Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
55279707
label
Legacy Documents and Drafts [binder] [3]
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
55279707
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7367449-20110638S-004-010-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
eb6a4b438a09dded
ocrText
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 001. fax To Margy Waller From Deborah Vincent; RE: addresses/phone 11/21/2000 P6/b(6) numbers/personal info [partial] (2 pages) 002. fax To Margy Waller From Deborah Vincent; RE: address/phone 11/27/2000 P6/b(6) number/personal info [partial] (1 page) 003. paper Working Families Real People; RE: phone number/personal info n.d. P6/b(6) [partial] (2 pages) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records Domestic Policy Council Anna Richter OA/Box Number: 23737 FOLDER TITLE: Legacy Documents and Drafts [binder] [3] 2011-0638-S ms153 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)] Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIAJ P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA] b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRAJ an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA] financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA] b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information [(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA) b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA] personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIAJ PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. Children & Families Living w/ Grandmother fakawaybromwork aboutiomiles - Head 7 Alexiss Carlos Start kids 4 $16 months - started Leceving TANF money about a year ago daycareis 5 blks from home about 2 miles from work grandmothers house: no heat - Coldin winter swamp cooler - Hot in Summer Safer neighboorhood now- gives without the Partnership notable to find a stablejob now have opportunities infrontot me - support gave to got confidence " Because of Presiden/elinton's leaderhip I we been aste to move up helpmyself my children & w/outsthe offor welfare houring woucher, been ask DNARETO work been ableto make IF to Workevemblan curryday I maynet have Inouldnt have you safer negenborhoud is both for my indy-clope which to work t daycane 11/21/2000 11:03 OFFICE UH SECRETARY 94567431 NO.845 001 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Washington, DC 20410-8000 Tel: (202) 708-0270 Fax: (202) 708-6092 or 4087 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11-21-00 TO: Margy WalleR ORGANIZATION: D.P.C. FAX: 456-2431 TELEPHONE: FROM: DEBORAH VINCENT. Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, for Policy MESSAGE: Please see what you think about these Weltare-fo-Work Steries. infermation. I'm still getting additional NUMBER OF PAGES (including this page): 3 If you experience problems receiving this facsimile, please call (202)708-0270 Withdrawal/Redaction Marker Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 001. fax To Margy Waller From Deborah Vincent; RE: addresses/phone 11/21/2000 P6/b(6) numbers/personal info [partial] (2 pages) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records Domestic Policy Council Anna Richter OA/Box Number: 23737 FOLDER TITLE: Legacy Documents and Drafts [binder] [3] 2011-0638-S ms153 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)] Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA] P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA] b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRAJ an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA) financial information [(a)(4) of the PRAJ b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information |(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRAJ b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy |(b)(6) of the FOIA] personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA] PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. 0002/12/11 11:03 OFFICE OF SECRETARY + 94567431 NO.845 002 [001] WELFARE TO WORK SUCCESS STORIES Ms. Anna M. Lorea P6/(b)(6) Place of Employment: City of Phoenix The EARN Alliance 520 West Van Buren Street Phoenix, AZ 85033 (602) 534-1093 (602)534-1715 Fax [email protected] Anna is a 20 year old single parent with two children. She was referred to the Welfare-to-Work program by the state TANF program. She moved into her Section 8 apartment in July 2000. Section 8 permitted her to move to a decent, safe apartment P6/(b)(6) The apartment moving from to is close to the city's public transportation system and is within walking distance to her childcare center. u Anna initially found a temporary job P6/(b)(6) P6/(b)(6) P6/(b)(6) She is free of welfare assistance and ts working nun time for the City of Phoenix as a Customer Service Clerk. Anna is taking computer courses to allow her to be more competitive for advancement opportunities in the City. a spanish Anna credits her success to the Section 8 Welfare-to-Work program. She says, "I never would have been able to do any of this without the Welfare-to-Work voucher - living in a nice apartment close to daycare and the bus to get to work." HOW old children? when on welfare.' worked before? 11/21/2000 11:03 OFFICE UF SECRETARY -> 94567431 NO.845 903 [001] Ms. Lonnie Giles P6/(b)(6) (801) 487-8211 (work #) Lonnie is a single mother with a three year old daughter. She received her Welfare- to-Work voucher in March. 2000. P6/(b)(6) P6/(b)(6) She was able to obtain full time employment in June, 2000 at Maverik Country Store P6/(b)(6) The only remaining welfare assistance she receives is for childcare expenses. Lonnie is very enthusiastic about the Welfare-to-Work program and would be happy to share her experiences and the benefits of the program from her perspective. She can be reached at her work number 11AM-7PM MST Monday through Friday. 0002/17/II. 10:11 OFFICE OF SECRETARY 94567431 NO. 846 901 CC. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY anna Washington, DC 20410-8000 andrea Tel: (202) 708-0270 Fax: (202) 708-6092 or 4087 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/24/00 TO: margy Waller ORGANIZATION: DPC FAX: 202-456-7431 TELEPHONE: 202-456-5586 FROM: DEBORAH VINCENT. Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, for Policy MESSAGE: Are any ot the examples acceptable ? should I continues to pursue families ? Please advise thanks. NUMBER OF PAGES (Including this page): 2 If you experience problems receiving this facsimile, please call (202)708-0270 Withdrawal/Redaction Marker Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 002. fax To Margy Waller From Deborah Vincent; RE: address/phone 11/27/2000 P6/b(6) number/personal info [partial] (1 page) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records Domestic Policy Council Anna Richter OA/Box Number: 23737 FOLDER TITLE: Legacy Documents and Drafts [binder] [3] 2011-0638-S ms153 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)] Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information |(b)(1) of the FOIA] P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA] b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRAJ an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute ((b)(3) of the FOIA] financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA] b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information [(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors {a)(5) of the PRA] b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA] personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions |(b)(8) of the FOIA] PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells |(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. 11/27/2000 10:11 OFFICE OF SECRETARY -> 94567431 NO. 846 002 [002] Phong Le P6/(b)(6) Santa Clara County Housing Authority contact: Sandi Douglas (408) 572-4200 Phong is a Vietnamese immigrant who escaped adversity in his country and is now building a better life in the United States with his family. Phong, his wife and two teenage children have 2000. used their WtW voucher to rent a house where they began to receive rental assistance in July When Phong came to the United States, he did not have skills that he could utilize in the American workforce, and lacked English language proficiency. Phong enrolled in a community college to take ESL and electronic assembly classes and completed a series of Welfare-to-Work Money Management workshops. Since the start of Phong's participation in the WtW voucher program, he has completed his AS degree in Electronics Assembly and now has a basic command of the English language. He is no assembler longer receiving welfare assistance and is working full-time at Flextronics as an electronics P6/(b)(6) Phong hopes that he and his family will be able to purchase a new home within the next ten years. WORKING FAMILIES REAL PEOPLE Welfare Reform Success Stories Rhonda Costa, Salomon Smith Barney Rhonda Costa didn't dream much when she was on welfare. She spent her days trying to pay her bills with a $280 a month welfare check and her nights shielding her two daughters from stray gunfire in a one-bedroom apartment. Rhonda decided to change her life after her oldest daughter, Lakiyah, told Rhonda to get up and do something with her life. "It really hit home when your 11-year-old daughter recognizes that you are not doing anything productive with your life," said Rhonda. The next day, Rhonda enrolled with Wildcat Service Corporation, a New York service provider that trains welfare recipients for jobs. After a 16-week training course, Rhonda was hired by Salomon Smith Barney. Rhonda was recently promoted to office manager and now has an assistant of her own - a Wildcat graduate. Through Salomon Smith Barney's tuition reimbursement program, Rhonda is taking a class at Borough of Manhattan Community College for her business management degree. "It's great when you have a job where you're excited to get out of bed in the morning," she said. (Introduced POTUS at WH in 5/9798; Update is from WTW Partnership Summer 2000 Report) "I want to thank Wildcat Services, Salomon Smith Barney and every business here, who has given someone a chance to make a better life for themselves. I have made a better life for my girls and myself. Just because a person was on welfare, doesn't mean that they can't get out and work. They just need a chance and I'm living proof that it can be done.' (May 27, 1998) LaTonya R. Stephens, Duncanville, TX LaTonya Stephens was determined to reach her dreams when she and her two daughters - Regina and Nakeisha - moved to Dallas three years ago to get a fresh start after living on public assistance. Her path off welfare began with GED and computer training through the Dallas Housing Authority, and entrance into a customized training program offered by Goodwill and Bank of America to train people for jobs as Customer Service Representatives. LaTonya is now a member of the top performing Call Center team at Bank of America and has won a national award for her work performance (and a trip to Beverly Hills). With benefits like subsidized child care, medical, 401(k), life insurance and stock options, LaTonya has purchased a car and is now closing in on her biggest dream - a house with a backyard. Through the Bank's Associate Home Ownership program, LaTonya has been working with a personal financial counselor, will take advantage of an employee $5,000 principal-free loan, will qualify for a mortgage at a discounted rate, and begin house hunting this summer. From homeless to homeowner in two years - LaTonya Stephens. (Participated in POTUS WTW Town Hall in 8.99; Update is from WTW Partnership Summer 2000 Report) [NOTE: Would need to call to get quote.] Maria Mercado, Boston, MA Maria Mercado never graduated from high school, but now, she can't stop thinking about college. After spending nine years on welfare before landing a job with Marshalls, Maria has started college funds for her two daughters Elixmarie, 11, and Maria Ellena, 7. "I want them tto have the opportunity to follow their dreams," she said. For almost a decade, she dreamed of getting off welfare. In the autumn of 1998, Maria entered The First Step Transition to Work Program, which is a collaborative program between The TJX Companies, Inc. and Morgan Memorial Goodwill Industries. The program led to an internship at Marshalls, where Maria discovered her natural ability for retail. She was promoted from intern to full-time sales associate to a merchandising lead sales position. Each accomplishment gave her more confidence and inspired her to pursue additional responsibility. Maria is now training in TJX's Bridges To Management program and is well on her way to becoming an Assistant Store Manager. She is studying to earn her GED and hopes to pursue an accounting degree. "I learned that nothing is impossible," said Maria. (Participated in POTUS WTW Town Hall in 8.99; Update is from WTW Partnership Summer 2000 Report) "I am very proud of myself that I had accomplished SO much in SO short time, and become a dependable person. With the support of my two beautiful daughters, my family, Goodwill, Marshalls, and the thanks from my bottom of my heart to TJX company. (August 3, 2000) Business Stories: United Airlines Gerald Greenwald, Chairman Emeritus, United Airlines and Chairman of the Board, The Welfare to Work Partnership United Airlines is one of the five founding companies of the Welfare to Work Partnership and expects to reach their goal of hiring 2,000 former welfare recipients before the end of the year. United has used the Partnership as a tool to enhance morale and a better working environment for all United employees, which has resulted in nearly doubling their retention rate. One innovative step this company has taken to help former welfare to work employ esrecipients transition into a -their new job at United is through a volunteer mentoring program with current United employees. The mentors are there to be a friend, help with workplace questions, and to offer encouragement. This foundation has contributed in the company's success in hiring and retaining welfare to work employees. United Parcel Service of America James Kelly, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, UPS UPS has been a leader in recruiting and hiring welfare recipients for the past 25 years and as one of the five founding members of the Welfare to Work Partnership, UPS has become even more involved in hiring welfare recipients and encouraging other companies to get involved since 1997. To date, UPS has hired 2535,000 [35,000 since 1997 per the info the Partnership just sent me for recent POTUS letters to Rodney and Jim Kelly] welfare to work employees in 40 locations throughout the