under chapter 1 of subpart
6
2 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act
7
of 1965.
8
(42) The program under part E of title IV of
9
Higher Education Act of 1965.
10
(43) The program under subpart 4 of part A of
11
title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
12
(44) The program under title IX of the Higher
13
Education Act of 1965.
14
(45) The program under subpart 5 of part A of
15
title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
16
(46) The program under chapter 1 of title I of
17
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
18
1965.
19
(47) The programs under the Follow Through
20
Act (42 U.S.C. 9861-9877).
21
(48) The programs established in sections 338A
22
and 338B of the Public Health Service Act and the
23
programs established in part A of title VII of such
24
Act (relating to loans and scholarships for education
25
in the health professions).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
37
1
(49) The program established in section
2
317(j)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (relating
3
to grants for immunizations against vaccine-prevent-
4
able diseases).
5
(50) The program established in section 317A
6
of the Public Health Service Act (relating to grants
7
for screening, referrals, and education regarding
8
leading poisoning in infants and children).
9
(51) The program established in part A of title
10
XIX of the Public Health Service Act (relating to
11
block grants for preventive health and health serv-
12
ices).
13
(52) The programs established in subparts I
14
and II of part B of title XIX of the Public Health
15
Service Act.
16
(53) The programs under part C of title IV of
17
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
18
1965 (20 U.S.C. 3081-3112).
19
(54) The programs carried out under the Child
20
Development Associate Scholarship Assistance Act
21
of 1985 (42 U.S.C. 10901 et seq.).
22
(55) (A) The program of training for dis-
23
advantaged adults and youth under part A of title
24
II of the Job Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C.
25
1601 et seq.), as in effect before July 1, 1993.
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
38
1
(B) (i) The program of training for dis-
2
advantaged adults under part A of title II of the Job
3
Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.),
4
as in effect on and after July 1, 1993.
5
(ii) The program of training for disadvantaged
6
youth under part C of title II of the Job Training
7
Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1641 et seq.), as in ef-
8
fect on and after July 1, 1993.
9
(56) The Job Corps program under part B of
10
title IV of the Job Training Partnership Act (29
11
U.S.C. 1692 et seq.).
12
(57) The summer youth employment and train-
13
ing programs under part B of title II of the Job
14
Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1630 et seq.).
15
(58) The programs carried out under the Older
16
American Community Service Employment Act (42
17
U.S.C. 3001 et seq.).
18
(59) The programs under title III of the Older
19
Americans Act of 1965.
20
(60) The programs carried out under part B of
21
title II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of
22
1973 (42 U.S.C. 5011-5012).
23
(61) The programs carried out under part C of
24
title II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of
25
1973 (42 U.S.C. 5013).
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
39
1
(62) The State unemployment compensation
2
programs approved under section 303 of the Social
3
Security Act and under section 3304 of the Internal
4
Revenue Code of 1986.
5
(63) The program under the Low-Income En-
6
ergy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8621 et
7
seq.).
8
(64) The weatherization assistance program
9
under title IV of the Energy Conservation and Pro-
10
duction Act (42 U.S.C. 6851).
11
(65) The program of block grants to States for
12
social services under title XX of the Social Security
13
Act.
14
(66) The programs carried out under the Com-
15
munity Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9901
16
et seq.).
17
(67) The program of legal assistance to eligible
18
clients and other programs under the Legal Services
19
Corporation Act (42 U.S.C. 2996 et seq.).
20
(68) The program for emergency food and shel-
21
ter grants under title III of the Stewart B. McKin-
22
ney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11331 et
23
seq.).
24
(69) The program of social services for refugees
25
and Cuban/Haitian entrants under section 412(c) of
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
40
1
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
2
1522(c)) and through the exercise of authority
3
under section 501(a) of the Refugee Education As-
4
sistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422).
5
(70) The programs carried out under the Child
6
Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42
7
U.S.C. 9858 et seq.).
8
(71) A State program for providing child care
9
under section 402(i) of the Social Security Act.
10
(72) The program of State legalization impact-
11
assistance grants (SLIAG) under section 204 of the
12
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
13
TITLE III-MISCELLANEOUS
14
AMENDMENTS
15 SEC. 301. AFDC RECIPIENTS REQUIRED TO UNDERGO NEC-
16
ESSARY SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS A
17
CONDITION OF RECEIVING AFDC.
18
(a) IN GENERAL-Section 402(a) of the Social Secu-
19 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by inserting after
20 paragraph (34) the following:
21
"(35) provide that-
22
"(A) as a condition of eligibility for aid,
23
each applicant or recipient who the State deter-
24
mines is addicted to alcohol or drugs must be
25
required to agree to participate, and must
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
41
1
maintain satisfactory participation (as deter-
2
mined by the State), in an appropriate addic-
3
tion treatment program; and
4
"(B) each applicant or recipient who fails
5
to comply with any requirement imposed pursu-
6
ant to subparagraph (A) shall not be eligible for
7
aid during the 2-year period that begins with
8
such failure to comply."
9
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-
10
(1) IN GENERAL.-Except as provided in para-
11
graph (2), the amendment made by subsection (a)
12
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this
13
Act, and apply to payments under part A of title IV
14
of the Social Security Act for calendar quarters end-
15
ing after such date.
16
(2) DELAY PERMITTED IF STATE LEGISLATION
17
REQUIRED.-In the case of a State plan approved
18
under section 402(a) of the Social Security Act
19
which the Secretary of Health and Human Services
20
determines requires State legislation (other than leg-
21
islation appropriating funds) in order for the plan to
22
meet the additional requirement imposed by the
23
amendment made by subsection (a) of this section,
24
the State plan shall not be regarded as failing to
25
comply with the requirements of such section 402(a)
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
42
1
solely on the basis of the failure of the plan to meet
2
such additional requirement before the end of the 2-
3
year period that begins with the date of the enact-
4
ment of this Act.
5 SEC. 302. AUTHORITY OF STATE TO MODIFY CERTAIN AFDC
6
INCOME DISREGARD RULES.
7
(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 402(a)(8)(B) of the So-
8 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)(8)(B)) is amended—
9
(1) by striking "and" at the end of clause (i);
10
and
11
(2) by adding at the end the following:
12
"(iii) notwithstanding clauses (ii) and (iv)
13
of subparagraph (A) and clause (ii) of this sub-
14
paragraph, may disregard earned income of any
15
child or relative receiving aid to families with
16
dependent children, or of any other individual
17
(living in the same home as such relative and
18
child) whose needs as taken into account in
19
making the determination under paragraph (7),
20
in accordance with any combination of rules
21
which (as determined by the State in accord-
22
ance with regulations prescribed by the Sec-
23
retary) is at least as favorable to the recipient
24
of such aid as the combination of rules con-
25
tained in such clauses, but not more favorable
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
F:\M\SHAW\SHAW.015
H.L.C.
43
1
to the recipient than a rule providing for the
2
disregard of the first $200 of the total of such
3
earned income for such month plus ¹/₃ of the
4
remainder thereof; and".
5
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by
6 subsection (a) shall apply to benefits payable for calendar
7 months beginning after the date of the enactment of this
8 Act.
9 SEC. 303. ENHANCED MATCH FOR EXPENDITURES FOR
10
JOBS PROGRAM AVAILABLE FOR ALL PER-
11
SONNEL EXPENDITURES.
12
(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 403(1)(1)(A)(ii)(I) of So-
13 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 603(1)(1)(A)(ii)(I)) is amend-
14 ed by striking "full-time".
15
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by
16 subsection (a) shall apply to payments under part A of
17 title IV of the Social Security Act for calendar quarters
18 ending after the date of the enactment of this Act.
January 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)
CLI ON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP
PHOTOCOPY
ucher
PRESERVATION
? 3
WELFARE INSERT
The old fashioned Democrats used to say: government can do
everything for everybody. The new fangled Republicans now say:
government shouldn' do anything for anybody -- except maybe the
rich. But there's a third way. The way that says: government
can do a lot for us if we also do a lot for ourselves and for
each other.
The third way says to us: working hard and playing by the
rules will be rewarded. It says: you deserve the best schools
possible for your child, but you must make sure your child stays
in school and off drugs. It says: you deserve a fair return for
your work and investment, but you must make sure you pay your
fair share in taxes. It says: you deserve a chance to go to
college if you want to, but you must repay your loan obligation
with either a small percentage of your income or service to your
community.
And the third way says: if you're poor, and you need a
helping hand, you deserve to get one -- but you must use that
help as a hand up, not a hand out.
I want to talk today about how we can reform our welfare
system by strengthening families and making work pay
Everyone agrees the welfare system needs fixing. Everyone
hates it - - liberals and conservatives, those who pay for it and
those who need it.
But George Bush has done nothing to make the system more
efficient, responsive and fair. He has done nothing to help our
families help themselves get off welfare.
It beats me how an Administration that has preached so often
and BO loudly about family values could so undervalue our
American families
During the Bush Administration, the welfare caseload grew by
25 percent. Five times as much during Bush's years in office as
during the Carter and Reagan years combined.
And the need for some kind of help for poor families will
only grow greater. Because the latest poverty figures show more
people are poor now than at any time since Lyndon Johnson began
his War on Poverty in 1964.
George Bush is presiding over the poorest America in a
generation.
He has talked a good line. He has said that the welfare
system needs "radical change."
RESERVATION
But talk. He has never introduced a comprehensive
plan to welfare. In fact he only mentioned welfare reform
Vice in his presidency up until the beginning of the 1992
campaign season.
Why last month in Houston he managed to mention Elvis twice
one little old acceptance speech alone.
And when he finally did decide in July that a presidential
candidate maybe ought to look like he's working on the problem,
he came up with a plan full of technical fixes and minor
ad justments that had a bigger effect on the people who printed
the document than the people who collect the welfare.
We need to end welfare as we know it. We need a fundamental
restructuring of the entire system to help our families and save
our taxpayers money.
I know how we can do it. I know it can work. We even made
a promising start at national reform four years ago.
I was one of the chief architects of the national Family
Support Act of 1988, which emphasizes work, child support, and
family benefits. I fought night and day to get it drafted and
passed-
But when it was finally passed, George Bush was SO sluggish
about implementing it that many of the funds available to help
people move from welfare to work have never been spent.
Frankly, when it comes to helping the poor and
disadvantaged, George Bush just doesn t get it.
I know what at stake here. I understand something about
hard times and how hard things can get. My mother was widowed
before I was born, and for my first years I lived with my
grandparents while my mother went to nursing school in New
Orleans. She wanted to be able to get a job and support me.
And I remember the time my grandmother and I went to visit
her on the train, and when it was time to go back home and we
pulled out of the station, I saw her kneel down by the side of
the railroad tracks and cry.
I remember that to this day. I remember how she bore her
grief every day because she believed that if she sacrificed in
the short run, in the long run she could build a better life for
us.
There are millions of stories like that in America today.
Remember, during the LA riots last spring most poor people
people with jobs and those without -- did not riot. They did not
loot. They kept their children home and off the streets.
+
CCITF
G21#
3
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
Most Americans today do give their children love, and
discipline, and respect for others and for the law.
But we have to face the hard truth that too many Americans
are cut off from these values and is life that would reinforce
these values, Too many Americans who live by their values are
denied the progress they were promised -- the progress that was
real for the poor of my generation and my mother's.
So if we value work and family, we must reward work and
family. We must honor those who play by the rules.
Here's how I plan to do it.
First, we've got to reward work. Too many parents struggle
heroically to hold down one or two or three jobs, spend more time
at work and less time with their kids, and still can't earn
?
enough to lift their families out of poverty. One-fifth of our
hardworking fulltime wage earners are unable to keep themselves
and their kids above the poverty line.
What are we teaching them about how America values hard
work?
Too many kids see their parents run themselves ragged over
their jobs by day and still worry themselves sick over their
bills by night.
What are we teaching them about how America values the
family?
That's not right. If you work, you shouldn't be poor.
We should expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to guarantee a
working wage to any working family. Increase the minimum wage to
keep pace with inflation. And create a national apprenticeship
training program so young people who don't go to college can
learn the skills they need to get good, high-paying work.
Second, we should make it the goal of our welfare system to
end permanent dependency and put people back to work.
Welfare should be a second chance, not a way of life.
That's just the opposite of what's happening now. In the
sixteen years before George Bush took office, the welfare rolls
grew at a tiny annual rate around three percent.
In just three years of George Bush's presidency, the welfare
rolls shot up by 25%.
And at the present rate, two-thirds of the people on welfare
??
right now will still be there in the new millennium -- eight
years from now.
is.
4
PHOTOCOPY
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
George Bush has done nothing to get people off welfare and
into the workforce.
Let me tell you what I've done. In my home state of
Arkansas we created a system that offers training and childcare
and medical coverage for welfare parents so they can go out and
find a good job. And we got 10,000 people off welfare and on the
job in 1991 alone. It gave them the dignity of work. And it
saved money for Arkansas taxpayers.
We can do it for every American. We can tell them: we'll
offer you up to two years' worth of help getting training,
learning to read if you need to, and we'll make sure your
children get good care while you're out. Then we'll require you
to get a job.
We can do even more to break the cycle. If we guarantee
affordable health care to every American, then nobody will be
forced to stay on welfare just to get Medicaid. If we sign into
law a Family and Medical Leave Act -- like the one George Bush
vetoed -- then nobody will be forced to choose between the job
they need and the sick relative or new baby who needs them.
Third, we must do more to protect America's children from
the consequences of divorce and absent parents.
Nothing plunges a family faster into poverty than a father
who leaves his responsibilities when he leaves his children. The
likelihood that a child will live in poverty practically doubles
overnight when one parent walks out the door.
Nearly half of the divorced or single mothers who have court
orders for child support payments actually collect less than
they're owed -- often nothing at all. Deadbeat parents -- mostly
fathers but mothers too -- owe $25 billion in unpaid child
support.
Marriage may not always be "til death do us part, " but
parenthood sure is. We need to get tough on child support
enforcement.
In my state, if you fall more than a thousand dollars behind
x
in your child support, we report you to every major credit agency
in Arkansas. We can do that on a national level. And we can use
the IRS to help collect child support, and make it a felony to
cross state lines to avoid your obligations. We can get more
money to the families who need it -- and save money for the
taxpayer.
Fourth, we can start now to raise the next generation of
productive adults by giving our children the best education we
can.
CLINTON'LIBRARY PHOTOCOP
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
We must begin with the very youngest children by fully
funding Head Start and expanding innovative parenting programs
like the one we have in Arkansas called HIPPY. HIPPY helps build
an ethic of learning at home by enlisting parents to become their
children's first teachers.
We must set tough standards for all schools, including those
in disadvantaged neighborhoods, and improve Chapter One funding
to help meet them. And we must set up a National Service Trust
Fund to lend money to any American who wants to go to college, to
be repaid either out of their paycheck after graduation or with
service to the community.
And fifth, we must encourage all American families and
citizens to make the best individual decisions in their lives,
based on a full sense of personal responsibility and concern for
the consequences of their behavior. That means letting teenagers
know that it is wrong for children to have children and giving
them the education they need to prevent that from happening.
There are millions of children and millions of families
hanging in the balance in this country. They are part of our
national family. They are all our family.
of course we must exhort all parents to do a better job, and
we must write into our social programs incentives for stronger
family values.
But we cannot ignore the plain need for a national policy to
value families and reward their work. To reconnect all Americans
to our most cherished values and the idea of progress for those
who live by those values.
We must believe we can make a difference. We must believe
that tomorrow can be better than today. We have the tools.
Reforming welfare is one.
The question for us this election year is: do we have the
vision and the will?
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
TO: Bruce R., George S., James c., Bob B., Gene S., et al.
FR: Atul Gawande
RE: Ideas for welfare hook.
DT: 7 September 1992
The following are options for something new to unveil when we
reintroduce the welfare plan on Wednesday. My recommendation is 3b,
below.
1) A promise to move 3 million people from welfare to work.
"In the 16 years before Bush, the number of people on welfare grew
just 3%. Under Bush, the welfare rolls grew 25%. He sent close to
3 million people from work to welfare.
Bill Clinton's plan to end welfare as we know it will move 1
million families -- 3 million people -- from welfare to work in the
next four years.
Three million women and children (1 million adults) is an extremely
conservative estimate, and can be expected to be private sector
work. We could get away with a larger number (a moderate estimate
is 4.5 million). However, that number may begin to reflect public
sector workers, too.
Alternatively, we could say, "Bill Clinton's plan to reward work
will move 3 million people from welfare to private sector work,
more to public sector work, and end welfare as we know it."
PRO: Sounds specific. Gives something for experts to chew on and
give us a news hook. Also can make us seem realistic to experts.
CON: Seems contradictory to say you are ending welfare as we know
it and moving only a given number of people off welfare. Is welfare
over or only for some people? Also, sounds like another rabbit-out-
of-a-hat promise, no matter how well we document it.
2) Thematic pitch: "It is time to end welfare as we know it."
If we harp on this point enough in the speech and in enough
different ways, this can attract attention. For example, we can
drive the point home by announcing forthrightly our opposition to
the California welfare reform program to preempt any credit Bush
may try to get for signing their waivers.
"The President just doesn't get it. The system is broken. We
don't need anymore welfare tinkering. It is time to put an end to
welfare as we know it."
PRO: Focuses on policy, zaps Bush, and sends our message across.
CON: It's a theme we will use regardless of whatever else we do.
It still leaves us open to questions of how we are going to pay for
our public work program and won't necessarily pick up enough
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
attention because we have said this before.
3) Combinations of 1 and 2.
a) Hit theme hard in the speech. Release the details on paper.
Gene's idea is that we stick to thematics in the speech but by
providing a realistic phase-in and possibly even numbers on
paper, we avoid being charged with having more unrealistic
campaign promises.
b) Hit theme hard in the speech, but spell out timetable. "I
will end welfare as we know it. And I start by moving 1
million families -- 3 million people -- from welfare to
private sector work, more to public sector work, by 1996."
This last option, 3b, is what I recommend. It allows us to
inject realism and a sense of transition to the program while
emphasizing that we will end welfare as we know it. A Con is that
it could muddy the message.
4) The numbers in the plan.
We could be honest about our program and point out that we
phase in the earned income tax credit and two year time limit over
5 years. If we do, we are within range of actually meeting the
budget we have laid out, assuming that we also collect significant
savings from moving people off welfare to private sector work.
Here is a preliminary break down of the funds and new spending
to "reward work" consistent with the Putting People First plan:
Funds and new spending for "rewarding work"
(in billions of dollars)
1993
1994
1995
1996
Spending
3.0
EITC
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
2-year time limit costs
2.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
for training and jobs
Child support enforcement 0.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
Total new spending
3.0
6.5
9.5
11.0
10.0
Budget & Savings
Budget for new spending
in Putting People First -3.5
-5.5
-6.5
-7.0
Savings from getting just
3 M people off welfare
-0.0
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
Net (unbudgeted cootal
-n =
n
, A
0 A
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
We're in the ballpark, though we don't quite break even. To get it
right, we can phase in the 2 year time limit over an even
period OF claim a Targer number or people coming off welfare.
These numbers will change as I get more feedback from experts.
PRO: If done right, can seem fiscally responsible. Get credit for
explaining how we meet our promises.
CON: Any set of numbers will get savaged and draw debate, even if
well prepared.
5) Beef up our reforms in child support enforcement.
Child support enforcement is a great issue for us. It allows
us to emphasize family values and personal responsibility. We can
beat up on Bush for cutting child support enforcement and proposing
little. It saves money. And it takes another step toward replacing
welfare.
This section of our plan has room for more specific, tough
policies that will save the government $1 billion a year and move
350,000 recipients (1.5 million women and children) off of welfare.
In particular, two weeks ago, the US Commission on Interstate Child
Support produced a report with solid recommendations, most of which
w
we should move quickly to endorse (before Bush does).
However, if we unveil child support enforcement provisions
this week, it is more difficult to make the connection with our
theme of putting Americans back to work. Child support payments do
not put people to work in a direct sense. Rather, for child support
payments percentage to have get 350 CO De 000 working women at least part time.
6) Individual development accounts tied to community development.
We have backed individual development accounts which are bank
accounts where the government matches the individual's savings in
the account. The individual can only withdraw the funds for
purchasing a house or education or other such purpose. The
suggestion valies, is that the they you Phment could be money held to in ao the double duty of
improving individual's lives and fostering the economic growth of
communities.
TO: Andie
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
FR: Atul
RESERVATION
RE: Welfare speech
DT: 4 Sept 1992
1. Material:
Look at Oct. 23, 1991 New Covenant speech.
Look at rewarding work Clinton/Gore policy brief.
2. Facts:
Working poor: Over 5 million people live in families with a
full-time worker where the family remains poor. The majority
7
of such families have two parents. Alternative: almost one of
every five people who works full time doesn't earn enough to
support his or her family above the poverty line.
Bush policy: from work-to-welfare. In the sixteen years before
George Bush became President, the number of people on welfare
grew just 3%. In three years under George Bush, people on
welfare grew 25% -- nearly three million people.
7
Long-term dependency. Two-thirds of the people on welfare
today will be there 8 years or more.
Deadbeat Dads. Deadbeat parents owe $25 billion in unpaid
child support, leaving millions of single-parent families in
poverty and two-thirds of single mothers without any child
support at all.