country including Atlanta, Camden, Chicago, Philadelphia and San Diego. In the Philadelphia area, Rodney Carroll (formerly Operations Division Manager, UPS and now, Chief Operating Executive Officer and President, The Welfare to Work Partnership) and UPS helped to create a bus system with SEPTA (South Eastern Philadelphia Transit Authority), that allowed Rodney to personally hire more than 700 people from welfare to work at UPS. Transportation has been one of the major roadblocks in welfare to work success, and the program he created, which started in 1996 with 4 buses and has grown today to a total of 54 buses, now moves thousands of people to their jobs daily. Loews Hotels (Miami, FL) Jonathan Tisch, Chief Executive Officer A board member of the Welfare to Work Partnership since 1997, Jonathan Tisch leads a rapidly expanding chain of 15 [still?] hotels and resorts. Loews empowers individuals and communities by partnering with organizations to create jobs for and assist in the training of welfare recipients. A prime example of this welfare to work effort is in Miami, where Loews and 44 other members of the Greater Miami & the Beaches Hotel Association worked with Mayor Alex Penelas's office, the local WAGES coalition, and service providers such as Lockheed Martin and America Works, to meet the need for enthusiastic well-trained employees. To date, Loews has hired 40 [up to date?] responsible and qualified individuals from the welfare rolls into well-paying jobs with growth opportunities in their new 800-room hotel in Miami Beach. The success of this venture has inspired Loews to replicate this model at all of their new properties, while maintaining a strong commitment to hire welfare recipients at pre-existing sites. CVS Corporation Tom Ryan, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President Since the inception of CVS's involvement in welfare to work, the company has hired 3,788 [up to date?] welfare recipients with a 60 percent retention rate, double the industry standard. With active welfare to work programs throughout the eastern United States, CVS has an established record of hiring harder-to-place welfare recipients, and has made internal promotion a company policy. In the metropolitan D.C. area, CVS/Pharmacy and the District of Columbia Apprenticeship Council have developed an apprenticeship program for Pharmacy Technicians. This program has delivered quality employment and training opportunities. Citigroup Marjorie Magner, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer, The Global Consumer, a division of Citigroup Citigroup's welfare to work model is unique in that they have developed partnerships between Salomon Smith Barney and Wildcat, a New York City-based service provider. The welfare to work employees are trained at Wildcat to use the specific software and computer systems at Salomon Smith Barney. Once this training is complete, the former welfare recipients are prepared and qualified to work at Salomon Smith Barney, and it has proven such a success that Citigroup is replicating this program at other Citigroup subsidiaries around the country and in England. The retention rate for this Partnership is 90 percent. Small Businesses: Automated Data Sciences (Santa Monica, CA) Rena Burns, President Rena Burns, a 47-year-old, small business owner, runs an information technology/software development firm which employs 50 people, and has been a winner of the Small Business Administration's Regional Welfare to Work Entrepreneur Award. Although she did not set out to hire welfare recipients, Burns experienced such success with one welfare to work employee that she has now hired four welfare to work employees, and is using the local One-Stop Center as a hiring source. She believes the small business environment is a good one for welfare to work hires, as they are able to be more versatile in providing the personal attention, encouragement, and coaching which she feels are key factors to the success of these new workers. Having been on welfare as one of five children with a single mother, Rena works hard to provide others with the chances she never had growing up. She also believes that as a business owner it is her responsibility to give back to the community that supports her business. Rachel's Bus Company, Inc. E. Rachel Hubka, Owner and Chief Executive Officer Rachel's Bus Company, Inc. is a contract carrier for Chicago Public Schools. Rachel is a former welfare recipient who firmly believes that small businesses like hers should make a personal commitment to hire qualified welfare recipients and help them maintain their employment. Approximately 40 percent of her 150 employees have come from a welfare background. Ms. Hubka thinks that the welfare to work program has provided her with motivated workers, and "In return, I have been able to help my employees improve their self-esteem and gain hope for themselves and their children's futures. Because our future depends on continuing to hire from the welfare rolls, my commitment is to hire and train as many qualified individuals as are available." General Converters and Assemblers, Inc. George Stinson, Chairman of the Board, GCA General Converters and Assemblers, Inc. is a contract packaging and manufacturing company located in Racine, Wisconsin. George Stinson has been hiring former welfare recipients for more than thirty years, and today more than half of his employees were once welfare beneficiaries. Mr. Stinson claims that, "Welfare to work has been crucial to GCA's expansion over the last thirty years. We are living proof that you can help your community and improve your bottom line at the same time." Mr. Stinson has also been active in recruiting and educating other companies about the Welfare to Work Partnership and has partnered with local organizations, such as the Workforce Investment Board and the One Stop Job Center, to provide job-specific training and personal mentors for welfare to work employees. Earned Income Tax Credit Expansion Jessica Cupp, of Thurmont, MD, is a married mother of 2-year-old triplet girls. Her husband, Tommy Cupp, has been working for B&J Insulators in Frederick, MD for three years. In September 1997, Jessica and Tommy quickly went from a 2 person, 2 income earner family to a 5 person, 1 income earner family. The Cupp triplets were born 26 weeks into Jessica's pregnancy at very low birth weights and with several medical problems. Jessica was forced to stop her work at a childcare center in order to care for her own three children. In bothFor -1997 and 1998through 1999, the Cupp family applied for and received an-Earned Income Tax Credit refunds as well as a child tax credits that they would not have received had it not been for the 1993 EITC expansion and the new child tax credit promoted by this Administration. -This money has enabled the family to pay off debt accrued when the triplets were born, to move into a home more suited for raising 3 children, to trade in their 2-door vehicle for a van, and has allowed Jessica to stay home and care for their three growing daughters. "With the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit we were able to pay off our debts, SO we could afford the mortgage payments to buy a home and we bought a used van that we fixed Withdrawal/Redaction Marker Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 003. paper Working Families Real People; RE: phone number/personal info n.d. P6/b(6) [partial] (2 pages) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records Domestic Policy Council Anna Richter OA/Box Number: 23737 FOLDER TITLE: Legacy Documents and Drafts [binder] [3] 2011-0638-S ms 153 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)| Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information |(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA] P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office |(a)(2) of the PRAJ b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA] an agency |(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute |(b)(3) of the FOIA] financial information |(a)(4) of the PRA] b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information [(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) of the PRA] b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA) personal privacy |(a)(6) of the PRAJ b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA] PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. [003] up. The EITC was worth a mortgage payment for (1 month. That was a boost that my husband and / really appreciated. It kind of rewarded the hard work he put in, just when we really needed it. " (January 12, 2000) [NOTE: This family was featured at an event to highlight a FY2001 budget proposal to expand the EITC for families with 3 children, which we did not get this year. They benefited from ETTC in 1997 and 1998, but as of the event were no longer eligible because of an increase in income.] Fatherhood Carlos Rosas, of St. Paul, MN, is a 33 year old father from St. Paul, Minnesota, who enrolled in a fathers' employment and training program in October 1996 when he was not earning enough money to keep up with his child support obligation for his son, Ricardo, who is now 13 years old. At that time, Ricardo's mother was receiving welfare. During his time with the program operated by the Ramsey County Child Support office, Carlos worked hard to upgrade his skills and increase his earning power SO he could meet his child support responsibilities, save money to send Ricardo to college, and improve his own future. In January 1999, when he introduced the President at an event on responsible fatherhood and Welfare-to-Work, Carlos was balancing a full time job as a head maintenance worker with finishing his degree at a two-year Electronics Technology/Computer Sciences program. In May 1999, Carlos graduated from St. Paul Technical College and-started a full-time job as an In-Shop Technician at Stringer Business Systems. In January 2000, he was invited to join the First Lady in viewing the President's State of the Union Address. In July 2000, Carlos was recommended to and hired by Check Technology Corporation as a Systems Technician, and he received a significant raise and great benefits. P6/(b)(6) "With the help of this [fatherhood] program 1 am proud to say that / am on my way to a rewarding career in électronics technology and computer science, and am again paying my child support regularly. / know that Ricardo is proud of me. and I am glad that I can be a good role model for him. I want to thank the President for supporting fathers and programs for fathers like the one I am involved in. (January 25, 1999) Could get quotes/statments from the following people: Joe Jones, President The Center for Fathers, Families & Workforce Development (CFWD) Baltimore, MD 410-367-42465691 Joe Jones is a nationally recognized leader in promoting responsible fatherhood, especially among low-income fathers or 'dead broke dads'. He has played a key role in contributing to the development of the Administration's policy on responsible fatherhood, including participating in the 1994 Family Reunion Conference that Al and Tipper Gore held on involving men in their children's lives that is widely hailed as a pivotal point in the development of the fatherhood movement. At the same time, he has implemented a successful local program in Baltimore. Joe was raised by a single mother in a Baltimore housing project, and got involved in drugs as a [003] teenager. He eventually shed his addictions after he entered a rehabilitation program, and then decided to enter the social services field to help others who faced similar challenges. In 1993, he worked with the Baltimore human services agency to found the Men's Services component of Baltimore's federally-funded Healthy Start Program. Today, the Center for Fathers, Families and Workforce Development that he started has served more than 700 fathers, providing employment, parenting classes, helping fathers meet their child support obligations, and offering other critical services including domestic violence counseling. P6/(b)(6) Transportation KK: since you don't have similar context for other people, you may not need this at all, but if you do leave it in, I'd revise/update as follows On February 2223, 2000 the President announced several new initiatives to help low-income families get on the road to work and opportunity by making it easier for them to own a car or obtain public transportationa new regulation that enabled 150.000 individuals to own a reliable car without losing eligibility for food stamps. He also called on Congress to enact three legislative proposals in his FY20001 budget that will: 1) Since then, FY 2001 appropriations bills signed by the President will enable 245,000 more families-people to own a car and still get food stamps by allowing states to use the more generous rules already put in place for their welfare reform programs and will provide $100;2) double funding to $150-million for Access to Jobs grants to support innovative, locally-designed transportation solutions. And, a final Food Stamp regulation announced by the President on November 18th will allow over 100,000 more low-income individuals to own a reliable car without losing food stamp eligibility; and 3) allow low income families to use Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) to save for a car. Michael Alexander, from Brockton, NY, is a 24-year-old single father of two children. Mr. Alexander is working hard to find jobs to support his family, but because he resides in an area with very limited public transportation and he did not own a car, it was very difficult for him to maintain steady employment. P6/(b)(6) Through the help of a [federally funded2Jfederally-funded, MW, you checked this with Irene, right? -county run program, EARNA CAR, Mr. Alexander was recently able to purchase a used vehicle. He attended classes about car maintenance, helped repair a donated car, and with the help of a local bank worked out a manageable loan payment. Now he is working part-time at Dunn Tire and attending classes in computer repair at a local community college. He is in the process of moving into full-time employment, SO he can fully support his children and leave public assistance [does this reflect updates you just got?]