3. Language:
Putting our people first means honoring and rewarding those
who work hard and play by the rules, demanding responsibility and
ending welfare as we know it. I have a simple strategy which will
strengthen families and make work pay. It will break the cycle of
dependency and end welfare as we know it.
For twelve years the Republicans have talked aobut the virtue
of hard work and family values. Yet on average, working men and
women earn less today than they did 20 years ago, adjusting for
inflation. Almost one in every five full-time workers does not earn
enough to keep a family out of poverty. They talk of family values
and the problems facing single parents, but they have never taken
the lead in tracking down deadbeat Dads.
In the sixteen years before George Bush became President, the
number of people on welfare grew just 3%. In three years under
George Bush, people on welfare grew 25% --- nearly three million
people. George bush talks about moving people from welfare to work,
but during his administration they were moving from work to welfare
by the millions.
What is the Bush solution? Giving states permission to reduce
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOGOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
benefits for a few recipients. The President just doesn't get it.
The system is broken. We don't need more welfare tinkering. It is
time to put an end to welfare as we know it.
Three fundamental themes:
We will end welfare as we know it. After two years on welfare,
people who collect aid would have access to training,
education and other support services designed to help them
move into a job. After two years, welfare recipients who are
able to work will be required to take a job in the private or
public sector. I will take three million people (number may be
changed) from welfare to work.
If you work you shouldn't be poor. Making work pay.
Full time workers earn less today (adjusted for
inflation) than twenty years ago. The problems are even more
severe for young people.
The problem is more than low income. The working poor are
literally one broken finger away from losing everything, since
most have little medical protection. It is astonishing that we
provide insurance to the poor on welfare, but have no such
guarantee for many working families.
No wonder over five million people live in familes with
a full-time worker where the family remains poor.
Clinton plan to make work pay:
WOT King people difrough iia health START
2) Expand the earned income tax credit (working family
tax credit) which amounts to a pay raise for low and
moderate income working families.
3) [Restore the minimum wage by letting it increase with
inflation.]
4) Most importantly, restore growth to the American
economy -- our single best policy for going from welfare
to work.
one parent should DO
typical child born in the US today will spend time in a single
parent home. (see facts above).
Clinton plan: See putting people first and past papers
Ideas: Make sure both parents are identified at birth for
every child born out of wedlock. Set and update simple
guidelines for child support so if you father a child you know
what you have to pay and that you will hav responsibility for
the first 18 years of your child's life. Automatica
withholding of child support from paychecks beginning with all
new awards. Child support is an alternative to welfare, not an
after-thought like the Bush administration treats it.
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
WELFARE
Opening Line: Our current welfare system is a disaster -- we've got to abolish it and replace
it with a program that gives people two years to go from welfare to work -- and no more. Hard
work should be a way of life in this country, not welfare handouts.
Clinton Position / Record
Our welfare system is a mess: it penalizes people who work or marry; it frustrates people who
want to help themselves; it allows families to remain dependent for decades. George Bush
hasn't done anything about this -- but I will.
Let's start with why so many people have gone on welfare under the Bush administration
-- people who are working hard for their families aren't doing as well as they deserve
to. On average, sons earn less than their fathers did. People working full-time can't pull
their families out of poverty, let alone get them ahead -- and since so many working
families don't have health insurance, they find themselves just one broken arm away
from losing everything.
The best way to get people off welfare is to make sure that people who are working hard
are getting ahead -- not falling behind. That means we should:
-
Increase tax credits for working families and tie the minimum wage to inflation;
Make sure that all working families have health care. After all, rich families do,
and poor families do, too!
Second, we have too many single parents who have to carry the whole load for their
families. We've got to make both parents responsible for the care of their children.
It's no surprise that half of the children of single parents live in poverty -- as much as
$15 billion in child support goes uncollected each year. We've got to:
Identify the fathers, right at the time of birth, with blood tests and court
determinations;
been track of absentee dads and make sure that
they pay.
If we help families by making sure that hard work has its rewards and by doing a better
job of collecting from deadbeat dads, that should move people off the welfare rolls right
away. But for those who still need help, I believe we should abolish our current system
of welfare and replace it with a new plan that would:
WELFAR.001
09/06/92 version
09/06/92 12:37pm
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
Give a person two years on welfare to get training, education, and the skills they
need to land a job;
And at the end of those two years, tell that person to accept a job that is available
or do full-time community service - and put an end to their stay on the welfare
rolls.
We should give everyone the opportunity to succeed - but then everyone must take
responsibility for their own families and their own lives. In this country, people who
work hard and play by the rules shouldn't get the shaft and in this country, people
ought to be expected to meet their responsibilities as parents and citizens.
Government help to get families going - yes; but not government handouts.
In Arkansas, that's what we've done. We've moved 17,000 people from welfare to work
in the past three years. Overall, we have cut welfare rolls 14 percent in Arkansas since
I was first elected Governor. And even during George Bush's recession, the number of
families on food stamps in my state has gone up far less than the national average.
Bush Record / Vulnerabilities
As Governor of Arkansas, I have moved 17,000 people from welfare to work; under George
Bush's Presidency, people have been moving from work to welfare in record numbers.
From 1972 to 1988, the number of people on welfare in this country remained constant,
growing only by 3 percent - but in the three years of the Bush Presidency, welfare has
grown 25 percent.
It's no surprise: one out of every five full-time workers does not earn enough to keep a
family out of poverty; five million people live in families with a full-time worker - but
still remain in poverty.
families
who
on
welfare get health care, but those who work hard to get themselves off the welfare rolls
lose their health coverage. That doesn't make any sense.
What values are we communicating to children when they see parents who work hard but
keep falling farther behind?
where sons earn less than fathers?
where welfare
...
...
recipients get better health care than the working poor? And beyond talking about
ramily
values,
what
has
Ocurge
of
conditions?
Bush has done too little to help mothers collect child-support from deadbeat dads;
estimates of unpaid support run from $5 to $15 billion and Bush's own Secretary of
Sarce?
HHS calls his administration's record in this area "abysmal."
WELFAR.001
09/06/92 version
- 2 -
09/06/92 12:37pm
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOL-
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
Since Bush took office (7/89), the number of people on food stamps has gone up 38
percent.
The Bush Position
Waivers and Experimentation: The President supports giving states waivers to permit
more experimentation with their welfare systems. Among the state reforms the President
may embrace:
Cutting benefits for welfare recipients where those benefits are higher than the
working wage; and
Cutting off benefits for welfare mothers who have additional children.
Increased Collections: Bush will also point to a 50-percent increase in collections for
child support -- nationwide -- in recent years.
Able-Bodied Workers: Bush may also endorse the Michigan plan, which threw every
single, able-bodied person off the welfare rolls -- 70,000+ individuals.
Bush's Plan for Cities: He is also likely to discuss his plan to create private-sector
opportunities for the poor -- through enterprise zones, weed and seed, crime control,
tenant management -- as the alternative for welfare.
Likely Bush Attacks and Best Clinton Rebuttals
Bush's obvious attack is to paint Clinton as a big-spending liberal who wants to waste money
on welfare. Bush will also attack the Arkansas record.
Attack: Bill Clinton thinks that a welfare mother who has more children should get more
money - but working families don't get a raise for each kid they have.
Rebuttal: This attack misses the point -- I'm for scrapping our entire welfare system and
getting rid of the sort of dependency and lifetime-on-welfare that you are talking about.
Under my plan, welfare would be temporary -- for two years only. At the end of that period,
a mother or father on welfare would have to get a job or go to work in community service. No
lifetime on welfare -- opportunity and responsibility instead.
For the brief time that people are on welfare, I'm not for penalizing children. If a family needs
extra money to feed and clothe another child, I don't think we should punish that child for his
or her parent's actions. Our goal should be moving people off welfare -- not punishing children
who find themselves in need of help.
WELFAR.001
09/06/92 version
- 3 -
09/06/92 12:37pm
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
BB & duec am all-time high
President. and 40 percent of three people in poverty in this country now are citile on
While poverty went wijo across the nation this past year, it went down 1001 Arkansas: we did the
fourth best of any statelin the country:
we still have a long way to go. But at least we re moving in the right direction.
Attack: Clinion talks.about the 17,000 people he moved off welfare in the past four years,
but he doesn't mention the thousands more he moved on. Welfare and food stamp rolls
are actually up since Clinton started his reform program.
Rebuttal: It's true that, because of George Bush's recession, the number of people on welfare
and receiving food stamps in my state have gone up in the past three years.
WELFAR 001
09/06/92 version
4 -
09/06/92 12:37pm
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
But thanks to my welfare reform program, this growth has been much slower in Arkansas than
in other states. Thanks to our plan, we are doing far better than the rest of the country has done
under George Bush.
The increase in welfare families in Arkansas has been at only half the national average under
President Bush; and the number of families getting food stamps has risen 30 percent less in my
state than across the rest of the country.
In Arkansas, we couldn't overcome the economic disaster that George Bush's policies have
produced in this country -- but we did do our best to deal with their consequences -- and I'm
proud of how much we have been able to accomplish.
Attack: Under Bill Clinton, administrative costs for welfare in Arkansas have gone up
3,000 percent.
Rebuttal: This is another Republican lie about my record. We took several different agencies
in my state and consolidated them into one -- that didn't make our administrative costs grow --
it just made sense.
You know, a 1991 report by the Bush Administration said that our welfare program reflected
"sound management and administration." Bush's own Department of Health and Human
Services ranked Arkansas in the top ten states in the country in terms of welfare administration.
That shows what a lie this charge really is.
Attack: Bill Clinton wants to guarantee every welfare recipient a job -- but if you are not
on welfare, what guarantee do your have? That's not fair.
Rebuttal: First of all, I think we ought to spend more time worrying about creating jobs and
less time raising fears over "guaranteed" job programs. My first priority is to implement an
economic plan that succeeds in creating the jobs we need in this country; the President's first
priority seems to be dividing us, pitting one American against another.
My welfare plan does not guarantee a job for anyone. What it does guarantee is that no one is
going to get welfare for more than two years -- something that President Bush's plan has failed
to do. Under my plan, at the end of two years, a welfare recipient would be forced to accept
any appropriate job available in the private sector -- or perform community service if no job is
available.
No guarantees of a job -- just a guarantee of work and responsibility -- that's what my plan has,
but his doesn't.
WELFAR.001
09/06/9 version
- 5 -
09/06/92 12:37pm
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
To:
ATU
5 pp
PHOTOCOPY
BOB
RESERVATION
Reed 9/8/92 4pm DRAFT
GS
etal
Remarks Prepared for Delivery
Clayton County Office of Family & Children's Services
Jonesboro, Georgia
September 9, 1992
I'm so glad I had the chance to be here in Jonesboro today to
talk with people who are working hard to lift themselves off
welfare and go back to work. [Tell stories of the mothers you will
have just met who are in the program.
hire
I wanted to come here today, because like many of the people
I
this morning, I was born poor, in a state here more than
ha the pe ple lived below the poverty line.
mother was
idowed before I was born, and for my first years I lived with my
grandparents while my mother went back to nursing school so she
could get a job and support us.
to MORTH and and bel: because
And I wanted to come here because like the good people who run
this program, I have spent the last decade back home in my state
working to change the welfare system to lift people out f poverty
and give people on welfare the skills they need to go back to work
This has been the work of my life, and it will be a central part of
>re
my presidency.
START
Here in Georgia, and across this country, people are hurting.
IT,
UMiddle-class people are working Larder than ever and making lass;
w/
d
HARDERM
the Commerce Depar
spected last week that the average
smily
class
,SH
saw its income di
100 ast year. Over the last decade the
attento
Str
per entage of har work, low-wage jobs increased by half. Poverty
Sare
w3/h
ploding: 37 million people last year, and growing. One of
xe
have
ten Americans is on food stamps. America's welfare rolls are
helfore
full to bursting.
Meat?
Meanwhile, for the irst time since the roaring '20s, the
wealthiest 1% of Americans now control more than 90% of the
mery
nation's wealth -- while working people have seen America's wages
drop from 1st in the world a decade ago to 13th today. Millions of
hard-working people can't get health insurance or earn a decent
40%
wage so their children get enough to eat.
ther day, in columbus, ohio, I met a woman with seven
childr
who was making $50,000 a year. She was so proud that she
could support her family. But one of her children had spina
Lufida, and her insur nce premiums got so righ that she had to quit
her job and
are so her child ould get care.
Everywhert
go, I meet parents who've lost their jobs and
dread what
their favorite time of the day -- having dinner
with thei family
because now the tension is so thick you could
RECEIVED FROM
09.07
cut it with a knife and the parents have trouble looking their
children in the eye because they think they have failed them.
All over this country, there are millions of people who are
dying to go to work, dying to give their children a chance to get
ahead, and and desperately hoping that the Amer can Dream will hang
on. And there are millions more who have given up on the system
and are throwing their lives away in gangs or in jails, in despair
or dependency.
We can't go on this way any longer. As a President who really
cared about Georgia, Franklin Roosevelt, said in his first campaign
60 years ago, we need to break with old orthodoxies if we are going
to change and lift this country.
In this campaign, I've put forth a plan that leaves behind
stale old ideologies of the right and the left and offers new ways
to ve our country and our people forward.
STANDARD
I believe we've had enough of the failed trickle-down economic
BLON
theory of the last 12 years -- the crazy idea that if we just keep
taxes low on the wealthy and keep government out of the way, the
LINE
rich will get so rich that the rest of us might do a little better.
I believe the wealthy ought to pay their fair share, and the middle
class should get a break for a change.
But I don't want to go back to the old Democratic notion that
we can tax and spend our way to prosperity, either. I'm against
brain-dead politics in both parties.
MY economic plan takes a whole new approach, by putting people
first, rewarding work, and organizing our economy to compete and
win again. Eight (6?) Nobel laureates have endorsed my plan; they
think it will create 2 million jobs a year. But don't take their
word for it; read a copy and decide for yourself. (Hold book)
Yesterday, I met with workers at a machine-tool factory in
connecticut, and laid out my plan to rebuild America's
manufacturing base. My state ranks #1 in job growth over the last
12 months, and in recent years, we've created manufacturing jobs at
ten times the national rate. Why? Because we believe in
encouraging businesses to invest in new plant and equipment; in
starting apprenticeship programs for young people who choose not to
go on to college; and in expanding adult literacy and giving
workers a chance to earn their GED where they work.
STATE
Today, I want to talk about something else we've learned how
to do in Arkansas that we need to do at the national level --
10%
moving people off the welfare rolls and onto the work rolls.
I've been working on this issue harder, longer, than just
about anybody. Back in 1979, when I first was elected governor, I
started the Arkansas Welfare-to-Work demonstration project, which
increased employment and earnings by more than a third for those
PHOTOCOPY
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
08 '92 21:37 CLINTOM FOR PRES. 501-399-3799.
19.54 FROM JCD MVIMTION
JES
I
TO
15013702645
PHOTOCOPY
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
who
part, and reduced welfare payments by 18 percent. In the
mid-
I chaired the National Governors' Association Task Force
on
Welf Reform, and worked with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
to write and enact the Family Support Act of 1988, the most
comprehensive welfare reform law ever passed.
We wanted to make Arkansas a showcase for welfare reform. so
in 1989, we launched a JOBS program called Project Success. Our
program gives people the child care, health care, and training they
need to get off welfare. And in just three years, we've moved
17,000 people from welfare to work. Arkansas taxpayers save $12
million a year because people on welfare have found work or had
their benefits reduced.
Independent researchers from a group called the Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation came to Arkansas to look at
Project Success and CC luded that it was one of the three best
wel are-to-work program they had found in the nation.
If we can d hat in a poor state like Arkansas, think what we
can do for the country.
I want to build on the lessons of Project Success in Arkansas
principles
to
the Family Support Act a step further. We need to reform
re "ystem so that it puts people back to work and ends
permanent de: endency. I have a plan to end welfare as we know it.
$VII
11!!
My pl 1 will make welfare a second chance, not a way of life.
We'll erase the stigma of welfare for good by restoring a simple,
dignified principle: People who can work ought to go to work, and
work you By AND TO IN THE PLAY IF YOU IF HARD
no one who can work should be able to stay on welfare forever.
Under my plan, we'll give everyone the education training
child care and medical coverage they need, but after two years
they'll have to take a job in the private sector or start earning
BURIES
their way through community service. That way, we'll restore the
3
covenant that welfare was first meant to be: a temporary hand
people who've fallen on hard times. By the tim we're through,
won't have a welfare program; we'll have a jo program.
In the last three years, the welfare rolls have exploded as a
result of the recession, rising unemployment, skyrocketing health
care costs, and a growing permanent underclass. The number of
welfare recipients has increased five times faster under this
administration than in the previous 12 years under Ronald Reagan
Front
and Jimmy Carter combined. When the poverty rolls rise, we all pay
-- in the past year, we've spent $8 billion more than three years
ago on welfare and food stamps alone.
We need to turn this devastating trend around by making work
pay, generating new jobs, and helping people lift themselves out of
poverty. I've consulted with welfare reform experts who estimate
hat my plan to end welfare as we know it will move a million
sople a year off the welfare rolls by requiring all those who can
Look OUT
work to go to work. We may not save a lot of money right away --
but when you consider that if we don't change the welfare system,
a quarter of the people now on welfare will stay there 8 years or
more, you can be sure that we'll save a lot of money down the road.
And more important, we'll save millions of Americans from a life of
dependence.
We've heard a lot of talk this year about family values, and
that's fine with me. I wouldn't be here if it weren't for family
values. But one of the most important values we need in this
country if we're going to be pro-family is to be pro-work.
Under the current system, there are too many incentives for
EXPAND
poor people not to work. Going to work means losing Medicaid or
other welfare-related benefits, and the jobs they can find don't
pay a sufficient wage to lift them out of poverty.
I want to make work pay by expanding the Earned Income Tax
Credit for the working poor. No one who works full-time and has a
family at home should be poor -- not in America.
At the same time, we need to control health care costs and
assure all Americans that they can get affordable health care when
they go to work. Medicaid rolls are breaking the bank in every
state in this country. Skyrocketing health care premiums aren't
just robbing this country of billions of dollars in administrative
waste; they're costing us jobs and they're forcing people onto the
poverty rolls because they can't get care anywhere else.
If we're pro-work, we ought to unleash the energies of every
community to create more good jobs in poor neighborhoods. My plan
will create a national network of Community Development Banks to
give low-income entrepreneurs the tools to start new businesses.
The South Shore Bank in Chicago, and its rural counterpart in my
home state, the Southern Development Bancorporation, help bolster
poor communities by providing housing loans and extending credit to
those who want to start a small business. Banks, non-profit
organizations, churches, and local governments can work together as
partners to generate jobs, opportunity and hope.
We've got to be pro-savings as well. Earlier this year, the
government ordered a young woman in New Haven, connecticut, and her
family to repay welfare benefits because she was saving money from
a part-time job to put herself through college. That's wrong. We
ought to raise the asset limit and encourage poor people to save
for job training, college, and other paths to independence.
Finally, if we believe in family values, it's time we toughen
our child support enforcement laws and launch a nationwide
crackdown on deadbeat parents. I'll tell you one thing I've
learned over the last decade: Governments don't raise children;
parents do.
Today, much of the money we spend on welfare goes toward
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
1,992 22443
children whose fathers could afford to pay child support but do
not. If we want to do something about the fact that one child in
four is born in poverty in this country, we can start by tracking
down an estimated $10 to $25 billion in unpaid child support. That
is one reason it disturbed me to learn that President Bush, in his
Midsession Review, has proposed a cut of nearly $3 billion in funds
to enforce the law and track down deadbeats.
As President, I'll push for the toughest child support
enforcement possible. In Arkansas, if you fall more than a
thousand dollars behind in your child support, we report you to
every major credit agency in the state. Last year, we collected
more than $41 million from deadbeat dads -- money that we now don't
have to pay in welfare or other public spending.
My plan will set up a national deadbeat data bank, begin a
national system of child support collection through automatic wage
withholding, and make an all-out effort to establish paternity in
the hospital when the baby is born, not in the courts after the
father has left. We'll enlist major credit agencies in a
nationwide effort to send a message to deadbeat parents: If you
don't pay child support for your children, you shouldn't get credit
for yourself. It's time we send a clear message that people who
bring children into this world have a responsibility to raise them.
In the end, this isn't about government programs; it's about
real people and their families. There will never be a government
program for every problem. The only thing that holds us together
is the daily assumption of personal responsibility by millions of
Americans from all walks of life. And the one thing that can move
us forward is the assumption of personal responsibility by the
President of the United States to stop the division and blame and
start challenging people to make the most of their lives.
A few years ago, I asked a woman in the welfare-to-work
program in Arkansas what she liked best about her new job. She
said she enjoyed the work and liked earning a paycheck, but the
best thing was that when her son was asked at school what his
mother does for a living, he could give an answer.
I hope you'll remember that for the next 55 days. When people
assume responsibility and shoulder the common load, they acquire a
dignity they never knew before. When people go to work, they
rediscover a pride that was lost. When fathers pay their child
support, they restore a connection they and their children need.
When the privilege of serving is enough of a perk for people in
Congress, and the President finally assumes responsibility for
America's problems, we'll not only stop doing wrong, we'll begin to
do what is right to move America forward.