. Without this car, it would be extremely difficult for him to balance his responsibilities at home with his current work and school schedule, much less pursue the full-time employment that would make him completely self-sufficient. [Introduced POTUS at 2/23/00 event - see above] "Because of my new, reliable car, I now will be able to get to and maintain a full-time job I know that this car will be very helpful in reaching my goal of leaving public assistance and supporting my family on my own... I am glad the President understands how important it is for people like me to have reliable transportation as they are working to support their families. " (February 232, 2000) Tiffany Smith, Philadelphia, PA UPS [WTW Partnership to find out if area received federal funds to improve transportation system] Julie T. Bosland 11/14/2000 10:32:40 AM Record Type: Record To: Karin Kullman/OPD/EOP@EOP Anna Richter/OPD/EOP@EOP CC: Subject: Fatherhood contacts Joe Jones, President The Center for Fathers, Families & Workforce Development (CFWD) Baltimore, MD 410-367-4246 Jeff Johnson, President/CEO National Center for Strategic Nonprofit Planning and Community Leadership Washington, D.C. 202-822-6725 Preston Garrison, Executive Director National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families Washington, D.C. 202-737-6683 Welfare to work - - Businesses & People - Dorian calling KK today Childsupport: Center for Law & Social Policy (CLASP) 3285140 JerriJensen X 1 Fatherhood: JoeJones- Role of fathers emphasized Carlos- Families quote in that Lexis Thansportations: Food stamps "98 , slater WHEVENA AccesstoJobs July 14 1999 TANF Flexibility Michael Lexts Teen Pregnancy: Brandy- - VPOTUS / POTUS (Events Campaign- - Tobacco: Campaign Lexis Housing: - Validators Page 3 1ST DOCUMENT of Level 1 printed in FULL format. Public Papers of the Presidents May 20, 1997 CITE: 33 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 744 LENGTH: 2633 words HEADLINE: Remarks Launching the Welfare to Work Partnership BODY: Thank you, George Stinson, for your wonderful introduction, your remarks, and most importantly, for your very, very powerful example. I thank the Governors, Tom Carper and Tommy Thompson, my former colleagues and friends, for being here and for the power of their example. I thank the Members of Congress, and most of all, I thank all the business leaders who are here, Gerry Greenwald and the leaders of the other companies that were with us when we just had 5, and all of you who are part of our first 105 thank you all. And I want to say a special word of thanks to my friend Eli Segal. He'd be a lot richer man if he'd never met me. [Laughter] I have but I have made him America's reigning expert in public startups. [Laughter] He is truly the father of AmeriCorps, the national service program that I love. And I can say, as I've been around the country now for nearly 4 1/2 years, more people have come up to me and said of AmeriCorps, that changed my life for the better than anything I have done as President, except now this will be more numerous. Because now you know, Eli and I were just sitting around talking one day, and he said, "Now, what can I do for you now?" And I said, "Well, we passed this welfare reform law," and I said, "I really believe in it, but I mean, you know, there's no way in the world we're going to get there. We've got the deficit, we've got to balance the budget, and we can't possibly meet the hiring targets of the welfare reform law unless we can organize the private sector and maximize in every State all the options to give people incentives to hire people in the private sector to move people from welfare to work. Oh, we can get a little money to put into the very high unemployment areas for the community service jobs and Congress has agreed to do that, but we've got to have the private sector." And he said, "We can do that." Then he found Gerry and the other first 4 that were here, who are here in the audience, and then there were 100, and soon there will be 1,000. And I thank you all very much. I would like to talk about this today, a little bit, from my perspective as President, but first let me say that I respect the fact that those of you who come here, come here as Americans. You come here primarily as business people. Some of you are Republicans; some of you are Democrats; some of you probably wish you had never met a politician. [Laughter] But you all recognize that this is not a partisan issue, that it is a moral obligation for our country. It is America's business, and therefore, it must be the work of American business. How did we get this goal of moving a million people from welfare to work by the year 2000? How did you get here, to make a difference, as you can, as you saw from the young women who have been introduced here, to help people to move Page 4 Public Papers of the Presidents from a lifetime of dependence to one of independence, to move from burdening their children with a legacy of despair to leaving their children with an inheritance of hope? Well, it all goes back to the effort we have made now as a nation. Some of us, as you heard the Governors talking, have been involved with this welfare reform issue a long time. But when I became President, I was convinced that we had to change both the economic policy and the social policy of the country if we wanted America to work again for everyone; that we had to do something to get the deficit down and expand trade and, at the same time, invest more money in education and science and technology and research and the things that would grow the economy; but that we had to prove that America could work again in a fundamental human way. So we had to deal with crime. We had to deal with our great diversity and get people to come together across the lines that divide us and a stronger community. We had to deal with the conflicts people feel with family and work, that working people are having trouble raising their kids too and meeting their obligations at work. And a big part of this mosaic was to change the culture of dependency that had arisen around our welfare system. There was lots of evidence that nobody really liked the welfare system very much, especially the people that were on it. There was also, frankly, a lot of evidence that, for about half the people that were on it, it worked reasonably well, just because, for those people, you'd have to practically throw them up against a wall to stop them from doing all right in life people that hit a rough patch in life, and they'd be on public assistance and they'd go on. But increasingly, to the point where we wound up with slightly more. than half of people on welfare were long-term dependents who felt literally unable to come back into the mainstream of American life. Well, we've seen a lot of progress in the last few years, and a lot of it's been helped by the fact that we've got the lowest unemployment rate in 24 years, and for the first time ever, our economy produced about 12 million jobs in a 4 year administration period. In that time, the welfare rolls had their biggest reduction ever in that short a period of time. And SO I began to think, well, maybe we can make the welfare reform targets. And then I realized I asked the Council of Economic Advisers to study this, and I said "How much of this welfare decline is due to the economy doing better, and how much of it is due to the fact that most States now are really working hard on welfare reform with us? They've gotten waivers from the Federal Government to get out from under rules and regulations and move people to work." And the study indicated that about 40 percent a little more of the people moved from welfare to work because the economy got better and just the labor markets got tighter. About over a third, more or less, got there because most States were aggressively working with us either statewide or in parts of their States on welfare reform, and about a quarter got there for some other reason. But one of the reasons was that child support collections were increased by 50 percent in the last 4 years. So then we said, "Okay, let's change. Let's go another step. Let's tell people that if they're able-bodied, they can only have 5 years of welfare over the course of a lifetime and no more than 2 years at one time, and let's give the States responsibility and the power and the money to design State by State a Page 5 Public Papers of the Presidents welfare reform system that will work and, in effect, will have to be designed community by community." That was the import of the welfare reform law. And in that law, as the Congressman here will tell you, they set up very strict targets. But essentially, about 40 percent of the population has to be fully into this law over the next 4 years. That's how we got to this burden you're undertaking, because I want all of you who signed on to understand what is at stake here. Now, what that means, bottom line, is that we have to move about another 900,000 to one million people in the work force in the next 4 years to meet the requirements of the law, which will move about 2.5 million people off welfare, because the average welfare family is about 2.5, 2.6 million, something like that. Now, if we produce another 12 million jobs, we'll get close anyway. But it would be the first time in history that we ever did it 8 years in a row, since we've only done it once 4 years in a row, and we just came out of that. Maybe we can do it. And I'd be the last to say we couldn't. But even if we did that here's the point I want to make even if we did that, if we don't have people like this man and like all of you, the people who would come off would be those who might make it off under any circumstances. And what we are trying to do here, the import of the reform welfare law, was to change, challenge, and end the culture of poverty, which means you have to find people who don't think they can make it, who have no idea what a resume is, who never had to show up on time before. There are people in this audience today have helped find people like that before, and I wish all of you who have actually hired people from welfare to work were up here speaking today. But what this is about is saying that we are going to go beyond what the normal economy would produce; we're going to make an extra effort. And the Government will do its part, but it has to be led by the private sector. Now, in April, the Vice President and I announced that we would hire at least 10,000 welfare recipients in the next 4 years without replacing anybody, just through job turnover, in an area where we will expand employment, which I think is a pretty good thing in a Federal Government that's 300,000 people smaller than it was 4 years ago when I took office. We'll do 10,000. And with the help of Secretary Slater and some of our other Cabinet Secretaries, we're going to work with our private contractors, the people that do direct business with us, to hire 10,000 more. And we believe we can do that. When we reached the budget agreement historic budget agreement with the leaders of Congress to balance the budget, it not only will give us the first balanced budget in almost 30 years, it contains the elements that we agree jointly should be a part of our contribution to your welfare reform effort. So let me mention them. First, it provides, as I said earlier, $ 3 billion to help cities and States to create jobs and subsidize jobs, either community service jobs or subsidized private sector jobs. That money will be targeted to very high unemployment areas where you cannot reasonably expect any effort to deal with the time deadlines. Second, it encourages employers to hire and retain welfare recipients by Page 6 Public Papers of the Presidents giving a 50 percent tax credit over 2 years for up to $ 10,000 in wages for every long-term welfare recipient hired that does not displace someone else. Now, these two things will help. But in addition to that, we have other big problems. One of the biggest problems that we think we need to get more help on is transportation. You heard Governor Carper talking about child care. There's $ 4 billion more in the welfare reform bill for child care. But there was a study that came out of Georgia recently which said that of the entry-level jobs in the inner city in fast food establishments, for example, something like, I don't know, 80 percent of the jobs were held by people who were low-income adults. In the suburbs, just a little more than half of those jobs were held by people who were low-income adults. The transportation barrier kept them from maximizing their ability to move from dependence to independence. So since two out of three new jobs are created in the suburbs and a significant percentage of people on welfare live in urban centers, it is very important that we do more on that. Today, we're awarding seed grants to 24 States to develop transportation schemes to help people go and get the jobs where the jobs are. And the legislation that we proposed in the new transportation bill would provide $ 600 million to help States and local communities put these plans into action. It also was approved in the budget agreement, SO that's a very, very good thing. And let me just say one other thing since we've got two very innovative Governors here, and Governor Thompson, you've seen, they've had a huge drop in Wisconsin and a sizeable drop in Delaware. If you look around the country, there's still a lot of unevenness in how much the welfare rolls have dropped. Part of it is due to underlying economic conditions. But part of it is due to how comprehensive the efforts are. One of the things that I think is important is that the States really do get together and steal the best ideas from each other. You should know that among other things, the States now have the power under this new law to take what was the welfare check and give all or part of it to an employer for a period of time as an employment or training subsidy. And a lot of States are doing that as well. There are lots of options out there. So I want to say to all of you who are part of this first hundred, you have to work with the Governors and with the State legislators, too, and with the mayors and the community-based operators. We've got to have a system here that's community-based. Finally, let me say that if you look at the numbers, a million people sounds like a huge amount over 4 years, but in an American economy that has well over 100 million people in the work force, that produced 12 million new jobs in the last 4 years, with these extra incentives around the edges, with committed private sector employers, small, medium, and large businesses, this is not a problem. This is a startup enterprise that can be stunningly successful. But as far as I know, there is no exact precedent for it in our history. There has never been anything quite like this, and this is something we're trying to do together. I will do my best to do my part, but I thank all of you from the bottom of my heart, starting with Eli and Gerry and encompassing all of you, for doing your part. Page 7 Public Papers of the Presidents You know, I've tried to learn about what a lot of you are doing. And Mr. Marriott here has this Pathways to Independence program that supports the transition from welfare to work. I've seen that. Then I meet a man with a small business, and more than half his employees are people who were on welfare. We were in Kansas City not very long ago, and I met a man who stores data for the Federal Government, way out in Kansas City - - that's what computers do for you these days -- and he had 25 people in his business, in this data storage business, and 5 of them were people that he had hired from the welfare rolls. Every time he expands now, he tries to hire somebody from welfare. I know we can do this. I just want to say to you, when you leave here today I want you to imagine what it is you would like your country to look like when we enter the 21st century. There will always be people who, for one reason or another, are out of work. There will always be people who, for one reason or another, have a rough spot in life. And as long as we're a nation of immigrants, there will always be people who start out below whatever the Federally established poverty line is. But we do not have to have a country with an intolerable crime rate, with an intolerable failure rate among young people in poverty and addiction and violence. And we do not have to have a country with a permanent culture of dependence. We do not have to have that. We just had this service summit in Philadelphia where we said, "We're all going to get together, without regard to party, try to give every child in America five things, a healthy start in life, a safe place to grow up, a decent education, a mentor with a caring adult, and a chance to serve and give something back, no matter how modest the child's resources are." I'll tell you, we could do more to get that done by liberating their parents from the culture of dependence than anything else. You are making the America we ought to have for the 21st century. And I hope when you leave here today, you'll be even more dedicated to it because the future of our children is riding on it. Thank you, and God bless you. NOTE: The President spoke at 2:50 p.m. in the East Room at the White House. In his remarks, he referred to George R. Stinson, chairman and president, General Converters and Assemblers, Inc.; Gov. Tom Carper of Delaware; Gov. Tommy G. Thompson of Wisconsin; Gerald Greenwald, chief executive officer, United Airlines; Eli Segal, president, Welfare to Work Partnership; J. W. Marriott, Jr., chairman, president, and chief executive officer, Marriott International, Inc. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: August 14, 1997 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release August 22, 1996 REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT THE SIGNING OF THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK OPPORTUNITY RECONCILIATION ACT The Rose Garden 11:15 A.M. EDT THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Lillie, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice President, to the members of the Cabinet. All of the members of Congress who are here, thank you very much. I'd like to say to Congressman Castle, I'm especially glad to see you here, because eight years ago about this time when you were the Governor of Delaware and Governor Carper was the Congressman from Delaware, you and I were together at a signing like this. Thank you, Senator Long, for coming here. Thank you, Governors Romer, Carper, Miller and Caperton. I'd also like to thank Penelope Howard and Janet Ferrel for coming here. They, too, have worked their way from welfare to independence and we're honored to have them here. I'd like to thank all of the people who worked on this bill who have been introduced from our staff and Cabinet, but I'd also like to especially thank Bruce Reed, who did a lot to do with working on the final compromises of this bill; I thank him. Lillie Harden was up there talking, and 1 want to tell you how she happens to be here today. Ten years ago, Governor Castle and I were asked to cochair a Governors Task Force on Welfare Reform, and we were asked together on it, and when we met at Hilton Head in South Carolina, we had a little panel. And 41 governors showed up to listen to people who were on welfare from several states. So I asked Carol Rasco to find me somebody from our state who had been in one of our welfare reform programs and had gone to work. She found Lillie Harden and Lillie showed up at the program. And I was conducting this meeting and I committed a mistake that they always tell lawyers never to do: never ask a question you do not know the answer to. (Laughter.) But she was doing so well talking about it, as you saw how well-spoken she was today -- and I said, "Lillie, what's the best thing about being off welfare?" And she looked me straight in the eye and said, "When my boy goes to school and they say what does your mama do for a living, he can give an answer." I have never forgotten that. (Applause.) And when I saw the success of all of her children and the success that she's had in the past 10 years, I can tell you, you've had a bigger impact on me than I've had on you. And I thank you for the power of your example, for your family's. And for all of America, thank you very much. (Applause.) What we are trying to do today is to overcome the flaws of the welfare system for the people who are trapped on it. We all know that the typical family on welfare today is very different from the one that welfare was designed to deal with 60 years ago. We all know that there are a lot of good people on welfare who just get off of it in the ordinary course of business, but that a significant number of people are trapped on welfare for a very long time, exiling them from the entire community of work that gives structure to our lives. Nearly 30 years ago, Robert Kennedy said, "Work is the meaning of what this country is all about. We need it as individuals, we need to sense it in our fellow citizens, and we need it as a society and as a people." He was right then, and it's right now. From now on, our nation's answer to this great social challenge will no longer be a never-ending cycle of welfare, it will be the dignity, the power and the ethic of work. Today, we are taking an historic chance to make welfare what it was meant to be: a second chance, not a way of life. The bill I'm about to sign, as I have said many times, is far from perfect, but it has come a very long way. Congress sent me two previous bills that I strongly believe failed to protect our children and did too little to move people from welfare to work. I vetoed both of them. This bill had broad bipartisan support and is much, much better on both counts. The new bill restores America's basic bargain of providing opportunity and demanding in return responsibility. It provides $14 billion for child care, $4 billion more than the present law does. It is good because without the assurance of child care it's all but impossible for a mother with young children to go to work. It requires states to maintain their own spending on welfare reform and gives them powerful performance incentives to place more people on welfare in jobs. It gives states the capacity to create jobs by taking money now used for welfare checks and giving it to employers as subsidies as incentives to hire people. This bill will help people to go to work SO they can stop drawing a welfare check and start drawing a paycheck. It's also better for children. It preserves the national safety net of food stamps and school lunches. It drops the deep cuts and the devastating changes in child protection, adoption, and help for disabled children. It preserves the national guarantee of health care for poor children, the disabled, the elderly, and people on welfare -- the most important preservation of all. It includes the tough child support enforcement measures that, as far as I know, every member of Congress and everybody in the administration and every thinking person in the country has supported for more than two years. It's the most sweeping crackdown on deadbeat parents in history. We have succeeded in increasing child support collection 40 percent, but over a third of the cases where there's delinquencies, involve who cross state lines. For a lot of women and children, the only reason they're on welfare today -- the only reason -- is that the father up and walked away when he could have made a contribution to the welfare of the children. That is wrong. If every parent paid the child support that he or she owes legally today, we could move 800,000 women and children off welfare immediately. With this bill we say, if you don't pay the child support you owe we'll garnish your wages, take away your driver's license, track you across state lines; if necessary, make you work off what you pay -- what you owe. It is a good thing and it will help dramatically to reduce welfare, increase independence, and reenforce parental responsibility. (Applause.) As the Vice President said, we strongly disagree with a couple of provisions of this bill. We believe that the nutritional cuts are too deep, especially as they affect low-income working people and children. We should not be punishing people who are working for a living already; we should do everything we can to lift them up and keep them at work and help them to support their children. We also believe that the congressional leadership insisted in cuts in programs for legal immigrants that are far too deep. These cuts, however, have nothing to do with the fundamental purpose of welfare reform. I signed this bill because this is an historic chance -- where Republicans and Democrats got together and said, we're going to take this historic chance to try to recreate the nation's social bargain with the poor. We're going to try to change the parameters of the debate. We're going to make it all new again and see if we can't create a system of incentives which reenforce work and family and independence. We can change what is wrong. We should not have passed this historic opportunity to do what is right. And so I want to ask all of you, without regard to party, to think through the implications of these other non-welfare issues on the American people and let's work together in good spirits and good faith to remedy what is wrong. We can balance the budget without these cuts, but let's not obscure the fundamental purpose of the welfare provisions of this legislation which are good and solid, and which can give us at least the chance to end the terrible, almost physical isolation of huge numbers of poor people and their children from the rest of mainstream America. We have to do that. (Applause.) Let me also say that there's something really good about this legislation. When I sign it we all have to start again. And this becomes everybody's responsibility. After I sign my name to this bill, welfare will no longer be a political issue. The two parties cannot attack each other over it. Politicians cannot attack poor people over it. There are no encrusted habits, systems and failures that can be laid at the foot of someone else. We have to begin again. This is not the end of welfare reform, this is the beginning. And we have to all assume responsibility. (Applause.) Now that we are saying with this bill we expect work, we have to make sure the people have a chance to go to work. If we really value work, everybody in this society -- businesses, non-profits, religious institutions, individuals, those in government -- all have a responsibility to make sure the jobs are there. These three women have great stories. Almost everybody on welfare would like to have a story like that. And the rest of us now have a responsibility to give them that story. We cannot blame the system for the jobs they don't have anymore. If it doesn't work now, it's everybody's fault -- mine, yours, and everybody else. There is no longer a system in the way. (Applause.) I've worked hard over the past four years to create jobs and to steer investment into places where there are large numbers of people on welfare because there's been no economic recovery. That's what the empowerment zone program was all about. That's what the community development bank initiative was all about. That's what our urban Brownfield cleanup initiative was all about -- trying to give people the means to make a living in areas that had been left behind. I think we have to do more here in Washington to do that, and I'll have more to say about that later. But let me say again, we have to build a new work and family system. And this is everybody's responsibility now. The people on welfare are people just like these three people we honor here today and their families. They are human beings. And we owe it to all of them to give them a chance to come back. I talked the other day when the Vice President and I went down to Tennessee and we were working with Congressman Tanner's district, we were working on a church that had burned. And there was a pastor there from a church in North Carolina that brought a group of his people in to work. And he started asking me about welfare reform, and I started telling him about it. And I said, "You know what you ought to do? You ought to go tell Governor Hunt that you would hire somebody on welfare to work in your church if he would give you the welfare check as a wage supplement, you'd double their pay and you'd keep them employed for a year or so and see if you couldn't train them and help their families and see if their kids were all right." I said, "Would you do that?" He said, "In a heartbeat." I think there are people all over America like that. (Applause.) I think there are people all over America like that. That's what I want all of you to be thinking about today -- what are we going to do now? This is not over, this is just beginning. The Congress deserves our thanks for creating a new reality, but we have to fill in the blanks. The governors asked for this responsibility; now they've got to live up to it. There are mayors that have responsibilities, county officials that have responsibilities. Every employer in this country that ever made a disparaging remark about the welfare system needs to think about whether he or she should now hire somebody from welfare and go to work. Go to the state and say, okay, you give me the check, I'll use it as an income supplement, I'll train these people, I'll help them to start their lives and we'll go forward from here. Every single person needs to be thinking -- every person in America tonight who sees a report of this who has ever said a disparaging word about the welfare system should now say, "Okay, that's gone. What is my responsibility to make it better?" (Applause.) Two days ago we signed a bill