If you remember your responsibilities to yourselves and your
future on November 3, I'll never forget mine as your President.
Thank you.
-- END --
PHOTOCOPY
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
TOTAL P.05
RECEIVED FROM
22:44
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
PHOTOCOP
PRESERVATION
The Clinton Record
A History of Commitment
Early Action. In his first term in office --- before welfare
reform was a national issue-- Governor Clinton got to work putting
people to work. He developed the Arkansas Welfare-to-Work
demonstration project, the most successful project of its kind in
the nation (what's this mean? cite).
National Leadership. As chairman of the National Governors'
Association Task Force on Welfare Reform, and later as chairman of
the association, Governor Clinton was a chief architect and driving
force behind the federal Family Support Act of 1988, the most
comprehensive and successful reform of welfare ever.
Project Success. To meet the requirements of the Family Support
Act he helped author, Governor Clinton implemented Project Success.
It provides people on welfare with education, training, and job
placement -- and the Medicaid, child care, and transportation
assistance they need. Arkansas implemented Project Success three
months before required by federal law -- and was one of only
thirteen states in the country to prepare a program by the early
date. (cite)
A History of Results
Between 1979 and 1991, while the number of AFDC recipients
nationwide increased by 16.5 percent, the number of recipients in
Arkansas declined by 14.2 percent. Governor Clinton's welfare
reforms and economic leadership have improved Arkansans' lives and
saved Arkansans' money. (cite)
The Family Support Act which Clinton helped author has
(get stat from Atul)
7
Governor Clinton's 1979 welfare reform, the Arkansas Welfare-to-
Work Demonstration Project, proved highly successful. After three
years, the program had increased the earnings of those enrolled by
31 percent, reduced AFDC payments by 18 percent, and increased
participants' employment by 34 percent. (cite)
- To date, 16,911 participants have become self-sufficient
through Project Success. (we need a better statistic here;
either the percent of people pulled off welfare, or Arkansas'
national rank)
- And they have remained self-sufficient: a 1991 follow-up
survey of Project Success participants whose cases were closed
due to earned income showed dramatica achievements: 72 percent
remained off AFDC, and 58 percent of those people remained in
the jobs they have obtained through Project Success. (cite)
Praise from Arkansans
Lynda is a single parent with three children. She was receiving
AFDC. Throug Project Success, she enrolled in the Jefferson School
PHOTOCOPY
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
of Nursing. Today Linday is a registered nurse and is fully
supporting her family. She writes, "It is so nice to be
independent.' (date, cite)
Monica is divorced and has three children. She had no child
support to raise her three children. Through Project Success, she
attended beauty school. Now she has her own booth in a beauty salon
and will receive her GED. She writes, "Project Success is wonderful
because it gives women a chance to stand on their own feet. Without
?
it I couldn't have made it. II (date, cite)
Praise from Republicans
The Bush Administration praised Project Success. In a May 1991
report, the Department of Health and Human Services said Project
Success was "very capable. reflecting sound management and
administration at both State and county office levels and
proficient service delivery at the local level. " (title, date of
report)
At the ceremony at which he signed the Family Support Act,
President Reagan told Bill Clinton
(quote, date)
Top Reagan aides, Judy Black and Frank Donatelli, congratulated
Governor Clinton for his achievement as Chairman of the National
Governors' Association and thanked him for his achievements in
reforming the welfare system. (quote, date, cite)
As Governor of Tennessee, Lamar Alexander commended Clinton for
his "critical leadership" on welfare reform. (date, cite)
Governors John Ashcroft of Missouri and Michael Castle of
Delaware thanked governor Clinton for making reform of welfare "a
top priority for the NGA." (date, cite)
PHOTOCOPY
RESERVATION
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
WELFARE REFORM
Bill Clinton has been working to reform the welfare system since his first term
as governor, guided by the belief that welfare should be a second chance, not a way
of life. Poor people should have the training, the incentives, and the requirement to
go to work. Here is the record:
#
Helped write The Family Support Act of 1988, a major revision of the Aid to
Families with Dependent Children Program and Title IV of the Social Security Act.
The goals of the Act are to emphasize work, child support and family benefits, and
to encourage and assist needy children and parents to obtain the education, training
and employment necessary to avoid long-term welfare dependence.
*
Although states were not required to implement JOBS programs under this
Act until October 1, 1990, Arkansas moved quickly to obtain increased training and
support services. Building on a WORK program initiated in Clinton's first
administration, Clinton made sure that Project Success, Arkansas' name for the new
program, was implemented at the earliest date possible, July 1, 1989.
*
In its first 12 months of operation, 2,744 welfare cases were closed after
Project Success participants found work. Between July 1990 and March 1991, 2,043
cases were closed because of employment. Through October, 1991, 1,589 AFDC
cases were closed due to employment, an increase of 9% over the last year.
*
A follow-up survey completed in August of 1991 on those participants whose
AFDC cases closed in 1990 due to earned income revealed that:
--72% remained off AFDC
--58% of those remained off AFDC and were still employed; the remainder had
married or were no longer receiving benefits for other reasons;
--75% had retained the same job; and
The average increase in wages was 16%.
*
In Fiscal Year 1992, 9,622 people entered employment with help from Project
Success.
*
Since the beginning of Project Success, almost 17,000 dases have been
closed and over 5,000 benefits have been reduced as a result of employment.
?
*
Under Clinton's leadership, the Arkansas Child Support Enforcement Unit has
received national recognition for identifying fathers and aggressive enforcement of
child support payments. Child support collections totalled more than $41 million in
1991, a 20% increase from 1990.
-25-
Among the tools used by the Child Support Enforcement Unit are income
withholding for children's health care coverage, reporting overdue support payments
to umer reporting agencies, and the establishment of a rebuttable presumption
of paternity if the father's name and social security number are recorded on the birth
record.
Another Clinton measure provides income withholding for health care
premiums of minor children as a part of child support, to provide better health care for
children.
Regarding the problems of those who are homeless:
Governor Clinton established the Arkansas Interagency Council for the
Homeless to survey the Arkansas homeless population and to coordinate the services
of 30 state agencies for maximum impact. The number of identified homeless
shelters has quadrupled since 1986.
The Arkansas Homeless Children's Office (AHCO) was established in the
Education Department to address barriers keeping homeless children out of school.
AHCO collects and distributes information, conducts workshops, awards grants,
facilitates efforts between service providers and schools to expedite enrollment,
transportation, and educational services, and encourages advocacy for the homeless
school-age child.
The Arkansas Adult Education Section has served thousands of homeless
adults at local sites throughout the states in homeless shelters, substance abuse
treatment facilities, shelters for abused women, and schools.
*
Additional special services have been provided for the homeless elderly, the
homeless mentally ill, and homeless veterans.
PHOTOCOP
CLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY
RESERVA
-26-
Siburbs - -Training program (inteprated adience)
- B'fast
w/i 4 yrs
Message (15 Mins.)
1 permanent
welfare
- Clinton record VS. Bush read
That will at w in half
The Plan
end w as we know it
move move MS f
- CSE ($2B cuts. $50 AFDC)
out the welfore caseloud
in half
opposed min wage
vetoed EITC expansion (3/20), signed another
1
Wendell Prims
13.6 M
offer
10.9 in 1989
in hospital registration
3m to private sector at
1.2 of 3
CSE
-
not data
1/2 the welfare rolls
4.7m caseload
Job
50%
Train
2.yr time
93 94 95 96
Recession
1996
2
$10B
Elte 1 2 3 4
CDB
2yr 2456 (⁴)
ABLE TO work
CSE - .5m/1.4m Ellwood 8%
Exempt 25m/68m
IDAs
Job - .1ml .4m GAIN
CSE 0 .5 .5 1.0
I
Incapacited
Deables member
Health- 1.8m/5.2m .5m/1.4m 10-25% offmer-
exempt SSI pregnant
child under 3 (don & give
3 6.5 8.5 11.
mar yrs if have beby)
Employe 30 h amr
-
all who are on
"
2 yr. or more
Reces 2yr - .75m/2.2m
Pregarant &
PPF 3.5 5.5 65 7
$1,000/person
3m 0 1 2 3 2
A MEMO TO BILL CLINTON & THE MEDIA FROM MARTY WILSON
Bush said he would do anything to get re-elected. Why hasn't he
done something to get the economy moving faster and reduce unemployment?
Why doesn t Bush tell us now what he plans to do after the election?
I suspect it is bècause what he plans to do will hurt the majority of voters,
the middle class and poor, but it won t hurt the rich, you can count on that.
What we need is the CAKWOOD PLAN - A WEALTH TAX only on millionaires.
A three percent tax on their net wealth would bring in 180 billion dollars,
a 5% tax 300 billion. Make the rich sell some of their gov't bonds to pay
the wealth tax which would automatically reduce the federal debt.
INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE to $8.00 an hour ($16,000 a year) lifting
35 million people out of poverty. The gov't should give a youcher to each
working American. If he makes $4.25 an hour ($170 a week) the vounher
would be $3.75 an hour ($150 a week) for a total of $320 a week. People
would get off welfare for $8.00 an hour.
ANNUALLY
The gov' could save 160 billion dollars A as a result on "entitle-
ments" food stamps, welfare payments, Medicaid.
The larger paychecks would jump start the economy, resulting in
more peeple becoming employed, more taxes collected, a smaller budget
deficit.
The voucher would be a separate check made out by the employer
to the employee who would take the check to his bank for deposit. The
bank then sends it to the gov't for re-imbursement.
The voucher might be given only to workers age: 20 or over.
To better compete with cheap foreign labor, the minimum wage could
INCREASED
be lowered to $3.00 an hour, and the gov voucher to $5.00 an hour
Contrary to myths spread by the rich, taxing the rich more would
not decrease the incentive to work, it would increase the incentive to work.
It would not cut down on investment but combined with a higher minimum
wage the increased demand for goods would increase investment opportunities
A wealth tax on millionaires would affect only the top one percent
of Americans who now own.nearly 40% of the nation's wealth. One study shows
in 1976 they had only 18%. Under Reagan-Bush they increased their wealth
dramatically. Reagan's tax cuts were a big factor. A person making five
million dollars in 1980 paid 2.5 million taxes. After Reagan's tax cuts
only 1.5 million, a saving for him of 10 million dollars the last ten years.
Fact In 1982 the value of the stock market was one trillion
dollars, today four trillion. In 1982 the federal debt was one trillion
dollars, today four trillion. A family of four now owes the gov't $65,000,
their share of the debt. While the rich got richer, you got poorer.
Reed 9/9/92 2am DRAFT
Remarks Prepared for Delivery
Clayton County Office of Family & Children's Services
Jonesboro, Georgia
September 9, 1992
I'm so glad I had the chance to be here in Jonesboro
today to talk with people who are working hard to lift
themselves off welfare and go back to work. [Tell stories of
the mothers you will have just met who are in the program.]
I am here today, because like many of the people I met
this morning, I was born poor, in a state where more than
half the people lived below the poverty line. My mother was
widowed before I was born, and for my first years I lived
with my grandparents while my mother went back to nursing
school so she could get a job and support us.
1
I am here because like the good people who run this
program, I have spent the last decade back home in my state
working to change the welfare system to lift people out of
poverty and give people on welfare the skills they need to go
back to work. This has been the work of my life, and it will
be a central part of my presidency.
And I am here because I share a common belief with the
mothers and the counselors and the American people, that it
is time to end welfare as we know it. Today I want to share
my plan to do that.
Here in Georgia, and across this country, people are
working harder than ever and making less. Last week, the
Commerce Department reported that the average family saw
its income drop by $1,100 last year. Over the last decade,
2
the percentage of hard-work, low-wage jobs increased by
half. One of every ten Americans is on food stamps.
America's welfare rolls are full to bursting. The
number of welfare recipients has increased five times faster
under this administration than in the previous 12 years
under Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter combined. Three
million more people have gone on welfare since 1988; three
million more are out of work. When the poverty and jobless
rolls rise, we all pay -- in the past year, we've spent $8
billion more than three years ago on welfare and food stamps
alone.
It doesn't have to be that way. Today, I want to talk
about what we're doing in Arkansas to try to stem the
national tide. We rank first in the country over the last 12
3
months in job creation. We've created good manufacturing
jobs at the ten times the national rate. And even though
Arkansas is a poor state with the second lowest tax burden
in America, we have a job training program that is moving
thousands of people off the welfare rolls and onto the work
rolls every year.
I've been working on this issue harder, longer, than just
about anybody. In the mid-1980s, I chaired the National
Governors' Association Task Force on Welfare Reform, and
worked with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan to write and
enact the Family Support Act of 1988, the most
comprehensive welfare reform law ever passed.
We wanted to make Arkansas a showcase for welfare
reform. So in 1989, we launched a JOBS program called
4
Project Success. Our program gives people the child care,
health care, and training they need to get off welfare. And
in just three years, we've moved 17,000 people from welfare
to work. Arkansas taxpayers save $12 million a year because
people on welfare have found work or had their benefits
reduced.
Independent researchers from a group called the
Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation came to
Arkansas to look at Project Success and concluded that it
was one of the three best welfare-to-work programs they had
found in the nation.
If we can do that in a poor state like Arkansas, think
what we can do for the country.
5
I want to build on the lessons of Project Success in
Arkansas to take the Family Support Act a step further. We
need to reform our welfare system so that it puts people back
to work and ends permanent dependency.
Welfare ought to be a second chance, not a way of life.
We can't afford to tinker around the edges. It's time to end
welfare as we know it. The system is broken, and we need
to start over with a new approach based on two simple
principles:
* First, people who can work ought to go to work, and
no one who can work should be able to stay on welfare
forever; and
* Second, no one who works full-time with a family at
home should live in poverty.
6
Under my plan, we'll give everyone the education,
training, child care and medical coverage they need, but
after two years, they'll have to take a job in the private
sector or start earning their way through community service.
A two-year time limit for AFDC recipients will restore the
covenant that welfare was first meant to be: a temporary
hand to people who've fallen on hard times.
That isn't a conservative idea, or a liberal idea; it's both
and it's different -- and we know it will work. By the time
we're through, we won't have a welfare program; we'll have
a job program.
My plan, Putting People First, sets money aside for
expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit [$2 billion/year]
and reforming the welfare system [$4 billion/year] -- and
7
pays for those investments through cuts in wasteful
government spending, defense savings, and higher taxes on
the wealthiest 2% of Americans whose incomes went up in
the '80s while their taxes went down.
When you consider that if we don't change the welfare
system, a quarter of the people now on welfare will still be
there in the year 2000, you can be sure that my plan will
save a lot of money down the road. And more important, it
can help save millions of Americans from a life of
dependence.
We've heard a lot of talk this year about family values,
and that's fine with me. I wouldn't be here if it weren't for
family values. But one of the most important values we need
8
in this country if we're going to be pro-family is to be pro-
work.
Under the current system, there are too many incentives
for poor people not to work. Going to work today means
less money in your pocket. Going to work today means
losing medical coverage and child care benefits, giving up
Medicaid, and struggling to find a job that doesn't pay
enough to lift them out of poverty.
I want to make work pay by expanding the Earned
Income Tax Credit for the working poor. No one who works
full-time and has a family at home should be poor -- not in
America.
9
At the same time, we need to control health care costs
and assure all Americans that they can get affordable health
care when they go to work. Medicaid rolls are breaking the
bank in every state in this country. Skyrocketing health care
premiums aren't just robbing this country of billions of
dollars in administrative waste; they're costing us jobs and
they're forcing people onto the poverty rolls because they
can't get care anywhere else.
If we're pro-work, we ought to unleash the energies of
every community to create more good jobs in poor
neighborhoods. My plan will create a national network of
Community Development Banks to give low-income
entrepreneurs the tools to start new businesses. The South
Shore Bank in Chicago, and its rural counterpart in my
home state, the Southern Development Bancorporation, help
10
bolster poor communities by providing housing loans and
extending credit to those who want to start a small business.
Banks, non-profit organizations, churches, and local
governments can work together as partners to generate jobs,
opportunity and hope.
We've got to be pro-savings as well. Earlier this year,
the government ordered a young woman in New Haven,
Connecticut, and her family to repay welfare benefits
because she was saving money from a part-time job to put
herself through college. That's wrong. We ought to raise
the asset limit and encourage poor people to save for job
training, college, and other paths to independence.
Finally, if we believe in family values, it's time we
toughen our child support enforcement laws and launch a
11
nationwide crackdown on deadbeat parents. I'll tell you one
thing I've learned over the last decade: Governments don't
raise children; parents do.
Today, much of the money we spend on welfare goes
toward children whose fathers could afford to pay child
support but do not. If we want to do something about the
fact that one child in four is born in poverty in this country,
we can start by tracking down an estimated $25 billion in
unpaid child support. That is one reason it disturbed me to
learn that President Bush, in his Midsession Review, has
proposed a cut of more than $2 billion in funds to enforce
the law and track down deadbeats.
As President, I'll push for the toughest child support
enforcement possible. In Arkansas, if you fall more than a
12
thousand dollars behind in your child support, we report you
to every major credit agency in the state. Last year, we
collected more than $41 million from deadbeat dads -- money
that we now don't have to pay in welfare or other public
spending.
My plan will set up a national deadbeat data bank,
begin a national system of child support collection through
automatic wage withholding, and make an all-out effort to
establish paternity in the hospital when the baby is born, not
in the courts after the father has left. We'll enlist major
credit agencies in a nationwide effort to send a message to
deadbeat parents: If you don't pay child support for your
children, you shouldn't get credit for yourself. It's time we
send a clear message that people who bring children into this
world have a responsibility to raise them.
13
In the end, this isn't about government programs; it's
about real people and their families. There will never be a
government program for every problem. The only thing that
holds us together is the daily assumption of personal
responsibility by millions of Americans from all walks of life.
And the one thing that can move us forward is the
assumption of personal responsibility by the President of the
United States to stop the division and blame and start
challenging people to make the most of their lives.
A few years ago, I asked a woman in the welfare-to-
work program in Arkansas what she liked best about her
new job. She said she enjoyed the work and liked earning
a paycheck, but the best thing was that when her son was
asked at school what his mother does for a living, he could
give an answer.
14
I hope you'll remember that for the next 55 days.
When people assume responsibility and shoulder the common
load, they acquire a dignity they never knew before. When
people go to work, they rediscover a pride that was lost.
When fathers pay their child support, they restore a
connection they and their children need. When the privilege
of serving is enough of a perk for people in Congress, and
the President finally assumes responsibility for America's
problems, we'll not only stop doing wrong, we'll begin to do
what is right to move America forward.
If you remember your responsibilities to yourselves and
your future on November 3, I'll never forget mine as your
President. Thank you.