increasing the minimum wage here and making it easier for people in small businesses to get and keep pensions. Yesterday we signed the Kassebaum-Kennedy bill which makes health care more available to up to 25 million Americans, many of them in lower-income jobs where they're more vulnerable. The bill I'm signing today preserves the increases in the earned income tax credit for working families. It is now clearly better to go to work than to stay on welfare -- clearly better. Because of actions taken by the Congress in this session, it is clearly better. And what we have to do now is to make that work a reality. I've said this many times, but, you know, most American families find that the greatest challenge of their lives is how to do a good job raising their kids and do a good job at work. Trying to balance work and family is the challenge that most Americans in the workplace face. Thankfully, that's the challenge Lillie Harden's had to face for the last 10 years. That's just what we want for everybody. We want at least the chance to strike the right balance for everybody. Today, we are ending welfare as we know it. But I hope this day will be remembered not for what it ended, but for what it began -- a new day that offers hope, honors responsibility, rewards work, and changes the terms of the debate so that no one in America ever feels again the need to criticize people who are poor on welfare, but instead feels the responsibility to reach out to men and women and children who are isolated, who need opportunity, and who are willing to assume responsibility, and give them to opportunity and the terms of responsibility. (Applause.) Now, I'd like to ask Penelope Howard, Janet Ferrel, Lillie Harden, the governors and the members of Congress from both parties who are here to come up and join me as I sign the welfare reform bill. Q Mr. President, before you sign the bill, can you tell us whether you think it's right to regulate tobacco or nicotine as a drug? THE PRESIDENT: You know, Wolf, under the law, I have to wait until the OMB makes a recommendation to me. I think we have to anticipate things. I can't say more than that right now. (The bill is signed.) Q Mr. President, some of your core constituencies are furious with you for signing this bill. What do you say to them? THE PRESIDENT: Just what I said up there. We saved medical care. We saved food stamps. We saved child care. We saved the aid to disabled children. We saved the school lunch program. We saved the framework of support. What we did was to tell the state, now you have to create a system to give everyone a chance to go to work who is able-bodied, give everyone a chance to be independent. And we did -- that is the right thing to do. And now, welfare is no longer a political football to be kicked around. It's a personal responsibility of every American who ever criticized the welfare system to help the poor people now to move from welfare to work. That's what I say. This is going to be a good thing for the country. We're going to monitor it and we're going to fix whatever is wrong with it. Q What guarantees are there that these things will be fixed, Mr. President, especially if Republicans remain in control of Congress? THE PRESIDENT: That's what we have elections for. END 11:33 A.M. EDT Karin Kullman 11/13/2000 04:43:37 PM Record Type: Record To: Anna Richter/OPD/EOP@EOP CC: Subject: Quotes/stories for legacy doc fyi Forwarded by Karin Kullman/OPD/EOP on 11/13/2000 04:43 PM Margy Waller 11/13/2000 04:39:22 PM Record Type: Record To: Karin Kullman/OPD/EOP@EOP CC: Julie T. Bosland/OPD/EOP Subject: Quotes/stories for legacy doc I'm not aware of 'real people' we already know for stories on food stamps or housing. The Center on Budget could be or find a validator on FS. Barbara Sard from the Center or Sheila Crowley from The National Low Income Housing Coalition could be a validator on housing. Others who managed these issues before me might recall stories. Do you want us to check with Eric, Paul, etc? Forwarded by Margy Waller/OPD/EOP on 11/13/2000 04:36 PM Julie T. Bosland 11/13/2000 04:07:30 PM Record Type: Record To: Karin Kullman/OPD/EOP@EOP CC: Margy Waller/OPD/EOP@EOP Subject: Quotes/stories for legacy doc Karin: Okay, Andrea suggested the following: Welfare to work: Dorian calling KK 11/14 WTW Partnership report (real person) WTW Partnership business (validator quote) Child Support: woman with twins who participated in the signing of the Deadbeat Dads Punishment Act; - Lookup - spring/summer 1998, signing in the Oval Office (real person) Vicki Turetsky, CLASP (validator quote) - Centertor Law Andsocial Policy possibly Jerri Jensen from ACES for validator quote X Fatherhood: Carlos Rosas (sp?) [she said you'd know who this was] (real person) Joe Jones (or Jeff Johnson) (validator quote) Transportation: Michael (not sure of last name) from February transportation event (real person) may 99 Food Stamps: Real person or validator?? (checking with Margy) Housing: Real person?? (checking with Margy) Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (validator quote) Good PHA?? (we could probably track something down) Teen Pregnancy: Brandy (not sure of last name); did several events with VPOTUS and FLOTUS (real person) Someone from Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy (validator quote) Feel free to page her if you want to discuss further DRAFT President Clinton's Legacy: Strengthening American Families In 1992, the economy was stagnant and middle class families were working longer for less money. Parents juggled responsibilities and tried to balance work and family, but found they were getting no help from their government. Congress passed the Family and Medical Leave Act to allow parents to take unpaid leave to care for a child or a sick relative only to see President Bush veto the legislation twice. At the same time, welfare rolls were growing and Americans knew the system had to be changed. Polls showed that 75 percent of Americans agreed with raising the minimum wage in order to make work more attractive than welfare, and 86 percent thought that the system needed to be reformed. Improving the Lives of America's Working Families President Clinton was elected with a commitment to put people first. From the first day on the job, he worked to improve the lives of all Americans and to give Americans the opportunities they needed to build strong families and a better future. He fought to reform the welfare system fairly, and enacted new measures to make work pay and to help parents balance work and family. Transformed the welfare system to one that moves Americans from welfare to work, but refused to do so in a way that punished children. President Clinton rejected two punitive welfare reform bills before signing the bipartisan 1996 Personal Responsibility Act, which removed barriers that keep people trapped in the welfare system and provided incentives like job training, expanded child care and increased child support enforcement to help them go to work. Helped families succeed on the job and at home by enacting the Family and Medical Leave Act - - the first law President Clinton signed in 1993. President Clinton won other important victories for children and families including signing a $500 child tax credit, a $1 per hour increase in the minimum wage, expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit, enacting the largest expansion of health insurance for children ever, and creating incentives for adoption and foster care. Improved the access, affordability and quality of child care by nearly doubling funding for Head Start and enacting critical quality improvements to the program. The President has more than doubled funding for child care subsidies and passed an Early Learning Fund to improve child care quality. Took on the tobacco industry by developing and implementing the first-ever plan to protect our children from tobacco and end tobacco marketing targeted to young people. Gave parents new tools to protect their children from media violence by enacting legislation requiring the installation of anti-violence screening chips (V-chips) in all new televisions so that parents can screen out television programs they believe are inappropriate for their children. The President worked with the television industry to create a television ratings system, and called on the FCC to enforce the rule requiring broadcasters to provide three hours of educational programming for children a day. The Results: Stronger Families President Clinton's efforts to strengthen families have led to reduce welfare rolls and the lowest tax burden on middle class families in a generation. The tax burden on middle class families has dropped to 22.8 percent, the lowest middle-class tax burden since 1978. Millions of American families have taken time off to care for a new child or sick relatives. Teen pregnancy rates have dropped by 20 percent to the lowest level ever recorded. DRAFT Welfare rolls have been cut in half -- from over 14 million people in 1993 to less than 7 million today - to the lowest level since 1968. The number of welfare recipients moving to work has increased by 82 percent. Child support collections have broken new records, doubling federal and state collections from $8 billion in 1993 to $16 billion last year. The child poverty rate has dropped by 16 percent since 1993 to the lowest rate since 1980. Investments in child care have doubled and now help parents provide care for 1.5 million children. Adoptions increased 29 percent between 1996 and 1998. Real Stories Go Here Page 2 LEVEL 1 - 3 OF 10 STORIES Copyright M2 Communications Ltd 1996 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 LENGTH: 3494 words HEADLINE: THE WHITE HOUSE Remarks by President at signing of Personal Responsibility Act HIGHLIGHT: The Rose Garden BODY: THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Lillie, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice President, to the members of the Cabinet. All of the members of Congress who are here, thank you very much. I'd like to say to Congressman Castle, I'm especially glad to see you here, because eight years ago about this time when you were the Governor of Delaware and Governor Carper was the Congressman from Delaware, you and I were together at a signing like this. Thank you, Senator Long, for coming here. Thank you, Governors Romer, Carper, Miller and Caperton. I'd also like to thank Penelope Howard and Janet Ferrel for coming here. They, too, have worked their way from welfare to independence and we're honored to have them here. I'd like to thank all of the people who worked on this bill who have been introduced from our staff and Cabinet, but I'd also like to especially thank Bruce Reed, who did a lot to do with working on the final compromises of this bill; I thank him. Lillie Harden was up there talking, and I want to tell you how she happens to be here today. Ten years ago, Governor Castle and I were asked to cochair a Governors Task Force on Welfare Reform, and we were asked together on it, and when we met at Hilton Head in South Carolina, we had a little panel. And 41 governors showed up to listen to people who were on welfare from several states. So I asked Carol Rasco to find me somebody from our state who had been in one of our welfare reform programs and had gone to work. She found Lillie Harden and Lillie showed up at the program. And I was conducting this meeting and I committed a mistake that they always tell lawyers never to do: never ask a question you do not know the answer to. (Laughter.) But she was doing SO well talking about it, as you saw how well-spoken she was today and I said, "Lillie, what's the best thing about being off welfare?" And she looked me straight in the eye and said, "When my boy goes to school and they say what does your mama do for a living, he can give an answer." I have never forgotten that. (Applause.) And when I saw the success of all of her children and the success that she's had in the past 10 years, I can tell you, you've had a bigger impact on me than I've had on you. And I thank you for the Page 3 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 power of your example, for your family's. And for all of America, thank you very much. (Applause.) What we are trying to do today is to overcome the flaws of the welfare system for the people who are trapped on it. We all know that the typical family on welfare today is very different from the one that welfare was designed to deal with 60 years ago. We all know that there are a lot of good people on welfare who just get off of it in the ordinary course of business, but that a significant number of people are trapped on welfare for a very long time, exiling them from the entire community of work that gives structure to our lives. Nearly 30 years ago, Robert Kennedy said, "Work is the meaning of what this country is all about. We need it as individuals, we need to sense it in our fellow citizens, and we need it as a society and as a people.' He was right then, and it's right now. From now on, our nation's answer to this great social challenge will no longer be a never-ending cycle of welfare, it will be the dignity, the power and the ethic of work. Today, we are taking an historic chance to make welfare what it was meant to be: a second chance, not a way of life. The bill I'm about to sign, as I have said many times, is far from perfect, but it has come a very long way. Congress sent me two previous bills that I strongly believe failed to protect our children and did too little to move people from welfare to work. I vetoed both of them. This bill had broad bipartisan support and is much, much better on both counts. The new bill restores America's basic bargain of providing opportunity and demanding in return responsibility. It provides $14 billion for child care, $4 billion more than the present law does. It is good because without the assurance of child care it's all but impossible for a mother with young children to go to work. It requires states to maintain their own spending on welfare reform and gives them powerful performance incentives to place more people on welfare in jobs. It gives states the capacity to create jobs by taking money now used for welfare checks and giving it to employers as subsidies as incentives to hire people. This bill will help people to go to work SO they can stop drawing a welfare check and start drawing a paycheck. It's also better for children. It preserves the national safety net of food stamps and school lunches. It drops the deep cuts and the devastating changes in child protection, adoption, and help for disabled children. It preserves the national guarantee of health care for poor children, the disabled, the elderly, and