-- END --
15
Page data
- Page
- 85
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 21cac7845f69d1a0
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 26413431
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "26413431",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Welfare Reform - [Miscellaneous] [3]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431",
"collections": [
"Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
"Bruce Reed's General Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"imageCount": 85,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "26413431",
"label": "Welfare Reform - [Miscellaneous] [3]",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "26413431",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Welfare Reform - [Miscellaneous] [3]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431",
"collections": [
"Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
"Bruce Reed's General Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-JPG/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_156_009_2015_Page_001.JPG",
"imageCount": 85,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413431",
"naId": 26413431,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"otherTitles": [
"42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015"
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 85,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/31/4134/26413431/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-General/2011-0299-S-General-PDF/Box_156/42-t-7367462-20110299S-156-009-2015.pdf",
"mediaId": "21cac7845f69d1a0",
"ocrText": "2/1/95\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n5.11:\nThere AN still 3 o n &\ncharges me ylan t MAKE\nin this vension; most AM\nmiver.\nRoom\n103D CONGRESS\n1ST SESSION\nH.R.\nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nMr. SHAW (for himself, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. GRANDY, Mr.\nSANTORUM, and Mr. GINGRICH) introduced the following bill; which was\nreferred to the Committee on\nA BILL\nTo amend title IV of the Social Security Act to provide\nwelfare families with the education, training, job search,\nand work experience needed to prepare them to leave\nwelfare within 2 years, to authorize States to conduct\ndemonstration projects to test the effectiveness of policies\ndesigned to help people leave welfare and increase their\nfinancial security, and for other purposes.\n1\nBe it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-\n2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n4\nThis Act may be cited as the \"Welfare Transition and\n5 Work Program Act\".\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n2\n1 SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.\n2\nThe table of contents of this Act is as follows:\nSec. 1. Short title.\nSec. 2. Table of contents.\nTITLE I-AFDC TRANSITION AND WORK PROGRAM\nSec. 101. AFDC transition and work program.\nSec. 102. Community work experience program amendments.\nSec. 103. Work supplementation program amendments.\nSec. 104. Effective date; regulations.\nTITLE I-DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS\nSec. 201. Authority to grant waivers to provisions of social welfare statutes to\nbetter enable providers of social services to promote self-suffi-\nciency.\nTITLE ILI-MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS\nSec. 301. AFDC recipients required to undergo necessary substance abuse\ntreatment as a condition of receiving AFDC.\nSec. 302. Authority of State to modify certain AFDC income disregard rules.\nSec. 303. Enhanced match for expenditures for JOBS program available for all\npersonnel expenditures.\n3 TITLE I-AFDC TRANSITION AND\n4\nWORK PROGRAM\n5 SEC. 101. AFDC TRANSITION AND WORK PROGRAM.\n6\n(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 402(a) of the Social Secu-\n7 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by inserting after\n8 paragraph (28) the following:\n9\n\"(29) provide that-\n10\n\"(A) the State must have in effect a pro-\n11\ngram that-\n12\n\"(i) provides qualified individuals with\n13\nthe education, training, and work experi-\n14\nence needed to prepare them for a life\n15\nwithout aid under the plan; and\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n3\n1\n\"(ii) consists of-\n2\n\"(I) a transition component,\n3\nwhich must include the job search\n4\nprogram established by the State\n5\nunder section 482(g), and which may\n6\ninclude any other service, activity, or\n7\nprogram of the State that is referred\n8\nto in section 482(d)(1); and\n9\n\"(II) a work component, which\n10\nmay include a work supplementation\n11\nprogram operated by the State under\n12\nsection 482(e), a community work ex-\n13\nperience program established by the\n14\nState under section 482(f), or any\n15\nother work program of the State that\n16\nis approved by the Secretary;\n17\n\"(B)(i) as used in this paragraph, the term\n18\n'qualified individual' means—\n19\n\"(I) on and after October 1, 1994, all\n20\nindividuals eligible for aid under the plan\n21\nwho applied for such aid on or after such\n22\ndate;\n23\n\"(II) on and after October 1, 1998,\n24\nall individuals eligible for aid under the\n25\nplan; and\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n4\n1\n\"(ii) notwithstanding clause (i), the term\n2\n'qualified individual' does not include any\n3\nindividual-\n4\n\"(I) who is incapacitated;\n5\n\"(II) at the option of the State, who\n6\nis making progress in a substance abuse\n7\ntreatment program, unless this subclause\n8\nhas been applied to the individual for 12\n9\nmonths;\n10\n\"(III) during such 6-month period as\n11\nthe individual may select, in which the in-\n12\ndividual gives birth to the first child born\n13\nalive to the individual after becoming eligi-\n14\nble for aid under this part;\n15\n\"(IV) during such 4-month period as\n16\nthe individual may select, in which the in-\n17\ndividual gives birth to the second or sub-\n18\nsequent child born alive to the individual\n19\nafter becoming eligible for aid under this\n20\npart;\n21\n\"(V) who is the parent of a child who\n22\nwas returned to the home of the individual\n23\nduring the preceding 2 months after hav-\n24\ning been removed from the home; or\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n5\n1\n\"(VI) who is providing full-time care\n2\nfor a disabled dependent of the individual;\n3\n\"(C)(i) each qualified individual must par-\n4\nticipate in the transition component, except as\n5\notherwise provided in this subparagraph;\n6\n\"(ii) a qualified individual may not be re-\n7\nquired (but may be allowed) to participate in\n8\nthe transition component if, on the basis of de-\n9\nmographic criteria, the State finds that it is un-\n10\nlikely that the individual will be a recipient of\n11\naid under the plan during a significant length\n12\nof time;\n13\n\"(iii) a qualified individual may not par-\n14\nticipate in the transition component if the indi-\n15\nvidual has elected to participate in the work\n16\ncomponent; and\n17\n\"(iv) a qualified individual may not partici-\n18\npate in the transition component after the first\n19\n24 months for which the individual is a quali-\n20\nfied individual;\n21\n\"(D)(i) each qualified individual participat-\n22\ning in the transition component must partici-\n23\npate in activities under such component for an\n24\naverage of not fewer than 10 hours per week\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n6\n1\nduring the first 24 months of such participa-\n2\ntion;\n3\n\"(ii) the State, in consultation with the\n4\nSecretary, must establish guidelines by which\n5\ndeterminations under clause (i) will be made,\n6\nand which, in the case of educational activities\n7\nunder the transition component, must provide\n8\nthat an individual who is enrolled full-time in a\n9\nprogram of study at an educational institution\n10\n(including a vocational or technical training\n11\nschool), as determined by the institution, and is\n12\nmaking satisfactory progress in the program of\n13\nstudy, as determined by the institution, is to be\n14\nregarded as participating in the transition com-\n15\nponent, in accordance with such rules as the\n16\nSecretary may prescribe (including rules gov-\n17\nerning how time spent in such a program of\n18\nstudy is to be converted into hours of participa-\n19\ntion in the transition component);\n20\n\"(E)(i) the State must require each quali-\n21\nfied individual (or, in the case of a family which\n22\nhas received aid under the plan by reason of\n23\nsection 407, at least 1 parent (or, at the option\n24\nof the State, both parents) in the family) who\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n7\n1\nis not participating in the transition component\n2\nto participate in the work component; and\n3\n\"(ii) any qualified individual participating\n4\nin the work component, may, with the approval\n5\nof the State, discontinue participation in the\n6\nwork component and begin or resume participa-\n7\ntion in the transition component, subject to\n8\nsubparagraph (C)(iv);\n9\n\"(iii) the State may, at its option, exempt\n10\na qualified individual, during 12 of the first 24\n11\nmonths for which an individual is a qualified in-\n12\ndividual, from the requirement to participate in\n13\nthe transition component or the work compo-\n14\nnent if the individual is described in paragraph\n15\n(35) (A) and is in compliance with paragraph\n16\n(35)(A);\n17\n\"(F) each qualified individual must cooper-\n18\nate with the State in developing a plan which-\n19\n\"(i) describes the respective respon-\n20\nsibilities of the State and of the individual\n21\nunder the program with the goal of prepar-\n22\ning the individual for work; and\n23\n\"(ii) includes a written statement in-\n24\nforming the individual that, upon comple-\n25\ntion of the transition component, aid under\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n8\n1\nthe State plan under this part will be dis-\n2\ncontinued unless the individual finds gain-\n3\nful employment or is participating in the\n4\nwork component;\n5\n\"(G) at the end of the first 12 months for\n6\nwhich an individual is a qualified individual (or,\n7\nat the option of the State, more frequently), the\n8\nState must determine whether the individual is\n9\nmaking clear and substantial progress toward\n10\npreparing for work (as defined by the State in\n11\nconsultation with the Secretary);\n12\n((H) if the State determines that a quali-\n13\nfied individual has failed to meet any require-\n14\nment imposed under this paragraph-\n15\n\"(i) in the case of the 1st such failure,\n16\nsubclauses (I) and (II) of section\n17\n402(a)(19)(G)(i) shall apply until the fail-\n18\nure to comply ceases;\n19\n\"(ii) in the case of the 2nd such fail-\n20\nure, subclauses (I) and (II) of section\n21\n402(a)(19)(G)(i) shall apply until the fail-\n22\nure to comply ceases or 3 months, which-\n23\never is longer; and\n24\n\"(iii) in the case of the 3rd such fail-\n25\nure, the family of the individual shall not\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n9\n1\nbe eligible for aid under the State plan\n2\nunder this part, notwithstanding any other\n3\nprovision of this part;\n4\n\"(I) at the option of the State, the State\n5\nmay impose a rule under which the family of an\n6\nindividual shall not be eligible for aid under the\n7\nState plan under this part, notwithstanding any\n8\nother provision of this part, after the individual\n9\nhas been required to participate in the work\n10\ncomponent for a period (determined by the\n11\nState) of not less than 3 years; and\n12\n\"(J) if a family becomes ineligible for aid\n13\nunder the State plan under this part by reason\n14\nof subparagraph (H) (iii) or (I), the family shall,\n15\nfor purposes of medical assistance under the\n16\nState plan under title XIX, be deemed to be a\n17\nrecipient of aid under the State plan under this\n18\npart for SO long as the family is otherwise eligi-\n19\nble for aid under the State plan under this\n20\npart.\"\n21\n(b) PAYMENTS TO STATES.-Section 403 of such Act\n22 (42 U.S.C. 603) is amended by adding at the end the fol-\n23 lowing:\n24\n\"(o) (1) Each State which has been paid under sub-\n25 section (1) for any fiscal year an amount equal to the lim-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n10\n1 itation determined under subsection (k)(2) for the fiscal\n2 year, and which operates a program under section\n3 402(a)(29), shall be entitled to payments under paragraph\n4 (4) of this subsection for the fiscal year in an amount\n5 equal to the lesser of-\n6\n\"(A) the sum of the applicable percentages\n7\n(specified in such paragraph (4)) of its expenditures\n8\nto carry out the program (subject to limitations pre-\n9\nscribed by or pursuant to such section or such para-\n10\ngraph (4) on expenditures that may be included for\n11\npurposes of determining payment under such para-\n12\ngraph (4)); or\n13\n\"(B) the limitation determined under paragraph\n14\n(2) of this subsection with respect to the State for\n15\nthe fiscal year.\n16\n\"(2) The limitation determined under this paragraph\n17 with respect to a State for any fiscal year is the amount\n18 that bears the same ratio to the amount specified in para-\n19 graph (3) for the fiscal year as the average monthly num-\n20 ber of adult recipients (as defined in subsection (k)(4))\n21 in the State in the preceding fiscal year bears to the aver-\n22 age monthly number of such recipients in all the States\n23 for such preceding year.\n24\n\"(3) The amount specified in this paragraph is-\n25\n\"(A) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 1994;\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n11\n1\n\"(B) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 1995;\n2\n\"(C) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 1996;\n3\n\"(D) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 1997; and\n4\n\"(E) $1,500,000,000 for fiscal year 1998.\n5\n\"(4) Each State which has been paid under sub-\n6 section (1) for a fiscal year an amount equal to the limita-\n7 tion determined under subsection (k)(2) for the fiscal year,\n8 and which operates a program under section 402(a)(29)\n9 during the fiscal year shall, in addition to any payment\n10 under subsection (a) or (1), be entitled to payment from\n11 the Secretary of an amount equal to-\n12\n\"(A) 50 percent of the expenditures of the\n13\nState for administrative costs incurred in operating\n14\nthe program during the fiscal year (other than per-\n15\nsonnel costs for staff employed in the operation of\n16\nthe program); and\n17\n\"(B) the greater of 70 percent or the Federal\n18\nmedical assistance percentage (as defined in section\n19\n1118 in the case of a State to which section 1108\n20\napplies, or as defined in section 1905(b) in the case\n21\nof any other State) of the other expenditures of the\n22\nState incurred in operating the program during the\n23\nfiscal year.\n24\n\"(5)(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (4), the Sec-\n25 retary shall pay to a State an amount equal to 50 percent\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n12\n1 of the expenditures of the State incurred in operating the\n2 program under section 402(a)(29) during a fiscal year if\n3 the State's participation rate (determined under subpara-\n4 graph (B)) for the immediately preceding fiscal year is less\n5 than-\n6\n\"(i) 15 percent if the preceding fiscal year is\n7\n1994;\n8\n\"(ii) 20 percent if such year is 1995;\n9\n\"(iii) 30 percent if such year is 1996;\n10\n'(iv) 40 percent if such year is 1997;\n11\n\"(v) 50 percent if such year is 1998;\n12\n\"(vi) 60 percent if such year is 1999; and\n13\n\"(vii) 70 percent if such year is 2000.\n14\n\"(B)(i) The State's participation rate for a fiscal year\n15 shall be the average of its participation rates for each\n16 month in the fiscal year.\n17\n\"(ii) The State's participation rate for a month shall\n18 be the number, expressed as a percentage, equal to-\n19\n\"(I) the number of individuals who participated\n20\nin the State's program under section 402(a)(29) in\n21\nthe month; divided by\n22\n\"(II) the number of individuals required to par-\n23\nticipate in the program in the month (including indi-\n24\nviduals with respect to whom the State has exercised\n25\nits option to require their participation).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n13\n1\n\"(iii) For purposes of this subparagraph, an individ-\n2 ual shall not be considered to have satisfactorily partici-\n3 pated in the program under section 402(a)(29) solely by\n4 reason of the individual being registered to participate in\n5 the program.\n6\n\"(C) For purposes of this paragraph, an individual\n7 shall be considered to have participated in the program\n8 under section 402(a)(29) if the individual has participated\n9 in accordance with such requirements, consistent with reg-\n10 ulations of the Secretary, as the State shall establish.\n11\n\"(D) If the Secretary determines that a State has\n12 failed to achieve the participation rate for any fiscal year\n13 specified in subparagraph (A), the Secretary may waive,\n14 in whole or in part, the reduction in the payment rate oth-\n15 erwise required by subparagraph (A) if the Secretary finds\n16 that the State—\n17\n\"(i) is in conformity with section 402(a)(29);\n18\n\"(ii) has made a good faith effort to achieve the\n19\nparticipation rate; and\n20\n\"(iii) has submitted a proposal which is likely\n21\nto achieve the applicable participation rates for the\n22\ncurrent fiscal year and any succeeding fiscal year SO\n23\nspecified.\"\n24\n(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.-Section 403(1)(3)\n25 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 603(1)(3)) is amended-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n14\n1\n(1) in subparagraph (A)-\n2\n(A) by striking \"and\" at the end of clause\n3\n(v);\n4\n(B) by striking the period in clause (vi)\n5\nand inserting a semicolon; and\n6\n(C) by adding at the end the following:\n7\n\"(vii) 30 percent if such year is 1996;\n8\n\"(viii) 40 percent if such year is 1997;\n9\n\"(ix) 50 percent if such year is 1998;\n10\n\"(x) 60 percent if such year is 1999; and\n11\n\"(xi) 70 percent if such year is 2000.\"; and\n12\n(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)(IV), by striking\n13\n\"and 1995\" and inserting \"through 2000\".\n14 SEC. 102. COMMUNITY WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM\n15\nAMENDMENTS.\n16\nSection 482(f)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42\n17 U.S.C. 682(f)(1)(B)) is amended—\n18\n(1) in clause (i)-\n19\n(A) by inserting \"(I)\" after \"(B)(i)\"; and\n20\n(B) by striking \"(as determined by the\n21\nState)\" and inserting \"in the transition compo-\n22\nnent of the program under section 402(a)(29)\n23\nwho is required to participate in the program\n24\nestablished under this subsection\"; and\n25\n(C) by adding at the end the following:\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n15\n1\n\"(II) Each participant in the work component of the\n2 program under section 402(a)(29) who is required to par-\n3 ticipate in the program established under this subsection\n4 may not be required to work in any month for a number\n5 of hours that exceeds 35 (or 30, if the State requires the\n6 participant to engage in a job search program established\n7 by the State under subsection (g)) and\n8\n(2) in clause (ii), by inserting \"who is a partici-\n9\npant in the transition component of the program\n10\nunder section 402(a)(29)\" after \"an individual\".\n11 SEC. 103. WORK SUPPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AMEND-\n12\nMENTS.\n13\n(a) AUTHORITY OF STATES TO ASSIGN PARTICI-\n14 PANTS TO UNFILLED JoBs.-Section 484(c) of the Social\n15 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 684(c)) is amended by striking\n16 the last sentence.\n17\n(b) AUTHORITY OF STATES TO USE SUMS THAT\n18 WOULD OTHERWISE BE EXPENDED FOR FOOD STAMP\n19 BENEFITS TO PROVIDE SUBSIDIZED JOBS FOR PARTICI-\n20 PANTS.-\n21\n(1) IN GENERAL.-Section 482(e)(1) of such\n22\nAct (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(1)) is amended-\n23\n(A) by inserting \", and the sums that\n24\nwould otherwise be used to provide participants\n25\nin the program under this subsection with food\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n16\n1\nstamp benefits under the Food Stamp Act of\n2\n1977,\" before \"and use\"; and\n3\n(B) by inserting \"and the food stamp ben-\n4\nefits that would otherwise be SO provided to\n5\nthem\" before the period.\n6\n(2) SUBSIDIES PROVIDED TO EMPLOYERS AND\n7\nINCLUDED IN WAGES OF PARTICIPANTS; MINIMUM\n8\nEMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION.-Section 482(e)(3) of\n9\nsuch Act (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(3)) is amended by add-\n10\ning at the end the following:\n11\n\"(E) Each State operating a work supplementation\n12 program under this subsection shall enter into an agree-\n13 ment with the employer who is to provide an eligible indi-\n14 vidual with a supplemented job under the program, under\n15 which-\n16\n\"(i) the State is required to pay the employer\n17\nan amount specified in the agreement as the sub-\n18\nsidized portion of the wages of the eligible individ-\n19\nual; and\n20\n\"(ii) the employer is required to pay the eligible\n21\nindividual wages which, when added to an amount\n22\nthat will be payable as aid to families with depend-\n23\nent children to the individual if the individual is paid\n24\nsuch wages, are not less than 125 percent of the\n25\nsum of-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n17\n1\n\"(I) the amount that would otherwise be\n2\npayable as aid to families with dependent chil-\n3\ndren to the eligible individual if the State did\n4\nnot have a work supplementation program\n5\nunder this subsection in effect; and\n6\n\"(II) if the State elects to subsidize jobs\n7\nfor participants in the program through the res-\n8\nervation of sums that would otherwise be used\n9\nto provide such participants with food stamp\n10\nbenefits under the Food Stamp Act of 1977,\n11\nthe amount paid to the State by the Secretary\n12\nof Agriculture that represents the cash value of\n13\nthe food stamp benefits for which the household\n14\nof the eligible individual is a member is eligible\n15\nunder such Act.\n16\n\"(F) For purposes of computing the amount of the\n17 Federal payment to a State under paragraph (1) or (2)\n18 of section 403(a), for expenditures incurred in making\n19 payments to individuals and employers under the State's\n20 work supplementation program under this section, the\n21 State may claim as such expenditures the maximum\n22 amount payable to the State under paragraph (4) of this\n23 subsection.\n24\n\"(G) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a State may\n25 use for any purpose the sums reserved under paragraph\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n18\n1 (1) which are not used to subsidize jobs under this sub-\n2 section attributable to savings achieved by operation of\n3 subparagraph (E).\"\n4\n(3)\nCONFORMING\nAMENDMENT.-Section\n5\n482(e)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 682(e)(3)(A))\n6\nis amended by striking the 2nd sentence.\n7\n(4) EMPLOYMENT CASHOUT OF FOOD STAMP\n8\nBENEFITS.-Section 16 of the Food Stamp Act of\n9\n1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025) is amended by adding at the\n10\nend the following:\n11\n\"(1) If a State agency of a State that makes the elec-\n12 tion described in section 482(e)(3)(E)(ii)(II) of the Social\n13 Security Act informs the Secretary that an individual who\n14 is participating in the work supplementation program car-\n15 ried out under section 482(e) of such Act is a member\n16 of a household that participates in the food stamp pro-\n17 gram and all the members of the household receive bene-\n18 fits under a State plan approved under part A of title IV\n19 of such Act-\n20\n\"(1) the Secretary shall pay to the State an\n21\namount equal to the value of the food stamp benefits\n22\nthe household is eligible to receive under this Act;\n23\n\"(2) the State shall expend the amount in ac-\n24\ncordance with section 482(e)(3) of the Social Secu-\n25\nrity Act to make a payment to the individual in lieu\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n19\n1\nof food stamp benefits the household would receive\n2\nbut for the operation of this subsection;\n3\n\"(3) for purposes of-\n4\n\"(A) sections 5 and 8(a) of this Act, the\n5\namount shall be excluded from household in-\n6\ncome and resources; and\n7\n\"(B) section 8(b) of this Act, the amount\n8\nshall be considered as the value of an allotment\n9\nprovided to the household; and\n10\n\"(4) the household shall not receive food stamp\n11\nbenefits from the State agency for the period during\n12\nwhich the member continues to participate in the\n13\nwork supplementation program.