people on welfare - the most important preservation of all. It includes the tough child. support enforcement measures that, as far as I know, every member of Congress and everybody in the administration and every thinking person in the country has supported for more than two years. It's the most sweeping crackdown on deadbeat parents in history. We have succeeded in increasing child support collection 40 percent, but over a third of the cases where there's delinquencies, involve who cross state lines. For a lot of women and children, the only reason they're on welfare today - the only reason - is that the father up and walked away when he could have made a Page 4 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 contribution to the welfare of the children. That is wrong. If every parent paid the child support that he or she owes legally today, we could move 800,000 women and children off welfare immediately. With this bill we say, if you don't pay the child support you owe we'll garnish your wages, take away your driver's license, track you across state lines; if necessary, make you work off what you pay - what you owe. It is a good thing and it will help dramatically to reduce welfare, increase independence, and reenforce parental responsibility. (Applause.) As the Vice President said, we strongly disagree with a couple of provisions of this bill. We believe that the nutritional cuts are too deep, especially as they affect low-income working people and children. We should not be punishing people who are working for a living already; we should do everything we can to lift them up and keep them at work and help them to support their children. We also believe that the congressional leadership insisted in cuts in programs for legal immigrants that are far too deep. These cuts, however, have nothing to do with the fundamental purpose of welfare reform. I signed this bill because this is an historic chance - where Republicans and Democrats got together and said, we're going to take this historic chance to try to recreate the nation's social bargain with the poor. We're going to try to change the parameters of the debate. We're going to make it all new again and see if we can't create a system of incentives which reenforce work and family and independence. We can change what is wrong. We should not have passed this historic opportunity to do what is right. And SO I want to ask all of you, without regard to party, to think through the implications of these other non-welfare issues on the American people and let's work together in good spirits and good faith to remedy what is wrong. We can balance the budget without these cuts, but let's not obscure the fundamental purpose of the welfare provisions of this legislation which are good and solid, and which can give us at least the chance to end the terrible, almost physical isolation of huge numbers of poor people and their children from the rest of mainstream America. We have to do that. (Applause.) Let me also say that there's something really good about this legislation. When I sign it we all have to start again. And this becomes everybody's responsibility. After I sign my name to this bill, welfare will no longer be a political issue. The two parties cannot attack each other over it. Politicians cannot attack poor people over it. There are no encrusted habits, systems and failures that can be laid at the foot of someone else. We have to begin again. This is not the end of welfare reform, this is the beginning. And we have to all assume responsibility. (Applause.) Now that we are saying with this bill we expect work, we have to make sure the people have a chance to go to work. If we really value work, everybody in this society - businesses, non-profits, religious institutions, individuals, those in government - all have a responsibility to make sure the jobs are there. These three women have great stories. Almost everybody on welfare would like to have a story like that. And the rest of us now have a responsibility to give them that story. We cannot blame the system for the jobs they don't have Page 5 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 anymore. If it doesn't work now, it's everybody's fault - mine, yours, and everybody else. There is no longer a system in the way. (Applause.) I've worked hard over the past four years to create jobs and to steer investment into places where there are large numbers of people on welfare because there's been no economic recovery. That's what the empowerment zone program was all about. That's what the community development bank initiative was all about. That's what our urban Brownfield cleanup initiative was all about - trying to give people the means to make a living in areas that had been left behind. I think we have to do more here in Washington to do that, and I'll have more to say about that later. But let me say again, we have to build a new work and family system. And this is everybody's responsibility now. The people on welfare are people just like these three people we honor here today and their families. They are human beings. And we owe it to all of them to give them a chance to come back. I talked the other day when the Vice President and I went down to Tennessee and we were working with Congressman Tanner's district, we were working on a church that had burned. And there was a pastor there from a church in North Carolina that brought a group of his people in to work. And he started asking me about welfare reform, and I started telling him about it. And I said, "You know what you ought to do? You ought to go tell Governor Hunt that you would hire somebody on welfare to work in your church if he would give you the welfare check as a wage supplement, you'd double their pay and you'd keep them employed for a year or so and see if you couldn't train them and help their families and see if their kids were all right.' I said, "Would you do that?" He said, "In a heartbeat. " I think there are people all over America like that. (Applause.) I think there are people all over America like that. That's what I want all of you to be thinking about today - what are we going to do now? This is not over, this is just beginning. The Congress deserves our thanks for creating a new reality, but we have to fill in the blanks. The governors asked for this responsibility; now they've got to live up to it. There are mayors that have responsibilities, county officials that have responsibilities. Every employer in this country that ever made a disparaging remark about the welfare system needs to think about whether he or she should now hire somebody from welfare and go to work. Go to the state and say, okay, you give me the check, I'll use it as an income supplement, I'll train these people, I'll help them to start their lives and we'll go forward from here. Every single person needs to be thinking - every person in America tonight who sees a report of this who has ever said a disparaging word about the welfare system should now say, "Okay, that's gone. What is my responsibility to make it better?" (Applause.) Two days ago we signed a bill increasing the minimum wage here and making it easier for people in small businesses to get and keep pensions. Yesterday we signed the Kassebaum-Kennedy bill which makes health care more available to up to 25 million Americans, many of them in lower-income jobs where they're more vulnerable. Page 6 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 The bill I'm signing today preserves the increases in the earned income tax credit for working families. It is now clearly better to go to work than to stay on welfare - clearly better. Because of actions taken by the Congress in this session, it is clearly better. And what we have to do now is to make that work a reality. I've said this many times, but, you know, most American families find that the greatest challenge of their lives is how to do a good job raising their kids and do a good job at work. Trying to balance work and family is the challenge that most Americans in the workplace face. Thankfully, that's the challenge Lillie Harden's had to face for the last 10 years. That's just what we want for everybody. We want at least the chance to strike the right balance for everybody. Today, we are ending welfare as we know it. But I hope this day will be remembered not for what it ended, but for what it began - a new day that offers hope, honors responsibility, rewards work, and changes the terms of the debate so that no one in America ever feels again the need to criticize people who are poor on welfare, but instead feels the responsibility to reach out to men and women and children who are isolated, who need opportunity, and who are willing to assume responsibility, and give them to opportunity and the terms of responsibility. (Applause.) Now, I'd like to ask Penelope Howard, Janet Ferrel, Lillie Harden, the governors and the members of Congress from both parties who are here to come up and join me as I sign the welfare reform bill. I Mr. President, before you sign the bill, can you tell us whether you think it's right to regulate tobacco or nicotine as a drug? THE PRESIDENT: You know, Wolf, under the law, I have to wait until the OMB makes a recommendation to me. I think we have to anticipate things. I can't say more than that right now. (The bill is signed.) Q Mr. President, some of your core constituencies are furious with you for signing this bill. What do you say to them? THE PRESIDENT: Just what I said up there. We saved medical care. We saved food stamps. We saved child care. We saved the aid to disabled children. We saved the school lunch program. We saved the framework of support. What we did was to tell the state, now you have to create a system to give everyone a chance to go to work who is able-bodied, give everyone a chance to be independent. And we did - that is the right thing to do. And now, welfare is no longer a political football to be kicked around. It's a personal responsibility of every American who ever criticized the welfare system to help the poor people now to move from welfare to work. That's what I say. This is going to be a good thing for the country. We're going to monitor it and we're going to fix whatever is wrong with it. Page 7 M2 PRESSWIRE August 23, 1996 Q What guarantees are there that these things will be fixed, Mr. President, especially if Republicans remain in control of Congress? THE PRESIDENT: That's what we have elections for. LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: May 23, 1997 Page 2 LEVEL 1 - 1 OF 53 STORIES Copyright 2000 Sentinel Communications Co. THE ORLANDO SENTINEL September 17, 2000 Sunday, METRO SECTION: INSIGHT; Pg. G1 LENGTH: 748 words HEADLINE: BIG CITIES REMAIN BIG ON WELFARE RELIANCE; WELFARE NUMBERS ARE DECLINING, BUT IT'S HARD TO TELL THAT BY LOOKING AT AMERICA'S URBAN AREAS. BYLINE: Amy Goldstein, Washington Post BODY: WASHINGTON -- As welfare rolls have plummeted in recent years, families that still rely on government assistance are increasingly concentrated in big cities, which indicates that welfare reform is failing to ease the burden of poverty on urban America. Nearly three in five people on welfare can be found in the 100 largest U.S. cities -- even though they contain just one-third of the nation's population - - because people there are being weaned from assistance more slowly than in most suburban and rural communities. Those findings come from a recent study by the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C.-based liberal think tank. They provide the latest signs of how the face of welfare has changed in the four years since the federal government replaced the historical welfare safety net with a state-run system that pays temporary benefits and steers people toward jobs. The evidence that welfare recipients are becoming clustered in big cities follows other recent findings that the program is becoming racially isolated, with African-Americans and Hispanics accounting for a growing share of the families who remain on the rolls. The data for Florida fits with the national trend, with more than half the state's welfare families subject to time limits for cash assistance living in Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa-St. Petersburg and Orlando. Miami's share of Florida's welfare rolls leaped from 24 percent in 1996 to 39 percent in 2000, a more than 50 percent increase. However, in Central Florida, Orange County, the one with the largest urban core Orlando things are different. Orange County's share of the region's welfare recipients has remained constant since 1997 36 percent. "One story emerging in welfare reform is that size does matter and the task is tougher," said Don Winstead, welfare administrator with the Florida Department of Children and Families. These trends have significant implications. In two years, Congress must decide what to do when the bill that overhauled the welfare system is due to Page 3 Orlando Sentinel Tribune, September 17, 2000 expire. Already, there is political pressure to curtail the amount of money the government allots to states to help welfare recipients prepare for and keep jobs. Researchers at Brookings and elsewhere, along with officials struggling with welfare reform in several major cities, contend that urban communities will not be able to finish the work of welfare reform without outside help from neighboring suburbs and from state and federal governments. Moving people off welfare is more difficult in many cities, these officials say, because they face a shortage of entry-level jobs, poverty-ridden neighborhoods where education and work experience are scarce, and poor mass transportation to the suburbs, where jobs tend to be more plentiful. "The new jobs are inaccessible to our citizens,' said Timothy M. Kaine, the mayor of Richmond, Va., which has less than 3 percent of Virginia's population but 11 percent of its welfare cases. Only a few weeks ago, Kaine noted, did local officials in Chesterfield County, a neighboring suburb where jobs are abundant, agree to start allowing city bus routes to enter the county. By examining the geography of welfare reform, Brookings researchers draw a portrait considerably less promising than the common wisdom about what has happened under welfare reform. After 1994, the year when caseloads were the highest, the number of families on welfare fell by half, to about 2.5 million last September, according to the most recent federal figures. But that decline, far greater than advocates of welfare reform had hoped for, obscures the uneven pace of progress, according to Bruce Katz, director of Brookings' Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. The disproportionate burden of welfare on urban communities, Katz