\".\n14 SEC. 104. EFFECTIVE DATE; REGULATIONS.\n15\n(a) EFFECTIVE DATE.-\n16\n(1) IN GENERAL-Except as provided in para-\n17\ngraph (2), the amendments made by this Act shall\n18\ntake effect on October 1, 1994.\n19\n(2) STATE OPTION FOR EARLY APPLICABIL-\n20\nITY.-If a State formally notifies the Secretary of\n21\nHealth and Human Services of its desire operate a\n22\nprogram of the type authorized by the amendment\n23\nmade by section 101(a), during any period which be-\n24\ngins after the date of the enactment of this Act and\n25\nends on September 30, 1994, with respect to 1 or\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n20\n1\nmore groups of individuals selected by the State who\n2\nare eligible for aid under the State plan approved\n3\nunder section 402 of the Social Security Act, and\n4\nmakes such changes in the plan as are required in\n5\norder to operate the program in accordance with the\n6\namendment (except that, in lieu of the definition\n7\ncontained in subparagraph (B)(i) of the amendment,\n8\nthere is substituted a definition which describes such\n9\ngroup or groups) then-\n10\n(A) except as provided in subparagraph\n11\n(B) of this paragraph, the amendments made\n12\nby this Act (with such exceptions) shall apply to\n13\nthe State during the period; and\n14\n(B) subsection (0)(4)(B) of the amendment\n15\nmade by section 101(b) of this Act shall be ap-\n16\nplied to the State for the first 12 months of\n17\nsuch period by substituting '85 percent' for 'the\n18\ngreater of 70 percent or the Federal medical as-\n19\nsistance percentage (as defined in section 1118\n20\nin the case of a State to which section 1108 ap-\n21\nplies, or as defined in section 1905(b) in the\n22\ncase of any other State)'.\n23\n(b) REGULATIONS.-Not later than 1 year after the\n24 effective date of this Act, the Secretary of Health and\n25 Human Services shall prescribe such regulations as may\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n21\n1 be necessary to enable States to establish and operate pro-\n2 grams of the type authorized by the amendment made by\n3 section 101(a).\n4\nTITLE II-DEMONSTRATION\n5\nPROJECTS\n6 SEC. 201. AUTHORITY TO GRANT WAIVERS TO PROVISIONS\n7\nOF SOCIAL WELFARE STATUTES TO BETTER\n8\nENABLE PROVIDERS OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO\n9\nPROMOTE SELF-SUFFICIENCY.\n10\n(a) INTERAGENCY WAIVER REQUEST BOARD.-\n11\n(1) ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE.-In order\n12\nto provide a focal point within the Federal Govern-\n13\nment for the development and coordination of waiver\n14\nrequests designed to improve opportunities for low-\n15\nincome individuals and families, there is established\n16\nan Interagency Waiver Request Board (in this sub-\n17\nsection referred to as the \"Board\") which shall pro-\n18\nvide advice to the Chairman of the Board (in this\n19\nsection referred to as the \"Chairman\") in carrying\n20\nout this section.\n21\n(2) MEMBERSHIP.-\n22\n(A) PERMANENT MEMBERS.-The Board\n23\nshall consist of 8 permanent members, as fol-\n24\nlows:\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n22\n1\n(i) A Chairman appointed by and\n2\nserving at the pleasure of the President.\n3\n(ii) The Secretary of Agriculture (or\n4\nthe designee of the Secretary).\n5\n(iii) The Secretary of Health and\n6\nHuman Services (or the designee of the\n7\nSecretary).\n8\n(iv) The Secretary of Housing and\n9\nUrban Development (or the designee of the\n10\nSecretary).\n11\n(v) The Secretary of Labor (or the\n12\ndesignee of the Secretary).\n13\n(vi) The Secretary of the Interior (or\n14\nthe designee of the Secretary).\n15\n(vii) The Attorney General of the\n16\nUnited States (or the designee of the At-\n17\ntorney General).\n18\n(viii) The Director of the Office of\n19\nManagement and Budget (or the designee\n20\nof the Director).\n21\n(B) LIMITED PURPOSE MEMBERS.-In ad-\n22\ndition, for the purpose of carrying out the duty\n23\nof the Board to provide advice to the Chairman\n24\nwith respect to a particular application for\n25\nwaivers under this section, or with respect to\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n23\n1\nthe implementation of the reforms proposed in\n2\nthe application, the Board shall include the\n3\nhead of each department or agency (or the des-\n4\nignee of the head) having responsibility for the\n5\nadministration of a program which the applica-\n6\ntion proposes to reform.\n7\n(3) VACANCY.-A vacancy in the position of\n8\nChairman shall be filled in the manner in which the\n9\noriginal appointment was made.\n10\n(4) COMPENSATION OF CHAIRMAN.-\n11\n(A) BASIC PAY.-\n12\n(i) IN GENERAL.-The Chairman shall\n13\nbe paid at a rate equal to the rate of basic\n14\npay payable for level II of the Executive\n15\nSchedule.\n16\n(ii) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-Sec-\n17\ntion 5313 of title 5, United States Code, is\n18\namended by adding at the end the fol-\n19\nlowing new item:\n20\n\"Chairman, Interagency Waiver Request\n21\nBoard.\"\n22\n(B) TRAVEL EXPENSES.-The Chairman\n23\nshall receive travel expenses, including per diem\n24\nin lieu of subsistence, in accordance with sec-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n24\n1\ntions 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States\n2\nCode.\n3\n(5) APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION OF\n4\nPERSONNEL.-The Chairman may appoint and fix\n5\nthe compensation of personnel as may be necessary\n6\nto assist the Board in carrying out the responsibil-\n7\nities of the Board, in accordance with chapter 51\n8\nand subchapters III and VIII of chapter 53 of title\n9\n5, United States Code.\n10\n(6) PROHIBITION AGAINST ADDITIONAL COM-\n11\nPENSATION OF FEDERAL OFFICERS OR EMPLOY-\n12\nEES.-Members of the Board who are full-time offi-\n13\ncers or employees of the United States (other than\n14\nthe Chairman) may not be provided additional pay,\n15\nallowances, or benefits by reason of their service on\n16\nthe Board.\n17\n(7) MEETINGS.-The Board shall meet not less\n18\nthan twice annually at the call of the Chairman.\n19\n(8) POWERS.-\n20\n(A) ASSISTANCE OF OTHER FEDERAL EN-\n21\nTITIES.-The head of each Federal department\n22\nor agency who is a permanent or other member\n23\nof the Board shall make available to the Board\n24\nsuch assistance as the Board may require to\n25\ncarry out the activities of the Board.\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n25\n1\n(B) USE OF UNITED STATES MAILS.-The\n2\nBoard may use the United States mails in the\n3\nsame manner and under the same conditions as\n4\nother departments and agencies of the United\n5\nStates.\n6\n(C) ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS, BEQUESTS,\n7\nAND DEVISES.-The Board may accept, use,\n8\nand dispose of gifts, bequests, or devises of\n9\nservices or property, both real and personal, for\n10\nthe purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of\n11\nthe Board. Gifts, bequests, or devises of money\n12\nand proceeds from sales of other property re-\n13\nceived as gifts, bequests, or devises shall be de-\n14\nposited in the Treasury and shall be available\n15\nfor disbursement upon order of the Chairman.\n16\n(9) ANNUAL REPORTS.-The Board shall trans-\n17\nmit annually to the Congress a report containing a\n18\ndetailed statement of the activities of the Board dur-\n19\ning the year covered by the report.\n20\n(b) APPLICATION FOR WAIVERS.-Any entity that is\n21 receiving or is eligible to receive Federal funds or other\n22 Federal assistance under a program referred to in sub-\n23 section (h) may submit to the Chairman an application\n24 which contains—\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n26\n1\n(1) a proposal to reform the conduct of the pro-\n2\ngram (and, if appropriate, any other such program)\n3\nby the entity;\n4\n(2) a written statement, from each other non-\n5\nFederal officer or entity to which the Federal funds\n6\nor assistance would otherwise be provided (either di-\n7\nrectly or through intervening levels of grantees or\n8\nother recipients) under the program or programs,\n9\nthat such other officer or entity approves of the pro-\n10\nposal and will cooperate in the implementation of the\n11\nproposal by the entity;\n12\n(3) a list of the provisions of law or regulation\n13\nwhich prevent the entity from implementing the pro-\n14\nposal; and\n15\n(4) a request that the Chairman, and the offi-\n16\ncer or officers of the Federal Government respon-\n17\nsible for the administration of the program or pro-\n18\ngrams proposed to be reformed, waive the applica-\n19\ntion of such provisions of law or regulation, to the\n20\nextent necessary to enable the entity to implement\n21\nthe proposal.\n22\n(c) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.-\n23\n(1) EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.-\n24\nThe Chairman shall--\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n27\n1\n(A) evaluate the proposal contained in any\n2\napplication submitted in accordance with sub-\n3\nsection (b), and make recommendations with re-\n4\nspect to the proposal; and\n5\n(B) transmit the application and rec-\n6\nommendations to the officer or officers referred\n7\nto in subsection (b) (4).\n8\n(2) INTERAGENCY COORDINATION.-The Chair-\n9\nman shall provide for the coordination of all actions\n10\nunder this section with respect to an application\n11\nsubmitted in accordance with subsection (b) that\n12\nproposes the coordinated implementation of reforms\n13\nto 2 or more programs referred to in subsection (h).\n14\n(d) AGENCY REVIEW.-Within 45 days after an offi-\n15 cer of the Federal Government receives an application\n16 transmitted pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(B), the officer\n17 shall review the application and notify the Chairman of\n18 the opinion of the officer as to-\n19\n(1) whether the program, as proposed to be re-\n20\nformed, would-\n21\n(A)(i) help certain individuals for whom\n22\nlong-term assistance is necessary to meet basic\n23\nhuman welfare needs and improve their living\n24\nconditions in the most efficient and effective\n25\nway possible; and\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n28\n1\n(ii) help able-bodied individuals and their\n2\nfamilies, on a temporary basis, meet basic\n3\nhuman welfare needs and improve their living\n4\nconditions in the most efficient and effective\n5\nway possible;\n6\n(B) help individuals and families acquire\n7\nskills necessary to-\n8\n(i) improve their living conditions sub-\n9\nstantially;\n10\n(ii) maintain and strengthen family\n11\nrelationships; and\n12\n(iii) attain or retain the capability for\n13\nmaximum self-support and independence;\n14\nor\n15\n(C) promote individual initiative and per-\n16\nsonal behavior consistent with progress toward\n17\nself-sufficiency and a strong family life;\n18\n(2) whether the program, as proposed to be re-\n19\nformed, would reasonably meet the needs of the in-\n20\ntended beneficiaries of the program; and\n21\n(3) whether granting the requested waiver\n22\nwould unnecessarily or unreasonably affect individ-\n23\nuals or families adversely.\n24\n(e) FINAL ACTION BY CHAIRMAN.-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n29\n1\n(1) WAIVER AUTHORITY.-The Chairman may\n2\napprove an application submitted in accordance with\n3\nsubsection (b) and grant the waiver or waivers pro-\n4\nposed in the application if-\n5\n(A) each officer to whom the Chairman\n6\ntransmitted the application pursuant to sub-\n7\nsection (c)(1)(B) has provided the Chairman\n8\nwith the notification required by subsection (d);\n9\nand\n10\n(B) the Chairman has determined that-\n11\n(i) the program, as proposed to be re-\n12\nformed, would meet the requirements of\n13\nany subparagraph of subsection (d) (1) and\n14\nreasonably meet the needs of the intended\n15\nbeneficiaries of the program; and\n16\n(ii) granting the requested waiver\n17\nwould not unnecessarily or unreasonably\n18\naffect individuals or families adversely.\n19\n(2) CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.-The Chairman\n20\nmay condition approval of the application on the ac-\n21\nceptance by the applicant of specified modifications\n22\nto the application.\n23\n(3) LIMITATION.-This subsection shall not be\n24\nconstrued to authorize the Chairman to waive the\n25\napplication to any State of a provision of law or reg-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n30\n1\nulation applicable to a program if the waiver would\n2\nresult in net payments by the Federal Government\n3\nto the State under the program for a fiscal year in\n4\nexcess of the net payments which would otherwise be\n5\nSO made to the State.\n6\n(f) REVOCATION OF WAIVER.-If, after granting a\n7 waiver under subsection (e) (1), the Chairman finds that\n8 the applicant has failed to carry out the program in ac-\n9 cordance with any applicable provision of law or regula-\n10 tion, or has failed to implement the reforms proposed in\n11 the application for the waiver, the Chairman may revoke\n12 the waiver in whole or in part, effective at such time as\n13 the Chairman deems appropriate.\n14\n(g) SPECIAL RULES.-For purposes of this section:\n15\n(1) INDIAN TRIBES DEEMED TO BE STATES.-\n16\nIn the case of a program referred to in subsection\n17\n(h) under which assistance is provided with respect\n18\nto an Indian Tribe, the Indian tribal organization is\n19\ndeemed to be the State.\n20\n(2) BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LEGAL\n21\nSERVICES CORPORATION DEEMED TO BE A FEDERAL\n22\nOFFICER.-The Board of Directors of the Legal\n23\nServices Corporation is deemed to be the officer of\n24\nthe Federal Government responsible for the adminis-\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n31\n1\ntration of the program referred to in subsection\n2\n(h)(67).\n3\n(h) PROGRAMS SUBJECT TO WAIVER AUTHORITY.-\n4 The programs referred to in this subsection are the fol-\n5 lowing:\n6\n(1) The program of medical assistance under\n7\ntitle XIX of the Social Security Act.\n8\n(2) The Maternal and Child Health Services\n9\nBlock Grant Program under title V of the Social Se-\n10\ncurity Act.\n11\n(3) The program established in section 330 of\n12\nthe Public Health Service Act (relating to commu-\n13\nnity health centers).\n14\n(4) The program established in section 1001 of\n15\nthe Public Health Service Act (relating to family\n16\nplanning methods and services).\n17\n(5) The program of cash and medical assistance\n18\nto refugees and Cuban/Haitian entrants under sec-\n19\ntion 412(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act\n20\n(8 U.S.C. 1522(e)) and through the exercise of au-\n21\nthority under section 501(a) of the Refugee Edu-\n22\ncation Assistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422).\n23\n(6) The program established in section 329 of\n24\nthe Public Health Service Act (relating to migrant\n25\nhealth centers).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n32\n1\n(7) The program of aid and services to needy\n2\nfamilies with children under part A of title IV of the\n3\nSocial Security Act.\n4\n(8) The child welfare services program under\n5\npart B of title IV of the Social Security Act.\n6\n(9) The supplemental security income program\n7\nunder title XVI of the Social Security Act.\n8\n(10) The program of foster care and adoption\n9\nassistance under part E of title IV of the Social Se-\n10\ncurity Act.\n11\n(11) The food stamp program, as defined in\n12\nsection 3(h) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7\n13\nU.S.C. 2012(h)).\n14\n(12) The school lunch program carried out\n15\nunder the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.\n16\n1751 et seq.).\n17\n(13) The special supplemental food program for\n18\nwomen, infants, and children carried out under sec-\n19\ntion 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42\n20\nU.S.C. 1786).\n21\n(14) The nutrition programs carried out under\n22\npart C of title III of the Older Americans Act of\n23\n1965 (42 U.S.C. 3030e et seq.).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n33\n1\n(15) The school breakfast program carried out\n2\nunder section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966\n3\n(42 U.S.C. 1773).\n4\n(16) The child and adult care food program\n5\ncarried out under section 17 of the National School\n6\nLunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1766).\n7\n(17) The Emergency Food Assistance Act of\n8\n1983 (7 U.S.C. 612c note).\n9\n(18) The summer food service program for chil-\n10\ndren carried out under section 13 of the National\n11\nSchool Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1761).\n12\n(19) The commodity supplemental food pro-\n13\ngram authorized by section 4(a) of the Agriculture\n14\nand Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C.\n15\n612c note).\n16\n(20) The special milk program carried out\n17\nunder section 3 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966\n18\n(42 U.S.C. 1772).\n19\n(21) The program of rental assistance on behalf\n20\nof low-income families provided under section 8 of\n21\nthe United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.\n22\n1437f).\n23\n(22) The program of assistance to public hous-\n24\ning under title I of the United States Housing Act\n25\nof 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n34\n1\n(23) The loan program under section 502 of the\n2\nHousing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472).\n3\n(24) The program of interest reduction pay-\n4\nments pursuant to contracts entered into by the Sec-\n5\nretary of Housing and Urban Development under\n6\nsection 236 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.\n7\n1715z-1).\n8\n(25) The program of loans for rental and coop-\n9\nerative housing under section 515 of the Housing\n10\nAct of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1485).\n11\n(26) The program of rental assistance pay-\n12\nments pursuant to contracts entered into under sec-\n13\ntion 521(a)(2)(A) of the Housing Act of 1949 (42\n14\nU.S.C. 1490a(a)(2)(A)).\n15\n(27) The program of assistance payments on\n16\nbehalf of homeowners under section 235 of the Na-\n17\ntional Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z).\n18\n(28) The program of rent supplement payments\n19\non behalf of qualified tenants pursuant to contracts\n20\nentered into under section 101 of the Housing and\n21\nUrban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s).\n22\n(29) The loan and grant programs under sec-\n23\ntion 504 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.\n24\n1474) for repairs and improvements to rural dwell-\n25\nings.\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n35\n1\n(30) The loan and assistance programs under\n2\nsections 514 and 516 of the Housing Act of 1949\n3\n(42 U.S.C. 1484, 1486) for housing for farm labor.\n4\n(31) The program of grants for preservation\n5\nand rehabilitation of housing under section 533 of\n6\nthe Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490m).\n7\n(32) The program of grants and loans for mu-\n8\ntual and self-help housing and technical assistance\n9\nunder section 523 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42\n10\nU.S.C. 1490c).\n11\n(33) The program of site loans under section\n12\n524 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490d).\n13\n(34) The program under part B of title IV of\n14\nthe Higher Education Act of 1965.\n15\n(35) The program under subpart 1 of part A of\n16\ntitle IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.\n17\n(36) The programs under the Head Start Act\n18\n(42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.)\n19\n(37) The program under part C of title IV of\n20\nthe Higher Education Act of 1965.\n21\n(38) The program under subpart 3 of part A of\n22\ntitle IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.\n23\n(39) The programs under the Carl D. Perkins\n24\nVocational and Applied Technology Education Act.\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n36\n1\n(40) The programs for migrant children under\n2\nsections 1201 through 1203 of the Elementary and\n3\nSecondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2781-\n4\n83).\n5\n(41) The program under chapter 1 of subpart\n6\n2 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act\n7\nof 1965.\n8\n(42) The program under part E of title IV of\n9\nHigher Education Act of 1965.\n10\n(43) The program under subpart 4 of part A of\n11\ntitle IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.\n12\n(44) The program under title IX of the Higher\n13\nEducation Act of 1965.\n14\n(45) The program under subpart 5 of part A of\n15\ntitle IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.\n16\n(46) The program under chapter 1 of title I of\n17\nthe Elementary and Secondary Education Act of\n18\n1965.\n19\n(47) The programs under the Follow Through\n20\nAct (42 U.S.C. 9861-9877).\n21\n(48) The programs established in sections 338A\n22\nand 338B of the Public Health Service Act and the\n23\nprograms established in part A of title VII of such\n24\nAct (relating to loans and scholarships for education\n25\nin the health professions).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n37\n1\n(49) The program established in section\n2\n317(j)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (relating\n3\nto grants for immunizations against vaccine-prevent-\n4\nable diseases).\n5\n(50) The program established in section 317A\n6\nof the Public Health Service Act (relating to grants\n7\nfor screening, referrals, and education regarding\n8\nleading poisoning in infants and children).\n9\n(51) The program established in part A of title\n10\nXIX of the Public Health Service Act (relating to\n11\nblock grants for preventive health and health serv-\n12\nices).\n13\n(52) The programs established in subparts I\n14\nand II of part B of title XIX of the Public Health\n15\nService Act.\n16\n(53) The programs under part C of title IV of\n17\nthe Elementary and Secondary Education Act of\n18\n1965 (20 U.S.C. 3081-3112).\n19\n(54) The programs carried out under the Child\n20\nDevelopment Associate Scholarship Assistance Act\n21\nof 1985 (42 U.S.C. 10901 et seq.).\n22\n(55) (A) The program of training for dis-\n23\nadvantaged adults and youth under part A of title\n24\nII of the Job Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C.\n25\n1601 et seq.), as in effect before July 1, 1993.\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n38\n1\n(B) (i) The program of training for dis-\n2\nadvantaged adults under part A of title II of the Job\n3\nTraining Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.),\n4\nas in effect on and after July 1, 1993.\n5\n(ii) The program of training for disadvantaged\n6\nyouth under part C of title II of the Job Training\n7\nPartnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1641 et seq.), as in ef-\n8\nfect on and after July 1, 1993.\n9\n(56) The Job Corps program under part B of\n10\ntitle IV of the Job Training Partnership Act (29\n11\nU.S.C. 1692 et seq.).\n12\n(57) The summer youth employment and train-\n13\ning programs under part B of title II of the Job\n14\nTraining Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1630 et seq.).\n15\n(58) The programs carried out under the Older\n16\nAmerican Community Service Employment Act (42\n17\nU.S.C. 3001 et seq.).\n18\n(59) The programs under title III of the Older\n19\nAmericans Act of 1965.\n20\n(60) The programs carried out under part B of\n21\ntitle II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of\n22\n1973 (42 U.S.C. 5011-5012).\n23\n(61) The programs carried out under part C of\n24\ntitle II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of\n25\n1973 (42 U.S.C. 5013).\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n39\n1\n(62) The State unemployment compensation\n2\nprograms approved under section 303 of the Social\n3\nSecurity Act and under section 3304 of the Internal\n4\nRevenue Code of 1986.\n5\n(63) The program under the Low-Income En-\n6\nergy Assistance Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 8621 et\n7\nseq.).\n8\n(64) The weatherization assistance program\n9\nunder title IV of the Energy Conservation and Pro-\n10\nduction Act (42 U.S.C. 6851).\n11\n(65) The program of block grants to States for\n12\nsocial services under title XX of the Social Security\n13\nAct.\n14\n(66) The programs carried out under the Com-\n15\nmunity Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9901\n16\net seq.).\n17\n(67) The program of legal assistance to eligible\n18\nclients and other programs under the Legal Services\n19\nCorporation Act (42 U.S.C. 2996 et seq.).