said, "is a massive blindspot in welfare policy.' The findings being released by Brookings are not the first clue that certain cities are struggling with welfare. But the new analysis, building on two earlier, smaller Brookings studies, is the most comprehensive and detailed of its kind, calculating the growing burden of welfare on a large number of individual cities and on the urban landscape as a whole. Between 1994 and last year, the findings show, the proportion of the nation's welfare families that live in the 100 largest cities swelled from 47 percent to 58 percent. The study analyzed cities by looking at urban counties, which in some cases included inner suburbs. GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Changing the system. President Clinton hugs former welfare recipient Lillie Harden, of Little Rock, Ark., in the Rose Garden of the White House, where he signed legislation overhauling America's welfare system in 1996. DENIS PAQUIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS LANGUAGE: ENGLISH Page 4 Orlando Sentinel Tribune, September 17, 2000 LOAD-DATE: September 18, 2000 Page 5 LEVEL 1 - 2 OF 53 STORIES Copyright 1999 N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. The New York Post August 4, 1999, Wednesday SECTION: All Editions; Pg. 031 LENGTH: 863 words HEADLINE: WELFARE: IT'S NOT OVER YET BYLINE: Michael Kelly BODY: IT'S official: The reform of the welfare system is a great triumph of social policy - so great, indeed, as to restore some legitimacy to the whole concept of large-scale social policy. When the 1996 law ending welfare as an entitlement was under consideration, the Department of Health and Human Services and the nongovernmental Urban Institute predicted that the proposed reform would push more than a million children into poverty. Critics warned of social catastrophe. This week, after studying the data for 1998 - the first full year of data available - HHS and the Urban Institute have returned their verdicts: The pessimists were wrong. Welfare reform did not give rise to catastrophe. It did not fling a million dependent children into the streets; it did rescue from the grinding tyranny of the dole millions of dependent adults. The principal aim of the 1996 law was to require the states to move adults off the welfare rolls and into work. In 1998, the states were obliged to show that 30 percent of adult welfare recipients were working at least 20 hours per week. The actual results, released this week by HHS: On average, 35 percent were working. In some states - Oregon, Montana, Wisconsin, Iowa and Wyoming - more than 55 percent of welfare recipients were working at least half-time. The Urban Institute also released a report this week. Studying women who left welfare between 1995 and 1997, the institute found that a majority - 60 percent - were employed at the time they were interviewed. And, as President Clinton justifiably boasted Tuesday, the welfare rolls have been cut in half since 1993, shrinking from 14.1 million to 7.3 million. The first question about welfare reform's success is: Why? Recall that only a decade ago, the welfare system seemed frozen utterly and forever: We called it, in its seeming permanence, the welfare state. In the media-warped public discussion, the politics of welfare were also locked in place, with liberal Democratic humanists protecting women and children from cruel Reaganite ketchup-as-vegetable-heads How did we ever get out of this great dismal swamp? The first answer is political. Here is one of those rare happy occasions when Page 6 The New York Post August 4, 1999, Wednesday everyone takes credit and everyone deserves credit. Governors - Republicans mostly, but some Democrats too - led reform well in advance of the administration and Congress, and they get credit for forcing and driving the issue - and, in many states, for implementing reform so aggressively and creatively as to outstrip the law's requirements. Newt Gingrich and his revolutionary Republican Congress of 1994 get credit for drafting three welfare-reform bills, sticking with the cause through two Clinton vetoes, and holding the president's feet to an election-year fire to win enactment the third time out. Bill Clinton gets credit for making the governors' crusade a national promise, with his 1992 campaign pledge to "end welfare as we know it," and for keeping that pledge. It is perhaps true that he kept it reluctantly, but he kept it, and more. Clinton worked to undo some of the more draconian and underthought elements of the law, and to strongly support the reworked version. In so doing, as a Democratic president, Clinton legitimized the reform; he did something crucial that no Republican could have done, and no other Democrat had ever dared to do. The second answer to the question of why is one of economics, and one of considerable debate. Some - Clinton, for one - hold that the 1996 law is responsible for almost all of the reform's success. Others believe the fantastic economy largely did the job. Isabel Sawhill, a policy analyst at the Brookings Institute, is probably right to figure that the economy accounted for half the gain and the other half was due to policy changes (including the 1996 bill, the increase in the earned income tax credit, improvements in child care for the poor and the increase in the minimum wage). Sawhill's analysis raises a last, critical point: Welfare reform's success is fledgling and fragile. As the Urban Institute's study shows, many of the women who have left welfare are barely making it. A recession of any length could threaten much of what has been accomplished. What this suggests is that we must plan for a recession, and to defeat a recession. Incredibly, House Speaker Dennis Hastert thinks differently. The states have been SO successful at getting people off welfare that at least $4 billion in unclaimed welfare block grants have piled up in Treasury accounts. The states have been wisely content to leave the money there for now, as rainy-day cushions against recession's ability to undo the hard-won gains upon which millions of reclaimed lives depend. Hastert has proposed that Congress glom the cash instead, and spend it on something else. It would be interesting to know what the speaker thinks is more important than the rescue of what was long thought to be a permanent underclass. GRAPHIC: President Clinton with Lillie Harden, a former welfare recipient who found work at a supermarket deli. But is there any guarantee she won't need welfare again in the future? Reuters LANGUAGE: ENGLISH Page 7 The New York Post August 4, 1999, Wednesday LOAD-DATE: August 4, 1999 Page 6 The New York Post August 4, 1999, Wednesday everyone takes credit and everyone deserves credit. Governors - Republicans mostly, but some Democrats too - led reform well in advance of the administration and Congress, and they get credit for forcing and driving the issue - and, in many states, for implementing reform SO aggressively and creatively as to outstrip the law's requirements. Newt Gingrich and his revolutionary Republican Congress of 1994 get credit for drafting three welfare-reform bills, sticking with the cause through two Clinton vetoes, and holding the president's feet to an election-year fire to win enactment the third time out. Bill Clinton gets credit for making the governors' crusade a national promise, with his 1992 campaign pledge to "end welfare as we know it, and for keeping that pledge. It is perhaps true that he kept it reluctantly, but he kept it, and more. Clinton worked to undo some of the more draconian and underthought elements of the law, and to strongly support the reworked version. In SO doing, as a Democratic president, Clinton legitimized the reform; he did something crucial that no Republican could have done, and no other Democrat had ever dared to do. The second answer to the question of why is one of economics, and one of considerable debate. Some - Clinton, for one - hold that the 1996 law is responsible for almost all of the reform's success. Others believe the fantastic economy largely did the job. Isabel Sawhill, a policy analyst at the Brookings Institute, is probably right to figure that the economy accounted for half the gain and the other half was due to policy changes (including the 1996 bill, the increase in the earned income tax credit, improvements in child care for the poor and the increase in the minimum wage). Sawhill's analysis raises a last, critical point: Welfare reform's success is fledgling and fragile. As the Urban Institute's study shows, many of the women who have left welfare are barely making it. A recession of any length could threaten much of what has been accomplished. What this suggests is that we must plan for a recession, and to defeat a recession. Incredibly, House Speaker Dennis Hastert thinks differently. The states have been so successful at getting people off welfare that at least $4 billion in unclaimed welfare block grants have piled up in Treasury accounts. The states have been wisely content to leave the money there for now, as rainy-day cushions against recession's ability to undo the hard-won gains upon which millions of reclaimed lives depend. Hastert has proposed that Congress glom the cash instead, and spend it on something else. It would be interesting to know what the speaker thinks is more important than the rescue of what was long thought to be a permanent underclass. GRAPHIC: President Clinton with Lillie Harden, a former welfare recipient who found work at a supermarket deli. But is there any guarantee she won't need welfare again in the future? Reuters LANGUAGE: ENGLISH Page 7 The New York Post August 4, 1999, Wednesday LOAD-DATE: August 4, 1999 Page 8 LEVEL 1 - 9 OF 53 STORIES Copyright 1997 SOFTLINE INFORMATION, INC. The Ethnic NewsWatch Los Angeles Sentinel March 12, 1997 SECTION: Vol. 62; No. 50; Pg. A6 LENGTH: 745 words HEADLINE: Leaving Welfare BYLINE: Shabazz, Betty BODY: Leaving Welfare. Ms. Lillie Harden is one of 1.9 million Americans who have left the welfare rolls and headed for lives of independence since President Clinton took office. And two million fewer people are using food stamps during the same period. These are more than just hard numbers. In the case of graduates from welfare to work, we're talking about 1.3 million more homes where bright-eyed young children will learn, many from an early age, what it means to go out and earn a living. In the case of people no longer using food stamps, it's two million more homes where children will learn the connection between employment and sustenance, from seeing at least one parent use their own money when buying groceries. The important lessons in these developments cannot be underestimated for this generation and the next. Critics should note that President Clinton is looking to make fixes in welfare policy in the current term. But that intent aside, he has been working all along to make sure that changes in welfare policy are not happening in a vacuum, to make sure that welfare recipients are not pushed out like skydivers being shoved from an airplane. From day one, the president has worked to help build a parachute to soften the landing for these Americans. He has implemented a series of economic initiatives to help working families trapped at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, and these same strategies are helping people go from welfare to work. For example. Americans, like Ms. Harden, have been helped through the difficult but doable transition by Clinton strategies like an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, which has provided a tax cut to 15 million poor working families; an increase in the minimum wage that amounts to an $1,800 annual raise for the working poor; and expanded Head Start and child care programs that make it easier for welfare recipients to leave home for job interviews and jobs. But help along the pathway to independence and success doesn't end there. As these workers advance in society, hopefully moving toward the mainstream, the president hopes they will be able to work and build promising new lives for their families more easily with the help of several pro-family initiatives for Page 9 The Ethnic NewsWatch, March 12, 1997 which he has worked. These include the Kennedy-Kassebaum law, which protects people against health insurance loss when they switch jobs; the Family and Medical Leave law, which protects workers' jobs when they have to take care of a family member emergency; a variety of home ownership-boosting strategies for low-and middle income families to add 8 million new homeowners by the year 2000; and greater pension security to protect workers' hard-earned resources for use in retirement. In the coming years, as we navigate our way through welfare reform, our country must find room for approximately two million more Americans like Ms. Harden to say goodbye to welfare and hello to work; goodbye to social isolation and denigration and hello to richer, more satisfying lives. Economists say it can be done in a 130-million plus job economy like ours. But as African Americans, we cannot and must not depend on the optimism of economists or help from the government alone to create these jobs. While the economists are optimistic about job creation and while the president is proposing tax incentives and grants to help spur the hiring of workers from welfare rolls, it is still up to us to make this work. We must reach out-churches, community groups, entrepreneurs, fraternal and sorority groups, and professional organizations--and link more people in our communities to jobs and to skills development training opportunities that lead to employment. That's what the president meant when he said during his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention: "There is no more 'who's to blame' on welfare. Now the only question is what to do. And we all have a responsibility to give poor people a chance to grow and support their families.' As African Americans, charting a new destiny for African American welfare recipients is to know and understand these words from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: "We are all inextricably linked. If they, welfare recipients, do well, we do well. And that's how our communities will grow and prosper into the 21st century. (The writer, Dr. Betty Shabazz, is the widow of the late Malcolm X and was vice chair of the Clinton-Gore '96 presidential election campaign.) ETHNIC-GROUP: African American/Caribbean/African LANGUAGE: English LOAD-DATE: July 3, 1997 Page 10 LEVEL 1 - 10 OF 53 STORIES Copyright 1997 The Dallas Morning News THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS January 19, 1997, Sunday, HOME FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 