\n20\n(68) The program for emergency food and shel-\n21\nter grants under title III of the Stewart B. McKin-\n22\nney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11331 et\n23\nseq.).\n24\n(69) The program of social services for refugees\n25\nand Cuban/Haitian entrants under section 412(c) of\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n40\n1\nthe Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.\n2\n1522(c)) and through the exercise of authority\n3\nunder section 501(a) of the Refugee Education As-\n4\nsistance Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-422).\n5\n(70) The programs carried out under the Child\n6\nCare and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42\n7\nU.S.C. 9858 et seq.).\n8\n(71) A State program for providing child care\n9\nunder section 402(i) of the Social Security Act.\n10\n(72) The program of State legalization impact-\n11\nassistance grants (SLIAG) under section 204 of the\n12\nImmigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.\n13\nTITLE III-MISCELLANEOUS\n14\nAMENDMENTS\n15 SEC. 301. AFDC RECIPIENTS REQUIRED TO UNDERGO NEC-\n16\nESSARY SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AS A\n17\nCONDITION OF RECEIVING AFDC.\n18\n(a) IN GENERAL-Section 402(a) of the Social Secu-\n19 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by inserting after\n20 paragraph (34) the following:\n21\n\"(35) provide that-\n22\n\"(A) as a condition of eligibility for aid,\n23\neach applicant or recipient who the State deter-\n24\nmines is addicted to alcohol or drugs must be\n25\nrequired to agree to participate, and must\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n41\n1\nmaintain satisfactory participation (as deter-\n2\nmined by the State), in an appropriate addic-\n3\ntion treatment program; and\n4\n\"(B) each applicant or recipient who fails\n5\nto comply with any requirement imposed pursu-\n6\nant to subparagraph (A) shall not be eligible for\n7\naid during the 2-year period that begins with\n8\nsuch failure to comply.\"\n9\n(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-\n10\n(1) IN GENERAL.-Except as provided in para-\n11\ngraph (2), the amendment made by subsection (a)\n12\nshall take effect on the date of the enactment of this\n13\nAct, and apply to payments under part A of title IV\n14\nof the Social Security Act for calendar quarters end-\n15\ning after such date.\n16\n(2) DELAY PERMITTED IF STATE LEGISLATION\n17\nREQUIRED.-In the case of a State plan approved\n18\nunder section 402(a) of the Social Security Act\n19\nwhich the Secretary of Health and Human Services\n20\ndetermines requires State legislation (other than leg-\n21\nislation appropriating funds) in order for the plan to\n22\nmeet the additional requirement imposed by the\n23\namendment made by subsection (a) of this section,\n24\nthe State plan shall not be regarded as failing to\n25\ncomply with the requirements of such section 402(a)\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n42\n1\nsolely on the basis of the failure of the plan to meet\n2\nsuch additional requirement before the end of the 2-\n3\nyear period that begins with the date of the enact-\n4\nment of this Act.\n5 SEC. 302. AUTHORITY OF STATE TO MODIFY CERTAIN AFDC\n6\nINCOME DISREGARD RULES.\n7\n(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 402(a)(8)(B) of the So-\n8 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)(8)(B)) is amended—\n9\n(1) by striking \"and\" at the end of clause (i);\n10\nand\n11\n(2) by adding at the end the following:\n12\n\"(iii) notwithstanding clauses (ii) and (iv)\n13\nof subparagraph (A) and clause (ii) of this sub-\n14\nparagraph, may disregard earned income of any\n15\nchild or relative receiving aid to families with\n16\ndependent children, or of any other individual\n17\n(living in the same home as such relative and\n18\nchild) whose needs as taken into account in\n19\nmaking the determination under paragraph (7),\n20\nin accordance with any combination of rules\n21\nwhich (as determined by the State in accord-\n22\nance with regulations prescribed by the Sec-\n23\nretary) is at least as favorable to the recipient\n24\nof such aid as the combination of rules con-\n25\ntained in such clauses, but not more favorable\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nF:\\M\\SHAW\\SHAW.015\nH.L.C.\n43\n1\nto the recipient than a rule providing for the\n2\ndisregard of the first $200 of the total of such\n3\nearned income for such month plus ¹/₃ of the\n4\nremainder thereof; and\".\n5\n(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by\n6 subsection (a) shall apply to benefits payable for calendar\n7 months beginning after the date of the enactment of this\n8 Act.\n9 SEC. 303. ENHANCED MATCH FOR EXPENDITURES FOR\n10\nJOBS PROGRAM AVAILABLE FOR ALL PER-\n11\nSONNEL EXPENDITURES.\n12\n(a) IN GENERAL.-Section 403(1)(1)(A)(ii)(I) of So-\n13 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 603(1)(1)(A)(ii)(I)) is amend-\n14 ed by striking \"full-time\".\n15\n(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by\n16 subsection (a) shall apply to payments under part A of\n17 title IV of the Social Security Act for calendar quarters\n18 ending after the date of the enactment of this Act.\nJanuary 29, 1993 (11:17 a.m.)\nCLI ON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP\nPHOTOCOPY\nucher\nPRESERVATION\n? 3\nWELFARE INSERT\nThe old fashioned Democrats used to say: government can do\neverything for everybody. The new fangled Republicans now say:\ngovernment shouldn' do anything for anybody -- except maybe the\nrich. But there's a third way. The way that says: government\ncan do a lot for us if we also do a lot for ourselves and for\neach other.\nThe third way says to us: working hard and playing by the\nrules will be rewarded. It says: you deserve the best schools\npossible for your child, but you must make sure your child stays\nin school and off drugs. It says: you deserve a fair return for\nyour work and investment, but you must make sure you pay your\nfair share in taxes. It says: you deserve a chance to go to\ncollege if you want to, but you must repay your loan obligation\nwith either a small percentage of your income or service to your\ncommunity.\nAnd the third way says: if you're poor, and you need a\nhelping hand, you deserve to get one -- but you must use that\nhelp as a hand up, not a hand out.\nI want to talk today about how we can reform our welfare\nsystem by strengthening families and making work pay\nEveryone agrees the welfare system needs fixing. Everyone\nhates it - - liberals and conservatives, those who pay for it and\nthose who need it.\nBut George Bush has done nothing to make the system more\nefficient, responsive and fair. He has done nothing to help our\nfamilies help themselves get off welfare.\nIt beats me how an Administration that has preached so often\nand BO loudly about family values could so undervalue our\nAmerican families\nDuring the Bush Administration, the welfare caseload grew by\n25 percent. Five times as much during Bush's years in office as\nduring the Carter and Reagan years combined.\nAnd the need for some kind of help for poor families will\nonly grow greater. Because the latest poverty figures show more\npeople are poor now than at any time since Lyndon Johnson began\nhis War on Poverty in 1964.\nGeorge Bush is presiding over the poorest America in a\ngeneration.\nHe has talked a good line. He has said that the welfare\nsystem needs \"radical change.\"\nRESERVATION\nBut talk. He has never introduced a comprehensive\nplan to welfare. In fact he only mentioned welfare reform\nVice in his presidency up until the beginning of the 1992\ncampaign season.\nWhy last month in Houston he managed to mention Elvis twice\none little old acceptance speech alone.\nAnd when he finally did decide in July that a presidential\ncandidate maybe ought to look like he's working on the problem,\nhe came up with a plan full of technical fixes and minor\nad justments that had a bigger effect on the people who printed\nthe document than the people who collect the welfare.\nWe need to end welfare as we know it. We need a fundamental\nrestructuring of the entire system to help our families and save\nour taxpayers money.\nI know how we can do it. I know it can work. We even made\na promising start at national reform four years ago.\nI was one of the chief architects of the national Family\nSupport Act of 1988, which emphasizes work, child support, and\nfamily benefits. I fought night and day to get it drafted and\npassed-\nBut when it was finally passed, George Bush was SO sluggish\nabout implementing it that many of the funds available to help\npeople move from welfare to work have never been spent.\nFrankly, when it comes to helping the poor and\ndisadvantaged, George Bush just doesn t get it.\nI know what at stake here. I understand something about\nhard times and how hard things can get. My mother was widowed\nbefore I was born, and for my first years I lived with my\ngrandparents while my mother went to nursing school in New\nOrleans. She wanted to be able to get a job and support me.\nAnd I remember the time my grandmother and I went to visit\nher on the train, and when it was time to go back home and we\npulled out of the station, I saw her kneel down by the side of\nthe railroad tracks and cry.\nI remember that to this day. I remember how she bore her\ngrief every day because she believed that if she sacrificed in\nthe short run, in the long run she could build a better life for\nus.\nThere are millions of stories like that in America today.\nRemember, during the LA riots last spring most poor people\npeople with jobs and those without -- did not riot. They did not\nloot. They kept their children home and off the streets.\n+\nCCITF\nG21#\n3\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nPRESERVATION\nMost Americans today do give their children love, and\ndiscipline, and respect for others and for the law.\nBut we have to face the hard truth that too many Americans\nare cut off from these values and is life that would reinforce\nthese values, Too many Americans who live by their values are\ndenied the progress they were promised -- the progress that was\nreal for the poor of my generation and my mother's.\nSo if we value work and family, we must reward work and\nfamily. We must honor those who play by the rules.\nHere's how I plan to do it.\nFirst, we've got to reward work. Too many parents struggle\nheroically to hold down one or two or three jobs, spend more time\nat work and less time with their kids, and still can't earn\n?\nenough to lift their families out of poverty. One-fifth of our\nhardworking fulltime wage earners are unable to keep themselves\nand their kids above the poverty line.\nWhat are we teaching them about how America values hard\nwork?\nToo many kids see their parents run themselves ragged over\ntheir jobs by day and still worry themselves sick over their\nbills by night.\nWhat are we teaching them about how America values the\nfamily?\nThat's not right. If you work, you shouldn't be poor.\nWe should expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to guarantee a\nworking wage to any working family. Increase the minimum wage to\nkeep pace with inflation. And create a national apprenticeship\ntraining program so young people who don't go to college can\nlearn the skills they need to get good, high-paying work.\nSecond, we should make it the goal of our welfare system to\nend permanent dependency and put people back to work.\nWelfare should be a second chance, not a way of life.\nThat's just the opposite of what's happening now. In the\nsixteen years before George Bush took office, the welfare rolls\ngrew at a tiny annual rate around three percent.\nIn just three years of George Bush's presidency, the welfare\nrolls shot up by 25%.\nAnd at the present rate, two-thirds of the people on welfare\n??\nright now will still be there in the new millennium -- eight\nyears from now.\nis.\n4\nPHOTOCOPY\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nGeorge Bush has done nothing to get people off welfare and\ninto the workforce.\nLet me tell you what I've done. In my home state of\nArkansas we created a system that offers training and childcare\nand medical coverage for welfare parents so they can go out and\nfind a good job. And we got 10,000 people off welfare and on the\njob in 1991 alone. It gave them the dignity of work. And it\nsaved money for Arkansas taxpayers.\nWe can do it for every American. We can tell them: we'll\noffer you up to two years' worth of help getting training,\nlearning to read if you need to, and we'll make sure your\nchildren get good care while you're out. Then we'll require you\nto get a job.\nWe can do even more to break the cycle. If we guarantee\naffordable health care to every American, then nobody will be\nforced to stay on welfare just to get Medicaid. If we sign into\nlaw a Family and Medical Leave Act -- like the one George Bush\nvetoed -- then nobody will be forced to choose between the job\nthey need and the sick relative or new baby who needs them.\nThird, we must do more to protect America's children from\nthe consequences of divorce and absent parents.\nNothing plunges a family faster into poverty than a father\nwho leaves his responsibilities when he leaves his children. The\nlikelihood that a child will live in poverty practically doubles\novernight when one parent walks out the door.\nNearly half of the divorced or single mothers who have court\norders for child support payments actually collect less than\nthey're owed -- often nothing at all. Deadbeat parents -- mostly\nfathers but mothers too -- owe $25 billion in unpaid child\nsupport.\nMarriage may not always be \"til death do us part, \" but\nparenthood sure is. We need to get tough on child support\nenforcement.\nIn my state, if you fall more than a thousand dollars behind\nx\nin your child support, we report you to every major credit agency\nin Arkansas. We can do that on a national level. And we can use\nthe IRS to help collect child support, and make it a felony to\ncross state lines to avoid your obligations. We can get more\nmoney to the families who need it -- and save money for the\ntaxpayer.\nFourth, we can start now to raise the next generation of\nproductive adults by giving our children the best education we\ncan.\nCLINTON'LIBRARY PHOTOCOP\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nWe must begin with the very youngest children by fully\nfunding Head Start and expanding innovative parenting programs\nlike the one we have in Arkansas called HIPPY. HIPPY helps build\nan ethic of learning at home by enlisting parents to become their\nchildren's first teachers.\nWe must set tough standards for all schools, including those\nin disadvantaged neighborhoods, and improve Chapter One funding\nto help meet them. And we must set up a National Service Trust\nFund to lend money to any American who wants to go to college, to\nbe repaid either out of their paycheck after graduation or with\nservice to the community.\nAnd fifth, we must encourage all American families and\ncitizens to make the best individual decisions in their lives,\nbased on a full sense of personal responsibility and concern for\nthe consequences of their behavior. That means letting teenagers\nknow that it is wrong for children to have children and giving\nthem the education they need to prevent that from happening.\nThere are millions of children and millions of families\nhanging in the balance in this country. They are part of our\nnational family. They are all our family.\nof course we must exhort all parents to do a better job, and\nwe must write into our social programs incentives for stronger\nfamily values.\nBut we cannot ignore the plain need for a national policy to\nvalue families and reward their work. To reconnect all Americans\nto our most cherished values and the idea of progress for those\nwho live by those values.\nWe must believe we can make a difference. We must believe\nthat tomorrow can be better than today. We have the tools.\nReforming welfare is one.\nThe question for us this election year is: do we have the\nvision and the will?\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nTO: Bruce R., George S., James c., Bob B., Gene S., et al.\nFR: Atul Gawande\nRE: Ideas for welfare hook.\nDT: 7 September 1992\nThe following are options for something new to unveil when we\nreintroduce the welfare plan on Wednesday. My recommendation is 3b,\nbelow.\n1) A promise to move 3 million people from welfare to work.\n\"In the 16 years before Bush, the number of people on welfare grew\njust 3%. Under Bush, the welfare rolls grew 25%. He sent close to\n3 million people from work to welfare.\nBill Clinton's plan to end welfare as we know it will move 1\nmillion families -- 3 million people -- from welfare to work in the\nnext four years.\nThree million women and children (1 million adults) is an extremely\nconservative estimate, and can be expected to be private sector\nwork. We could get away with a larger number (a moderate estimate\nis 4.5 million). However, that number may begin to reflect public\nsector workers, too.\nAlternatively, we could say, \"Bill Clinton's plan to reward work\nwill move 3 million people from welfare to private sector work,\nmore to public sector work, and end welfare as we know it.\"\nPRO: Sounds specific. Gives something for experts to chew on and\ngive us a news hook. Also can make us seem realistic to experts.\nCON: Seems contradictory to say you are ending welfare as we know\nit and moving only a given number of people off welfare. Is welfare\nover or only for some people? Also, sounds like another rabbit-out-\nof-a-hat promise, no matter how well we document it.\n2) Thematic pitch: \"It is time to end welfare as we know it.\"\nIf we harp on this point enough in the speech and in enough\ndifferent ways, this can attract attention. For example, we can\ndrive the point home by announcing forthrightly our opposition to\nthe California welfare reform program to preempt any credit Bush\nmay try to get for signing their waivers.\n\"The President just doesn't get it. The system is broken. We\ndon't need anymore welfare tinkering. It is time to put an end to\nwelfare as we know it.\"\nPRO: Focuses on policy, zaps Bush, and sends our message across.\nCON: It's a theme we will use regardless of whatever else we do.\nIt still leaves us open to questions of how we are going to pay for\nour public work program and won't necessarily pick up enough\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nattention because we have said this before.\n3) Combinations of 1 and 2.\na) Hit theme hard in the speech. Release the details on paper.\nGene's idea is that we stick to thematics in the speech but by\nproviding a realistic phase-in and possibly even numbers on\npaper, we avoid being charged with having more unrealistic\ncampaign promises.\nb) Hit theme hard in the speech, but spell out timetable. \"I\nwill end welfare as we know it. And I start by moving 1\nmillion families -- 3 million people -- from welfare to\nprivate sector work, more to public sector work, by 1996.\"\nThis last option, 3b, is what I recommend. It allows us to\ninject realism and a sense of transition to the program while\nemphasizing that we will end welfare as we know it. A Con is that\nit could muddy the message.\n4) The numbers in the plan.\nWe could be honest about our program and point out that we\nphase in the earned income tax credit and two year time limit over\n5 years. If we do, we are within range of actually meeting the\nbudget we have laid out, assuming that we also collect significant\nsavings from moving people off welfare to private sector work.\nHere is a preliminary break down of the funds and new spending\nto \"reward work\" consistent with the Putting People First plan:\nFunds and new spending for \"rewarding work\"\n(in billions of dollars)\n1993\n1994\n1995\n1996\nSpending\n3.0\nEITC\n1.0\n2.0\n3.0\n4.0\n2-year time limit costs\n2.0\n4.0\n6.0\n6.0\nfor training and jobs\nChild support enforcement 0.0\n0.5\n0.5\n1.0\nTotal new spending\n3.0\n6.5\n9.5\n11.0\n10.0\nBudget & Savings\nBudget for new spending\nin Putting People First -3.5\n-5.5\n-6.5\n-7.0\nSavings from getting just\n3 M people off welfare\n-0.0\n-1.0\n-2.0\n-3.0\nNet (unbudgeted cootal\n-n =\nn\n, A\n0 A\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nWe're in the ballpark, though we don't quite break even. To get it\nright, we can phase in the 2 year time limit over an even\nperiod OF claim a Targer number or people coming off welfare.\nThese numbers will change as I get more feedback from experts.\nPRO: If done right, can seem fiscally responsible. Get credit for\nexplaining how we meet our promises.\nCON: Any set of numbers will get savaged and draw debate, even if\nwell prepared.\n5) Beef up our reforms in child support enforcement.\nChild support enforcement is a great issue for us. It allows\nus to emphasize family values and personal responsibility. We can\nbeat up on Bush for cutting child support enforcement and proposing\nlittle. It saves money. And it takes another step toward replacing\nwelfare.\nThis section of our plan has room for more specific, tough\npolicies that will save the government $1 billion a year and move\n350,000 recipients (1.5 million women and children) off of welfare.\nIn particular, two weeks ago, the US Commission on Interstate Child\nSupport produced a report with solid recommendations, most of which\nw\nwe should move quickly to endorse (before Bush does).\nHowever, if we unveil child support enforcement provisions\nthis week, it is more difficult to make the connection with our\ntheme of putting Americans back to work. Child support payments do\nnot put people to work in a direct sense. Rather, for child support\npayments percentage to have get 350 CO De 000 working women at least part time.\n6) Individual development accounts tied to community development.\nWe have backed individual development accounts which are bank\naccounts where the government matches the individual's savings in\nthe account. The individual can only withdraw the funds for\npurchasing a house or education or other such purpose. The\nsuggestion valies, is that the they you Phment could be money held to in ao the double duty of\nimproving individual's lives and fostering the economic growth of\ncommunities.\nTO: Andie\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nFR: Atul\nRESERVATION\nRE: Welfare speech\nDT: 4 Sept 1992\n1. Material:\nLook at Oct. 23, 1991 New Covenant speech.\nLook at rewarding work Clinton/Gore policy brief.\n2. Facts:\nWorking poor: Over 5 million people live in families with a\nfull-time worker where the family remains poor. The majority\n7\nof such families have two parents. Alternative: almost one of\nevery five people who works full time doesn't earn enough to\nsupport his or her family above the poverty line.\nBush policy: from work-to-welfare. In the sixteen years before\nGeorge Bush became President, the number of people on welfare\ngrew just 3%. In three years under George Bush, people on\nwelfare grew 25% -- nearly three million people.\n7\nLong-term dependency. Two-thirds of the people on welfare\ntoday will be there 8 years or more.\nDeadbeat Dads. Deadbeat parents owe $25 billion in unpaid\nchild support, leaving millions of single-parent families in\npoverty and two-thirds of single mothers without any child\nsupport at all.\n3. Language:\nPutting our people first means honoring and rewarding those\nwho work hard and play by the rules, demanding responsibility and\nending welfare as we know it. I have a simple strategy which will\nstrengthen families and make work pay. It will break the cycle of\ndependency and end welfare as we know it.\nFor twelve years the Republicans have talked aobut the virtue\nof hard work and family values. Yet on average, working men and\nwomen earn less today than they did 20 years ago, adjusting for\ninflation. Almost one in every five full-time workers does not earn\nenough to keep a family out of poverty. They talk of family values\nand the problems facing single parents, but they have never taken\nthe lead in tracking down deadbeat Dads.\nIn the sixteen years before George Bush became President, the\nnumber of people on welfare grew just 3%. In three years under\nGeorge Bush, people on welfare grew 25% --- nearly three million\npeople. George bush talks about moving people from welfare to work,\nbut during his administration they were moving from work to welfare\nby the millions.\nWhat is the Bush solution? Giving states permission to reduce\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOGOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nbenefits for a few recipients. The President just doesn't get it.\nThe system is broken. We don't need more welfare tinkering. It is\ntime to put an end to welfare as we know it.\nThree fundamental themes:\nWe will end welfare as we know it. After two years on welfare,\npeople who collect aid would have access to training,\neducation and other support services designed to help them\nmove into a job. After two years, welfare recipients who are\nable to work will be required to take a job in the private or\npublic sector. I will take three million people (number may be\nchanged) from welfare to work.\nIf you work you shouldn't be poor. Making work pay.\nFull time workers earn less today (adjusted for\ninflation) than twenty years ago. The problems are even more\nsevere for young people.\nThe problem is more than low income. The working poor are\nliterally one broken finger away from losing everything, since\nmost have little medical protection. It is astonishing that we\nprovide insurance to the poor on welfare, but have no such\nguarantee for many working families.\nNo wonder over five million people live in familes with\na full-time worker where the family remains poor.\nClinton plan to make work pay:\nWOT King people difrough iia health START\n2) Expand the earned income tax credit (working family\ntax credit) which amounts to a pay raise for low and\nmoderate income working families.\n3) [Restore the minimum wage by letting it increase with\ninflation.]\n4) Most importantly, restore growth to the American\neconomy -- our single best policy for going from welfare\nto work.\none parent should DO\ntypical child born in the US today will spend time in a single\nparent home. (see facts above).\nClinton plan: See putting people first and past papers\nIdeas: Make sure both parents are identified at birth for\nevery child born out of wedlock. Set and update simple\nguidelines for child support so if you father a child you know\nwhat you have to pay and that you will hav responsibility for\nthe first 18 years of your child's life. Automatica\nwithholding of child support from paychecks beginning with all\nnew awards. Child support is an alternative to welfare, not an\nafter-thought like the Bush administration treats it.\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP\nPHOTOCOPY\nPRESERVATION\nWELFARE\nOpening Line: Our current welfare system is a disaster -- we've got to abolish it and replace\nit with a program that gives people two years to go from welfare to work -- and no more. Hard\nwork should be a way of life in this country, not welfare handouts.\nClinton Position / Record\nOur welfare system is a mess: it penalizes people who work or marry; it frustrates people who\nwant to help themselves; it allows families to remain dependent for decades. George Bush\nhasn't done anything about this -- but I will.\nLet's start with why so many people have gone on welfare under the Bush administration\n-- people who are working hard for their families aren't doing as well as they deserve\nto. On average, sons earn less than their fathers did. People working full-time can't pull\ntheir families out of poverty, let alone get them ahead -- and since so many working\nfamilies don't have health insurance, they find themselves just one broken arm away\nfrom losing everything.\nThe best way to get people off welfare is to make sure that people who are working hard\nare getting ahead -- not falling behind. That means we should:\n-\nIncrease tax credits for working families and tie the minimum wage to inflation;\nMake sure that all working families have health care. After all, rich families do,\nand poor families do, too!\nSecond, we have too many single parents who have to carry the whole load for their\nfamilies. We've got to make both parents responsible for the care of their children.\nIt's no surprise that half of the children of single parents live in poverty -- as much as\n$15 billion in child support goes uncollected each year. We've got to:\nIdentify the fathers, right at the time of birth, with blood tests and court\ndeterminations;\nbeen track of absentee dads and make sure that\nthey pay.\nIf we help families by making sure that hard work has its rewards and by doing a better\njob of collecting from deadbeat dads, that should move people off the welfare rolls right\naway. But for those who still need help, I believe we should abolish our current system\nof welfare and replace it with a new plan that would:\nWELFAR.001\n09/06/92 version\n09/06/92 12:37pm\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nGive a person two years on welfare to get training, education, and the skills they\nneed to land a job;\nAnd at the end of those two years, tell that person to accept a job that is available\nor do full-time community service - and put an end to their stay on the welfare\nrolls.\nWe should give everyone the opportunity to succeed - but then everyone must take\nresponsibility for their own families and their own lives. In this country, people who\nwork hard and play by the rules shouldn't get the shaft and in this country, people\nought to be expected to meet their responsibilities as parents and citizens.\nGovernment help to get families going - yes; but not government handouts.\nIn Arkansas, that's what we've done. We've moved 17,000 people from welfare to work\nin the past three years. Overall, we have cut welfare rolls 14 percent in Arkansas since\nI was first elected Governor. And even during George Bush's recession, the number of\nfamilies on food stamps in my state has gone up far less than the national average.\nBush Record / Vulnerabilities\nAs Governor of Arkansas, I have moved 17,000 people from welfare to work; under George\nBush's Presidency, people have been moving from work to welfare in record numbers.\nFrom 1972 to 1988, the number of people on welfare in this country remained constant,\ngrowing only by 3 percent - but in the three years of the Bush Presidency, welfare has\ngrown 25 percent.\nIt's no surprise: one out of every five full-time workers does not earn enough to keep a\nfamily out of poverty; five million people live in families with a full-time worker - but\nstill remain in poverty.\nfamilies\nwho\non\nwelfare get health care, but those who work hard to get themselves off the welfare rolls\nlose their health coverage. That doesn't make any sense.\nWhat values are we communicating to children when they see parents who work hard but\nkeep falling farther behind?\nwhere sons earn less than fathers?\nwhere welfare\n...\n...\nrecipients get better health care than the working poor? And beyond talking about\nramily\nvalues,\nwhat\nhas\nOcurge\nof\nconditions?\nBush has done too little to help mothers collect child-support from deadbeat dads;\nestimates of unpaid support run from $5 to $15 billion and Bush's own Secretary of\nSarce?\nHHS calls his administration's record in this area \"abysmal.\"\nWELFAR.001\n09/06/92 version\n- 2 -\n09/06/92 12:37pm\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOL-\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nSince Bush took office (7/89), the number of people on food stamps has gone up 38\npercent.\nThe Bush Position\nWaivers and Experimentation: The President supports giving states waivers to permit\nmore experimentation with their welfare systems. Among the state reforms the President\nmay embrace:\nCutting benefits for welfare recipients where those benefits are higher than the\nworking wage; and\nCutting off benefits for welfare mothers who have additional children.\nIncreased Collections: Bush will also point to a 50-percent increase in collections for\nchild support -- nationwide -- in recent years.\nAble-Bodied Workers: Bush may also endorse the Michigan plan, which threw every\nsingle, able-bodied person off the welfare rolls -- 70,000+ individuals.\nBush's Plan for Cities: He is also likely to discuss his plan to create private-sector\nopportunities for the poor -- through enterprise zones, weed and seed, crime control,\ntenant management -- as the alternative for welfare.\nLikely Bush Attacks and Best Clinton Rebuttals\nBush's obvious attack is to paint Clinton as a big-spending liberal who wants to waste money\non welfare. Bush will also attack the Arkansas record.\nAttack: Bill Clinton thinks that a welfare mother who has more children should get more\nmoney - but working families don't get a raise for each kid they have.\nRebuttal: This attack misses the point -- I'm for scrapping our entire welfare system and\ngetting rid of the sort of dependency and lifetime-on-welfare that you are talking about.\nUnder my plan, welfare would be temporary -- for two years only. At the end of that period,\na mother or father on welfare would have to get a job or go to work in community service. No\nlifetime on welfare -- opportunity and responsibility instead.\nFor the brief time that people are on welfare, I'm not for penalizing children. If a family needs\nextra money to feed and clothe another child, I don't think we should punish that child for his\nor her parent's actions. Our goal should be moving people off welfare -- not punishing children\nwho find themselves in need of help.\nWELFAR.001\n09/06/92 version\n- 3 -\n09/06/92 12:37pm\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nBB & duec am all-time high\nPresident. and 40 percent of three people in poverty in this country now are citile on\nWhile poverty went wijo across the nation this past year, it went down 1001 Arkansas: we did the\nfourth best of any statelin the country:\nwe still have a long way to go. But at least we re moving in the right direction.\nAttack: Clinion talks.about the 17,000 people he moved off welfare in the past four years,\nbut he doesn't mention the thousands more he moved on. Welfare and food stamp rolls\nare actually up since Clinton started his reform program.\nRebuttal: It's true that, because of George Bush's recession, the number of people on welfare\nand receiving food stamps in my state have gone up in the past three years.\nWELFAR 001\n09/06/92 version\n4 -\n09/06/92 12:37pm\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nBut thanks to my welfare reform program, this growth has been much slower in Arkansas than\nin other states. Thanks to our plan, we are doing far better than the rest of the country has done\nunder George Bush.\nThe increase in welfare families in Arkansas has been at only half the national average under\nPresident Bush; and the number of families getting food stamps has risen 30 percent less in my\nstate than across the rest of the country.\nIn Arkansas, we couldn't overcome the economic disaster that George Bush's policies have\nproduced in this country -- but we did do our best to deal with their consequences -- and I'm\nproud of how much we have been able to accomplish.\nAttack: Under Bill Clinton, administrative costs for welfare in Arkansas have gone up\n3,000 percent.\nRebuttal: This is another Republican lie about my record. We took several different agencies\nin my state and consolidated them into one -- that didn't make our administrative costs grow --\nit just made sense.\nYou know, a 1991 report by the Bush Administration said that our welfare program reflected\n\"sound management and administration.\" Bush's own Department of Health and Human\nServices ranked Arkansas in the top ten states in the country in terms of welfare administration.\nThat shows what a lie this charge really is.\nAttack: Bill Clinton wants to guarantee every welfare recipient a job -- but if you are not\non welfare, what guarantee do your have? That's not fair.\nRebuttal: First of all, I think we ought to spend more time worrying about creating jobs and\nless time raising fears over \"guaranteed\" job programs. My first priority is to implement an\neconomic plan that succeeds in creating the jobs we need in this country; the President's first\npriority seems to be dividing us, pitting one American against another.\nMy welfare plan does not guarantee a job for anyone. What it does guarantee is that no one is\ngoing to get welfare for more than two years -- something that President Bush's plan has failed\nto do. Under my plan, at the end of two years, a welfare recipient would be forced to accept\nany appropriate job available in the private sector -- or perform community service if no job is\navailable.\nNo guarantees of a job -- just a guarantee of work and responsibility -- that's what my plan has,\nbut his doesn't.\nWELFAR.001\n09/06/9 version\n- 5 -\n09/06/92 12:37pm\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nTo:\nATU\n5 pp\nPHOTOCOPY\nBOB\nRESERVATION\nReed 9/8/92 4pm DRAFT\nGS\netal\nRemarks Prepared for Delivery\nClayton County Office of Family & Children's Services\nJonesboro, Georgia\nSeptember 9, 1992\nI'm so glad I had the chance to be here in Jonesboro today to\ntalk with people who are working hard to lift themselves off\nwelfare and go back to work. [Tell stories of the mothers you will\nhave just met who are in the program.\nhire\nI wanted to come here today, because like many of the people\nI\nthis morning, I was born poor, in a state here more than\nha the pe ple lived below the poverty line.\nmother was\nidowed before I was born, and for my first years I lived with my\ngrandparents while my mother went back to nursing school so she\ncould get a job and support us.\nto MORTH and and bel: because\nAnd I wanted to come here because like the good people who run\nthis program, I have spent the last decade back home in my state\nworking to change the welfare system to lift people out f poverty\nand give people on welfare the skills they need to go back to work\nThis has been the work of my life, and it will be a central part of\n>re\nmy presidency.\nSTART\nHere in Georgia, and across this country, people are hurting.\nIT,\nUMiddle-class people are working Larder than ever and making lass;\nw/\nd\nHARDERM\nthe Commerce Depar\nspected last week that the average\nsmily\nclass\n,SH\nsaw its income di\n100 ast year. Over the last decade the\nattento\nStr\nper entage of har work, low-wage jobs increased by half. Poverty\nSare\nw3/h\nploding: 37 million people last year, and growing. One of\nxe\nhave\nten Americans is on food stamps. America's welfare rolls are\nhelfore\nfull to bursting.\nMeat?\nMeanwhile, for the irst time since the roaring '20s, the\nwealthiest 1% of Americans now control more than 90% of the\nmery\nnation's wealth -- while working people have seen America's wages\ndrop from 1st in the world a decade ago to 13th today. Millions of\nhard-working people can't get health insurance or earn a decent\n40%\nwage so their children get enough to eat.\nther day, in columbus, ohio, I met a woman with seven\nchildr\nwho was making $50,000 a year. She was so proud that she\ncould support her family. But one of her children had spina\nLufida, and her insur nce premiums got so righ that she had to quit\nher job and\nare so her child ould get care.\nEverywhert\ngo, I meet parents who've lost their jobs and\ndread what\ntheir favorite time of the day -- having dinner\nwith thei family\nbecause now the tension is so thick you could\nRECEIVED FROM\n09.07\ncut it with a knife and the parents have trouble looking their\nchildren in the eye because they think they have failed them.\nAll over this country, there are millions of people who are\ndying to go to work, dying to give their children a chance to get\nahead, and and desperately hoping that the Amer can Dream will hang\non. And there are millions more who have given up on the system\nand are throwing their lives away in gangs or in jails, in despair\nor dependency.\nWe can't go on this way any longer. As a President who really\ncared about Georgia, Franklin Roosevelt, said in his first campaign\n60 years ago, we need to break with old orthodoxies if we are going\nto change and lift this country.\nIn this campaign, I've put forth a plan that leaves behind\nstale old ideologies of the right and the left and offers new ways\nto ve our country and our people forward.\nSTANDARD\nI believe we've had enough of the failed trickle-down economic\nBLON\ntheory of the last 12 years -- the crazy idea that if we just keep\ntaxes low on the wealthy and keep government out of the way, the\nLINE\nrich will get so rich that the rest of us might do a little better.\nI believe the wealthy ought to pay their fair share, and the middle\nclass should get a break for a change.\nBut I don't want to go back to the old Democratic notion that\nwe can tax and spend our way to prosperity, either. I'm against\nbrain-dead politics in both parties.\nMY economic plan takes a whole new approach, by putting people\nfirst, rewarding work, and organizing our economy to compete and\nwin again. Eight (6?) Nobel laureates have endorsed my plan; they\nthink it will create 2 million jobs a year. But don't take their\nword for it; read a copy and decide for yourself. (Hold book)\nYesterday, I met with workers at a machine-tool factory in\nconnecticut, and laid out my plan to rebuild America's\nmanufacturing base. My state ranks #1 in job growth over the last\n12 months, and in recent years, we've created manufacturing jobs at\nten times the national rate. Why? Because we believe in\nencouraging businesses to invest in new plant and equipment; in\nstarting apprenticeship programs for young people who choose not to\ngo on to college; and in expanding adult literacy and giving\nworkers a chance to earn their GED where they work.\nSTATE\nToday, I want to talk about something else we've learned how\nto do in Arkansas that we need to do at the national level --\n10%\nmoving people off the welfare rolls and onto the work rolls.\nI've been working on this issue harder, longer, than just\nabout anybody. Back in 1979, when I first was elected governor, I\nstarted the Arkansas Welfare-to-Work demonstration project, which\nincreased employment and earnings by more than a third for those\nPHOTOCOPY\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\n08 '92 21:37 CLINTOM FOR PRES. 501-399-3799.\n19.54 FROM JCD MVIMTION\nJES\nI\nTO\n15013702645\nPHOTOCOPY\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nwho\npart, and reduced welfare payments by 18 percent. In the\nmid-\nI chaired the National Governors' Association Task Force\non\nWelf Reform, and worked with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan\nto write and enact the Family Support Act of 1988, the most\ncomprehensive welfare reform law ever passed.\nWe wanted to make Arkansas a showcase for welfare reform. so\nin 1989, we launched a JOBS program called Project Success. Our\nprogram gives people the child care, health care, and training they\nneed to get off welfare. And in just three years, we've moved\n17,000 people from welfare to work. Arkansas taxpayers save $12\nmillion a year because people on welfare have found work or had\ntheir benefits reduced.\nIndependent researchers from a group called the Manpower\nDemonstration Research Corporation came to Arkansas to look at\nProject Success and CC luded that it was one of the three best\nwel are-to-work program they had found in the nation.\nIf we can d hat in a poor state like Arkansas, think what we\ncan do for the country.\nI want to build on the lessons of Project Success in Arkansas\nprinciples\nto\nthe Family Support Act a step further. We need to reform\nre \"ystem so that it puts people back to work and ends\npermanent de: endency. I have a plan to end welfare as we know it.\n$VII\n11!!\nMy pl 1 will make welfare a second chance, not a way of life.\nWe'll erase the stigma of welfare for good by restoring a simple,\ndignified principle: People who can work ought to go to work, and\nwork you By AND TO IN THE PLAY IF YOU IF HARD\nno one who can work should be able to stay on welfare forever.\nUnder my plan, we'll give everyone the education training\nchild care and medical coverage they need, but after two years\nthey'll have to take a job in the private sector or start earning\nBURIES\ntheir way through community service. That way, we'll restore the\n3\ncovenant that welfare was first meant to be: a temporary hand\npeople who've fallen on hard times. By the tim we're through,\nwon't have a welfare program; we'll have a jo program.\nIn the last three years, the welfare rolls have exploded as a\nresult of the recession, rising unemployment, skyrocketing health\ncare costs, and a growing permanent underclass. The number of\nwelfare recipients has increased five times faster under this\nadministration than in the previous 12 years under Ronald Reagan\nFront\nand Jimmy Carter combined. When the poverty rolls rise, we all pay\n-- in the past year, we've spent $8 billion more than three years\nago on welfare and food stamps alone.\nWe need to turn this devastating trend around by making work\npay, generating new jobs, and helping people lift themselves out of\npoverty. I've consulted with welfare reform experts who estimate\nhat my plan to end welfare as we know it will move a million\nsople a year off the welfare rolls by requiring all those who can\nLook OUT\nwork to go to work. We may not save a lot of money right away --\nbut when you consider that if we don't change the welfare system,\na quarter of the people now on welfare will stay there 8 years or\nmore, you can be sure that we'll save a lot of money down the road.\nAnd more important, we'll save millions of Americans from a life of\ndependence.\nWe've heard a lot of talk this year about family values, and\nthat's fine with me. I wouldn't be here if it weren't for family\nvalues. But one of the most important values we need in this\ncountry if we're going to be pro-family is to be pro-work.\nUnder the current system, there are too many incentives for\nEXPAND\npoor people not to work. Going to work means losing Medicaid or\nother welfare-related benefits, and the jobs they can find don't\npay a sufficient wage to lift them out of poverty.\nI want to make work pay by expanding the Earned Income Tax\nCredit for the working poor. No one who works full-time and has a\nfamily at home should be poor -- not in America.\nAt the same time, we need to control health care costs and\nassure all Americans that they can get affordable health care when\nthey go to work. Medicaid rolls are breaking the bank in every\nstate in this country. Skyrocketing health care premiums aren't\njust robbing this country of billions of dollars in administrative\nwaste; they're costing us jobs and they're forcing people onto the\npoverty rolls because they can't get care anywhere else.\nIf we're pro-work, we ought to unleash the energies of every\ncommunity to create more good jobs in poor neighborhoods. My plan\nwill create a national network of Community Development Banks to\ngive low-income entrepreneurs the tools to start new businesses.\nThe South Shore Bank in Chicago, and its rural counterpart in my\nhome state, the Southern Development Bancorporation, help bolster\npoor communities by providing housing loans and extending credit to\nthose who want to start a small business. Banks, non-profit\norganizations, churches, and local governments can work together as\npartners to generate jobs, opportunity and hope.\nWe've got to be pro-savings as well. Earlier this year, the\ngovernment ordered a young woman in New Haven, connecticut, and her\nfamily to repay welfare benefits because she was saving money from\na part-time job to put herself through college. That's wrong. We\nought to raise the asset limit and encourage poor people to save\nfor job training, college, and other paths to independence.\nFinally, if we believe in family values, it's time we toughen\nour child support enforcement laws and launch a nationwide\ncrackdown on deadbeat parents. I'll tell you one thing I've\nlearned over the last decade: Governments don't raise children;\nparents do.\nToday, much of the money we spend on welfare goes toward\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOP\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\n1,992 22443\nchildren whose fathers could afford to pay child support but do\nnot. If we want to do something about the fact that one child in\nfour is born in poverty in this country, we can start by tracking\ndown an estimated $10 to $25 billion in unpaid child support. That\nis one reason it disturbed me to learn that President Bush, in his\nMidsession Review, has proposed a cut of nearly $3 billion in funds\nto enforce the law and track down deadbeats.\nAs President, I'll push for the toughest child support\nenforcement possible. In Arkansas, if you fall more than a\nthousand dollars behind in your child support, we report you to\nevery major credit agency in the state. Last year, we collected\nmore than $41 million from deadbeat dads -- money that we now don't\nhave to pay in welfare or other public spending.\nMy plan will set up a national deadbeat data bank, begin a\nnational system of child support collection through automatic wage\nwithholding, and make an all-out effort to establish paternity in\nthe hospital when the baby is born, not in the courts after the\nfather has left. We'll enlist major credit agencies in a\nnationwide effort to send a message to deadbeat parents: If you\ndon't pay child support for your children, you shouldn't get credit\nfor yourself. It's time we send a clear message that people who\nbring children into this world have a responsibility to raise them.\nIn the end, this isn't about government programs; it's about\nreal people and their families. There will never be a government\nprogram for every problem. The only thing that holds us together\nis the daily assumption of personal responsibility by millions of\nAmericans from all walks of life. And the one thing that can move\nus forward is the assumption of personal responsibility by the\nPresident of the United States to stop the division and blame and\nstart challenging people to make the most of their lives.\nA few years ago, I asked a woman in the welfare-to-work\nprogram in Arkansas what she liked best about her new job. She\nsaid she enjoyed the work and liked earning a paycheck, but the\nbest thing was that when her son was asked at school what his\nmother does for a living, he could give an answer.\nI hope you'll remember that for the next 55 days. When people\nassume responsibility and shoulder the common load, they acquire a\ndignity they never knew before. When people go to work, they\nrediscover a pride that was lost. When fathers pay their child\nsupport, they restore a connection they and their children need.\nWhen the privilege of serving is enough of a perk for people in\nCongress, and the President finally assumes responsibility for\nAmerica's problems, we'll not only stop doing wrong, we'll begin to\ndo what is right to move America forward.\nIf you remember your responsibilities to yourselves and your\nfuture on November 3, I'll never forget mine as your President.\nThank you.\n-- END --\nPHOTOCOPY\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nTOTAL P.05\nRECEIVED FROM\n22:44\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nPHOTOCOP\nPRESERVATION\nThe Clinton Record\nA History of Commitment\nEarly Action. In his first term in office --- before welfare\nreform was a national issue-- Governor Clinton got to work putting\npeople to work. He developed the Arkansas Welfare-to-Work\ndemonstration project, the most successful project of its kind in\nthe nation (what's this mean? cite).\nNational Leadership. As chairman of the National Governors'\nAssociation Task Force on Welfare Reform, and later as chairman of\nthe association, Governor Clinton was a chief architect and driving\nforce behind the federal Family Support Act of 1988, the most\ncomprehensive and successful reform of welfare ever.\nProject Success. To meet the requirements of the Family Support\nAct he helped author, Governor Clinton implemented Project Success.\nIt provides people on welfare with education, training, and job\nplacement -- and the Medicaid, child care, and transportation\nassistance they need. Arkansas implemented Project Success three\nmonths before required by federal law -- and was one of only\nthirteen states in the country to prepare a program by the early\ndate. (cite)\nA History of Results\nBetween 1979 and 1991, while the number of AFDC recipients\nnationwide increased by 16.5 percent, the number of recipients in\nArkansas declined by 14.2 percent. Governor Clinton's welfare\nreforms and economic leadership have improved Arkansans' lives and\nsaved Arkansans' money. (cite)\nThe Family Support Act which Clinton helped author has\n(get stat from Atul)\n7\nGovernor Clinton's 1979 welfare reform, the Arkansas Welfare-to-\nWork Demonstration Project, proved highly successful. After three\nyears, the program had increased the earnings of those enrolled by\n31 percent, reduced AFDC payments by 18 percent, and increased\nparticipants' employment by 34 percent. (cite)\n- To date, 16,911 participants have become self-sufficient\nthrough Project Success. (we need a better statistic here;\neither the percent of people pulled off welfare, or Arkansas'\nnational rank)\n- And they have remained self-sufficient: a 1991 follow-up\nsurvey of Project Success participants whose cases were closed\ndue to earned income showed dramatica achievements: 72 percent\nremained off AFDC, and 58 percent of those people remained in\nthe jobs they have obtained through Project Success. (cite)\nPraise from Arkansans\nLynda is a single parent with three children. She was receiving\nAFDC. Throug Project Success, she enrolled in the Jefferson School\nPHOTOCOPY\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nof Nursing. Today Linday is a registered nurse and is fully\nsupporting her family. She writes, \"It is so nice to be\nindependent.' (date, cite)\nMonica is divorced and has three children. She had no child\nsupport to raise her three children. Through Project Success, she\nattended beauty school. Now she has her own booth in a beauty salon\nand will receive her GED. She writes, \"Project Success is wonderful\nbecause it gives women a chance to stand on their own feet. Without\n?\nit I couldn't have made it. II (date, cite)\nPraise from Republicans\nThe Bush Administration praised Project Success. In a May 1991\nreport, the Department of Health and Human Services said Project\nSuccess was \"very capable. reflecting sound management and\nadministration at both State and county office levels and\nproficient service delivery at the local level. \" (title, date of\nreport)\nAt the ceremony at which he signed the Family Support Act,\nPresident Reagan told Bill Clinton\n(quote, date)\nTop Reagan aides, Judy Black and Frank Donatelli, congratulated\nGovernor Clinton for his achievement as Chairman of the National\nGovernors' Association and thanked him for his achievements in\nreforming the welfare system. (quote, date, cite)\nAs Governor of Tennessee, Lamar Alexander commended Clinton for\nhis \"critical leadership\" on welfare reform. (date, cite)\nGovernors John Ashcroft of Missouri and Michael Castle of\nDelaware thanked governor Clinton for making reform of welfare \"a\ntop priority for the NGA.\" (date, cite)\nPHOTOCOPY\nRESERVATION\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nWELFARE REFORM\nBill Clinton has been working to reform the welfare system since his first term\nas governor, guided by the belief that welfare should be a second chance, not a way\nof life. Poor people should have the training, the incentives, and the requirement to\ngo to work. Here is the record:\n#\nHelped write The Family Support Act of 1988, a major revision of the Aid to\nFamilies with Dependent Children Program and Title IV of the Social Security Act.\nThe goals of the Act are to emphasize work, child support and family benefits, and\nto encourage and assist needy children and parents to obtain the education, training\nand employment necessary to avoid long-term welfare dependence.\n*\nAlthough states were not required to implement JOBS programs under this\nAct until October 1, 1990, Arkansas moved quickly to obtain increased training and\nsupport services. Building on a WORK program initiated in Clinton's first\nadministration, Clinton made sure that Project Success, Arkansas' name for the new\nprogram, was implemented at the earliest date possible, July 1, 1989.\n*\nIn its first 12 months of operation, 2,744 welfare cases were closed after\nProject Success participants found work. Between July 1990 and March 1991, 2,043\ncases were closed because of employment. Through October, 1991, 1,589 AFDC\ncases were closed due to employment, an increase of 9% over the last year.\n*\nA follow-up survey completed in August of 1991 on those participants whose\nAFDC cases closed in 1990 due to earned income revealed that:\n--72% remained off AFDC\n--58% of those remained off AFDC and were still employed; the remainder had\nmarried or were no longer receiving benefits for other reasons;\n--75% had retained the same job; and\nThe average increase in wages was 16%.\n*\nIn Fiscal Year 1992, 9,622 people entered employment with help from Project\nSuccess.\n*\nSince the beginning of Project Success, almost 17,000 dases have been\nclosed and over 5,000 benefits have been reduced as a result of employment.\n?\n*\nUnder Clinton's leadership, the Arkansas Child Support Enforcement Unit has\nreceived national recognition for identifying fathers and aggressive enforcement of\nchild support payments. Child support collections totalled more than $41 million in\n1991, a 20% increase from 1990.\n-25-\nAmong the tools used by the Child Support Enforcement Unit are income\nwithholding for children's health care coverage, reporting overdue support payments\nto umer reporting agencies, and the establishment of a rebuttable presumption\nof paternity if the father's name and social security number are recorded on the birth\nrecord.\nAnother Clinton measure provides income withholding for health care\npremiums of minor children as a part of child support, to provide better health care for\nchildren.\nRegarding the problems of those who are homeless:\nGovernor Clinton established the Arkansas Interagency Council for the\nHomeless to survey the Arkansas homeless population and to coordinate the services\nof 30 state agencies for maximum impact. The number of identified homeless\nshelters has quadrupled since 1986.\nThe Arkansas Homeless Children's Office (AHCO) was established in the\nEducation Department to address barriers keeping homeless children out of school.\nAHCO collects and distributes information, conducts workshops, awards grants,\nfacilitates efforts between service providers and schools to expedite enrollment,\ntransportation, and educational services, and encourages advocacy for the homeless\nschool-age child.\nThe Arkansas Adult Education Section has served thousands of homeless\nadults at local sites throughout the states in homeless shelters, substance abuse\ntreatment facilities, shelters for abused women, and schools.\n*\nAdditional special services have been provided for the homeless elderly, the\nhomeless mentally ill, and homeless veterans.\nPHOTOCOP\nCLINTON LIBRARY PHOTOCOPY\nRESERVA\n-26-\nSiburbs - -Training program (inteprated adience)\n- B'fast\nw/i 4 yrs\nMessage (15 Mins.)\n1 permanent\nwelfare\n- Clinton record VS. Bush read\nThat will at w in half\nThe Plan\nend w as we know it\nmove move MS f\n- CSE ($2B cuts. $50 AFDC)\nout the welfore caseloud\nin half\nopposed min wage\nvetoed EITC expansion (3/20), signed another\n1\nWendell Prims\n13.6 M\noffer\n10.9 in 1989\nin hospital registration\n3m to private sector at\n1.2 of 3\nCSE\n-\nnot data\n1/2 the welfare rolls\n4.7m caseload\nJob\n50%\nTrain\n2.yr time\n93 94 95 96\nRecession\n1996\n2\n$10B\nElte 1 2 3 4\nCDB\n2yr 2456 (⁴)\nABLE TO work\nCSE - .5m/1.4m Ellwood 8%\nExempt 25m/68m\nIDAs\nJob - .1ml .4m GAIN\nCSE 0 .5 .5 1.0\nI\nIncapacited\nDeables member\nHealth- 1.8m/5.2m .5m/1.4m 10-25% offmer-\nexempt SSI pregnant\nchild under 3 (don & give\n3 6.5 8.5 11.\nmar yrs if have beby)\nEmploye 30 h amr\n-\nall who are on\n\"\n2 yr. or more\nReces 2yr - .75m/2.2m\nPregarant &\nPPF 3.5 5.5 65 7\n$1,000/person\n3m 0 1 2 3 2\nA MEMO TO BILL CLINTON & THE MEDIA FROM MARTY WILSON\nBush said he would do anything to get re-elected. Why hasn't he\ndone something to get the economy moving faster and reduce unemployment?\nWhy doesn t Bush tell us now what he plans to do after the election?\nI suspect it is bècause what he plans to do will hurt the majority of voters,\nthe middle class and poor, but it won t hurt the rich, you can count on that.\nWhat we need is the CAKWOOD PLAN - A WEALTH TAX only on millionaires.\nA three percent tax on their net wealth would bring in 180 billion dollars,\na 5% tax 300 billion. Make the rich sell some of their gov't bonds to pay\nthe wealth tax which would automatically reduce the federal debt.\nINCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE to $8.00 an hour ($16,000 a year) lifting\n35 million people out of poverty. The gov't should give a youcher to each\nworking American. If he makes $4.25 an hour ($170 a week) the vounher\nwould be $3.75 an hour ($150 a week) for a total of $320 a week. People\nwould get off welfare for $8.00 an hour.\nANNUALLY\nThe gov' could save 160 billion dollars A as a result on \"entitle-\nments\" food stamps, welfare payments, Medicaid.\nThe larger paychecks would jump start the economy, resulting in\nmore peeple becoming employed, more taxes collected, a smaller budget\ndeficit.\nThe voucher would be a separate check made out by the employer\nto the employee who would take the check to his bank for deposit. The\nbank then sends it to the gov't for re-imbursement.\nThe voucher might be given only to workers age: 20 or over.\nTo better compete with cheap foreign labor, the minimum wage could\nINCREASED\nbe lowered to $3.00 an hour, and the gov voucher to $5.00 an hour\nContrary to myths spread by the rich, taxing the rich more would\nnot decrease the incentive to work, it would increase the incentive to work.\nIt would not cut down on investment but combined with a higher minimum\nwage the increased demand for goods would increase investment opportunities\nA wealth tax on millionaires would affect only the top one percent\nof Americans who now own.nearly 40% of the nation's wealth. One study shows\nin 1976 they had only 18%. Under Reagan-Bush they increased their wealth\ndramatically. Reagan's tax cuts were a big factor. A person making five\nmillion dollars in 1980 paid 2.5 million taxes. After Reagan's tax cuts\nonly 1.5 million, a saving for him of 10 million dollars the last ten years.\nFact In 1982 the value of the stock market was one trillion\ndollars, today four trillion. In 1982 the federal debt was one trillion\ndollars, today four trillion. A family of four now owes the gov't $65,000,\ntheir share of the debt. While the rich got richer, you got poorer.\nReed 9/9/92 2am DRAFT\nRemarks Prepared for Delivery\nClayton County Office of Family & Children's Services\nJonesboro, Georgia\nSeptember 9, 1992\nI'm so glad I had the chance to be here in Jonesboro\ntoday to talk with people who are working hard to lift\nthemselves off welfare and go back to work. [Tell stories of\nthe mothers you will have just met who are in the program.]\nI am here today, because like many of the people I met\nthis morning, I was born poor, in a state where more than\nhalf the people lived below the poverty line. My mother was\nwidowed before I was born, and for my first years I lived\nwith my grandparents while my mother went back to nursing\nschool so she could get a job and support us.\n1\nI am here because like the good people who run this\nprogram, I have spent the last decade back home in my state\nworking to change the welfare system to lift people out of\npoverty and give people on welfare the skills they need to go\nback to work. This has been the work of my life, and it will\nbe a central part of my presidency.\nAnd I am here because I share a common belief with the\nmothers and the counselors and the American people, that it\nis time to end welfare as we know it. Today I want to share\nmy plan to do that.\nHere in Georgia, and across this country, people are\nworking harder than ever and making less. Last week, the\nCommerce Department reported that the average family saw\nits income drop by $1,100 last year. Over the last decade,\n2\nthe percentage of hard-work, low-wage jobs increased by\nhalf. One of every ten Americans is on food stamps.\nAmerica's welfare rolls are full to bursting. The\nnumber of welfare recipients has increased five times faster\nunder this administration than in the previous 12 years\nunder Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter combined. Three\nmillion more people have gone on welfare since 1988; three\nmillion more are out of work. When the poverty and jobless\nrolls rise, we all pay -- in the past year, we've spent $8\nbillion more than three years ago on welfare and food stamps\nalone.\nIt doesn't have to be that way. Today, I want to talk\nabout what we're doing in Arkansas to try to stem the\nnational tide. We rank first in the country over the last 12\n3\nmonths in job creation. We've created good manufacturing\njobs at the ten times the national rate. And even though\nArkansas is a poor state with the second lowest tax burden\nin America, we have a job training program that is moving\nthousands of people off the welfare rolls and onto the work\nrolls every year.\nI've been working on this issue harder, longer, than just\nabout anybody. In the mid-1980s, I chaired the National\nGovernors' Association Task Force on Welfare Reform, and\nworked with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan to write and\nenact the Family Support Act of 1988, the most\ncomprehensive welfare reform law ever passed.\nWe wanted to make Arkansas a showcase for welfare\nreform. So in 1989, we launched a JOBS program called\n4\nProject Success. Our program gives people the child care,\nhealth care, and training they need to get off welfare. And\nin just three years, we've moved 17,000 people from welfare\nto work. Arkansas taxpayers save $12 million a year because\npeople on welfare have found work or had their benefits\nreduced.\nIndependent researchers from a group called the\nManpower Demonstration Research Corporation came to\nArkansas to look at Project Success and concluded that it\nwas one of the three best welfare-to-work programs they had\nfound in the nation.\nIf we can do that in a poor state like Arkansas, think\nwhat we can do for the country.\n5\nI want to build on the lessons of Project Success in\nArkansas to take the Family Support Act a step further. We\nneed to reform our welfare system so that it puts people back\nto work and ends permanent dependency.\nWelfare ought to be a second chance, not a way of life.\nWe can't afford to tinker around the edges. It's time to end\nwelfare as we know it. The system is broken, and we need\nto start over with a new approach based on two simple\nprinciples:\n* First, people who can work ought to go to work, and\nno one who can work should be able to stay on welfare\nforever; and\n* Second, no one who works full-time with a family at\nhome should live in poverty.\n6\nUnder my plan, we'll give everyone the education,\ntraining, child care and medical coverage they need, but\nafter two years, they'll have to take a job in the private\nsector or start earning their way through community service.\nA two-year time limit for AFDC recipients will restore the\ncovenant that welfare was first meant to be: a temporary\nhand to people who've fallen on hard times.\nThat isn't a conservative idea, or a liberal idea; it's both\nand it's different -- and we know it will work. By the time\nwe're through, we won't have a welfare program; we'll have\na job program.\nMy plan, Putting People First, sets money aside for\nexpanding the Earned Income Tax Credit [$2 billion/year]\nand reforming the welfare system [$4 billion/year] -- and\n7\npays for those investments through cuts in wasteful\ngovernment spending, defense savings, and higher taxes on\nthe wealthiest 2% of Americans whose incomes went up in\nthe '80s while their taxes went down.\nWhen you consider that if we don't change the welfare\nsystem, a quarter of the people now on welfare will still be\nthere in the year 2000, you can be sure that my plan will\nsave a lot of money down the road. And more important, it\ncan help save millions of Americans from a life of\ndependence.\nWe've heard a lot of talk this year about family values,\nand that's fine with me. I wouldn't be here if it weren't for\nfamily values. But one of the most important values we need\n8\nin this country if we're going to be pro-family is to be pro-\nwork.\nUnder the current system, there are too many incentives\nfor poor people not to work. Going to work today means\nless money in your pocket. Going to work today means\nlosing medical coverage and child care benefits, giving up\nMedicaid, and struggling to find a job that doesn't pay\nenough to lift them out of poverty.\nI want to make work pay by expanding the Earned\nIncome Tax Credit for the working poor. No one who works\nfull-time and has a family at home should be poor -- not in\nAmerica.\n9\nAt the same time, we need to control health care costs\nand assure all Americans that they can get affordable health\ncare when they go to work. Medicaid rolls are breaking the\nbank in every state in this country. Skyrocketing health care\npremiums aren't just robbing this country of billions of\ndollars in administrative waste; they're costing us jobs and\nthey're forcing people onto the poverty rolls because they\ncan't get care anywhere else.\nIf we're pro-work, we ought to unleash the energies of\nevery community to create more good jobs in poor\nneighborhoods. My plan will create a national network of\nCommunity Development Banks to give low-income\nentrepreneurs the tools to start new businesses. The South\nShore Bank in Chicago, and its rural counterpart in my\nhome state, the Southern Development Bancorporation, help\n10\nbolster poor communities by providing housing loans and\nextending credit to those who want to start a small business.\nBanks, non-profit organizations, churches, and local\ngovernments can work together as partners to generate jobs,\nopportunity and hope.\nWe've got to be pro-savings as well. Earlier this year,\nthe government ordered a young woman in New Haven,\nConnecticut, and her family to repay welfare benefits\nbecause she was saving money from a part-time job to put\nherself through college. That's wrong. We ought to raise\nthe asset limit and encourage poor people to save for job\ntraining, college, and other paths to independence.\nFinally, if we believe in family values, it's time we\ntoughen our child support enforcement laws and launch a\n11\nnationwide crackdown on deadbeat parents. I'll tell you one\nthing I've learned over the last decade: Governments don't\nraise children; parents do.\nToday, much of the money we spend on welfare goes\ntoward children whose fathers could afford to pay child\nsupport but do not. If we want to do something about the\nfact that one child in four is born in poverty in this country,\nwe can start by tracking down an estimated $25 billion in\nunpaid child support. That is one reason it disturbed me to\nlearn that President Bush, in his Midsession Review, has\nproposed a cut of more than $2 billion in funds to enforce\nthe law and track down deadbeats.\nAs President, I'll push for the toughest child support\nenforcement possible. In Arkansas, if you fall more than a\n12\nthousand dollars behind in your child support, we report you\nto every major credit agency in the state. Last year, we\ncollected more than $41 million from deadbeat dads -- money\nthat we now don't have to pay in welfare or other public\nspending.\nMy plan will set up a national deadbeat data bank,\nbegin a national system of child support collection through\nautomatic wage withholding, and make an all-out effort to\nestablish paternity in the hospital when the baby is born, not\nin the courts after the father has left. We'll enlist major\ncredit agencies in a nationwide effort to send a message to\ndeadbeat parents: If you don't pay child support for your\nchildren, you shouldn't get credit for yourself. It's time we\nsend a clear message that people who bring children into this\nworld have a responsibility to raise them.\n13\nIn the end, this isn't about government programs; it's\nabout real people and their families. There will never be a\ngovernment program for every problem. The only thing that\nholds us together is the daily assumption of personal\nresponsibility by millions of Americans from all walks of life.\nAnd the one thing that can move us forward is the\nassumption of personal responsibility by the President of the\nUnited States to stop the division and blame and start\nchallenging people to make the most of their lives.\nA few years ago, I asked a woman in the welfare-to-\nwork program in Arkansas what she liked best about her\nnew job. She said she enjoyed the work and liked earning\na paycheck, but the best thing was that when her son was\nasked at school what his mother does for a living, he could\ngive an answer.\n14\nI hope you'll remember that for the next 55 days.\nWhen people assume responsibility and shoulder the common\nload, they acquire a dignity they never knew before. When\npeople go to work, they rediscover a pride that was lost.\nWhen fathers pay their child support, they restore a\nconnection they and their children need. When the privilege\nof serving is enough of a perk for people in Congress, and\nthe President finally assumes responsibility for America's\nproblems, we'll not only stop doing wrong, we'll begin to do\nwhat is right to move America forward.\nIf you remember your responsibilities to yourselves and\nyour future on November 3, I'll never forget mine as your\nPresident. Thank you.\n-- END --\n15"
}