1A LENGTH: 1623 words HEADLINE: Clinton's citizens; President draws on real people to focus the issues BYLINE: Susan Feeney, Washington Bureau of The Dallas Morning News DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: WASHINGTON - Four years ago, President Clinton's inaugural festivities included a celebrated luncheon with 53 Faces of Hope, everyday Americans he had met and bonded with during his first presidential campaign. He won't be paying to bring such regular Joes and Janes to Washington this time. There are too many of them. In this White House, the cultivation of "real people" has become a cottage industry. From campaign encounters, the mail or even the morning newspapers, Mr. Clinton harvests tales of American life far from the trappings of the Oval Office. He has told people privately that he worries about the potential isolation of the White House. The president latches on to these personal stories, concerns and triumphs, aides said, retelling them in public and private, in speeches and policy deliberations and drawing inspiration from them. One person's saga - the New York hotel worker worried about crime, an Arkansas woman who moved off welfare - can crystallize a national need or reinforce the president's resolve on policy. White House aides say they fill files with memorandums from the president that originated with someone's personal experience. Ronald Reagan told jokes and folksy yarns. George Bush wrote mountains of personal notes. Bill Clinton, even as he is under fire for trading access for campaign contributions, traffics in personal anecdotes. Sometimes the president highlights individual stories as validation of his efforts. At a rally in Texas last fall, he met with Longview Vietnam veteran Steve Snider and his 12-year-old daughter, Emily. She suffers from spina bifida and is paralyzed from the chest down, a condition family doctors suspect is tied to Mr. Snider's exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam. Page 11 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, January 19, 1997 While Mr. Clinton worked the crowd after his speech, he leaned over a rail to hold little Emily's face in his hands. Mr. Snider, a bulldozer operator, spoke with the president about providing more financial help for veterans whose children have illnesses stemming from a parent's military service. "He doesn't know about that bill we signed yesterday," the president said to personal aide Andrew Friendly, referring to a veterans' appropriations bill. The aide collected Mr. Snider's address and telephone number and promised to follow up with more information - which another White House staffer did within a week. In later remarks, Mr. Clinton touted the Sniders as a reason he should be re-elected. "Because of a bill I signed yesterday they are finally going to get the medical attention and the disability support they need,' the president said. Suspicious eye Some of Mr. Clinton's often-moving encounters with citizens are as serendipitous as they appear. But critics and skeptical journalists cast a suspicious eye when the president comes upon someone whose experience precisely illustrates his point. Indeed, the White House most certainly already knew how to reach the Sniders. People identifying themselves as Clinton staff invited the family to the Clinton rally, gave them V.I.P. passes to get up front and telephoned them twice to make sure that they'd be attending. Mr. Snider, a Republican who believes his family came to the administration's attention through Agent Orange experts, said he was honored to meet Mr. Clinton. "I'm a pretty fair judge of character. I really think he was sincere in the emotion he was showing," said Mr. Snider, who declined to say how he voted. "I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff. I'm just trying to get help for my little girl." White House aides say they work hard to gather personal stories. Real life experiences are among the best ways to illustrate the country's challenges and solutions, aides said. "They symbolize the values that he's fighting for," said Bruce Reed, Mr. Clinton's domestic policy adviser. Such tales are "a filter that the president works through on major policy,' said presidential adviser Rahm Emanuel. And people who have told their stories to Mr. Clinton - a feat that once seemed unimaginable to them - reject the notion that they are plants or props. "It worked for me. It works for him. It works for the country. Page 12 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, January 19, 1997 It works for everybody," said New York City hotel waiter Dimitrios Theofanis, who gets frequent presidential mention for his 1992 plea to Mr. Clinton to make the streets safe for his son. Such stories help to focus the president and staff, Mr. Reed said. "It's good to be reminded of the people your policies affect. Real people are always the best to help us cut through the underbrush of what we're doing, the aide said. Related strategy A related strategy was at work at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in August when nonpoliticians and their stories dominated the first day's proceedings. Republicans employed some of the same tactics at their convention in San Diego a few weeks earlier. Before his inauguration four years ago, Mr. Clinton promised the Faces of Hope: "Every day I'll remember you. And I'll remember who sent us here. And I'll remember that this town doesn't amount to a hill of beans unless we are spending all the money that you send us to try to help deal with your problems in an honest and forthright way. 11 In office, he has kept in close contact with the "faces." Through Ann Walker of the White House research staff, the Faces of Hope keep the president abreast of their lives and concerns. Nancy Henreich, director of Oval Office operations, maintains a database of the president's other citizen contacts. The president has set up his own private ZIP code where old friends or special acquaintances can write him directly. Ms. Walker sends the president detailed memos about the Faces of Hope and he often directs her to act on particular matters or to provide him with more information. He wants to know when any of them are in Washington and wants to see them when he visits their hometowns, Ms. Walker said. Two former South Central Los Angeles gang members keep Mr. Clinton up to speed on their mentoring program. During one Clinton visit, they brought 10 of their charges to meet him at the foot of the stairs to Air Force One. Dr. Patricia Wetzel, a Fort Worth physician who was infected with HIV on the job, said she still presses the president about the need for more AIDS education. Her connection with Mr. Clinton also gives her a receptive ear at the Centers for Disease Control and other federal agencies. "I feel very fortunate that I have just a slight little pull, maybe, " Dr. Wetzel said. Mr. Theofanis, the New York waiter, also has pressed the president about Page 13 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, January 19, 1997 improving public education. The two usually talk when Mr. Clinton is in New York. The Greek immigrant and his son traveled on the president's train to the Democratic convention. A framed photograph of Ricky Ray, a Florida boy who died of AIDS, sits on the credenza behind Mr. Clinton's desk. It was given to him by Clifford and Louise Ray, both Faces of Hope, who have two other sons with the disease. Health care push What institutionalized White House efforts to find and showcase real people was the 1993-94 push to pass health care reform. It was aide Julia Moffett's nearly full-time job to sift though a blizzard of mail to find compelling individuals. Wherever the president or first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton traveled, Americans shared their health care struggles. At the White House in August, when the president signed welfare reform legislation, he was joined by Lillie Harden, perhaps the longest-tenured of the president's "real people. in She worked her way off of welfare 10 years ago, when Mr. Clinton was governor of Arkansas. "I can tell you," the president told her at the Rose Garden signing ceremony, "you've had a bigger impact on me than I've had on you." Last month, he defended his veto of a bill that would have banned certain late-term abortions by recounting the traumas of several women who said they needed the procedure. Those women were at his side when he vetoed the legislation. Republicans contend that the president exploited a family tragedy with a campaign television ad last year featuring Kenneth and Rosemarie Weaver and their gravely ill daughter Melissa - who has since died. The Port Lavaca, Texas, family expressed gratitude for the Family and Medical Leave Act, which Mr. Clinton signed in 1993. These stories take a wide variety of routes from their source to Mr. Clinton's ear. Beverly Burnett met Gene Sperling, the president's economic adviser, in line at the Phoenix airport last fall. She noted that her son in Iowa was grateful to take advantage of unpaid leave for the birth of his son. Mr. Sperling told Paul Begala, a consultant who was helping prepare Mr. Clinton for the presidential debate in San Diego that evening. Halfway into the debate, Mr. Clinton mentioned Mrs. Burnett. "Had I heard this and it wasn't me, I think I would have said, Sure, someone really said that, " laughed Mrs. Burnett, a health care administrator. "It gave me a little more faith." Mr. Clinton is always rooting around for stories, aides said. On Christmas Day 1994, he read a story in The New York Times about Faith Page 14 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, January 19, 1997 Bowman, a single mother so financially strapped that she and her 8-year-old daughter painted their Christmas tree on the kitchen wall. She had come into a welcome $ 3,000 windfall when the Internal Revenue Service verified her eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit - a program Mr. Clinton has touted and helped to expand. "I should write her a letter of encouragement, the president wrote to aides in his rounded longhand. "Send a W.H. ornament for next year We can use her as an example of EITC! BC" GRAPHIC: PHOTO (S) : (1-2 The Dallas Morning News: David Woo) 1. Fireworks illuminate the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument and the Capitol on Saturday. 2. People stand in line Saturday despite the frigid weather to enter the Technology Playground on the National Mall in Washington. The playground, a multimedia center created for inauguration festivities, gives visitors Internet access. CHART (S) : /MAP (S) : (DMN/KRT) THE 53rd PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURATION. ; PHOTO LOCATION NOTE: Photo #2 was not archived. LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: February 20, 1997 Page 15 LEVEL 1 - 31 OF 53 STORIES Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company The New York Times August 23, 1996, Friday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 1; Column 1; National Desk LENGTH: 1303 words HEADLINE: CLINTON SIGNS BILL CUTTING WELFARE; STATES IN NEW ROLE BYLINE: By FRANCIS X. CLINES DATELINE: WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 BODY: In a sweeping reversal of Federal policy, President Clinton today ended six decades of guaranteed help to the nation's poorest children by signing into law a vast welfare overhaul requiring the 50 states to deal more directly with the social burdens and the budget expense of poverty. "Today we are taking a historic chance to make welfare what it was meant to be: a second chance, not a way of life," Mr. Clinton declared in signing the measure, which will affect tens of millions of poor Americans, largely by mandating work requirements and imposing a five-year lifetime limit on welfare help to needy families. With his signature, at a Rose Garden ceremony, the President eliminated a pillar of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal social welfare program, delighting the Republican-controlled Congress in this election year and incensing many of his fellow Democrats. Mr. Clinton, hailing the law as "good and solid" progress, expressed hope that the partisan edge would now be eliminated from the nation's frustrations over welfare. But moments after the signing, the Presidential campaign of Bob Dole commented, "By selling out his own party, Bill Clinton has proven he is ideologically adrift." On the Democratic side, the enactment was decried as a "moment of shame" by Marion Wright Edelman, the president of the Children's Defense Fund and a longtime friend of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was the fund's co-chairwoman until the 1992 election. Another frequent Clinton defender, Senator Paul Simon, Democrat of Illinois, rued the President's signature by declaring, "This isn't welfare reform, it's welfare denial." Mr. Clinton took care to have three former welfare mothers at his side in the sunshine as he signed the measure, praising it for restoring "America's basic bargain of providing opportunity and demanding in return responsibility. Page 16 The New York Times, August 23, 1996 He claimed credit for gaining a $3.5 billion increase in child care from Congress, for a total of $14 billion to help single mothers while they seek work. The heart of the complex new law abolishes Aid to Families With Dependent Children, the Government's welfare bulwark, which provides monthly cash benefits to 12.8 million people, including more than 8 million children. This is to be replaced by a system of block grants and vast new authority for the states, in the hope that they can fashion new work and welfare programs to solve the long-intractable problem of dependence on government. Job creation will be a particular state burden, since the law requires most poor adults to find a job within two years of first receiving aid. Critics, including the nation's Roman Catholic bishops, have asked how states already laboring to meet their own budget-crimping priorities can manage welfare better when the new law will provide less Federal revenue for the task, $55 billion less over six years. "The governors,' Mr. Clinton noted, "asked for this responsibility. Now they've got to live up to it. " He celebrated that "there is no longer a system in the way. " But Representative Carrie P. Meek, a Florida Democrat with a large welfare constituency, said it was more accurate to say, "Now we'll have 50 welfare systems, all doing different things. 11 Mr. Clinton, who had vetoed two earlier welfare-overhaul measures, hailed the final legislation, on balance, as a historic chance to "re-create the nation's social bargain with the poor. He vowed to fight what he described as its shortcomings, particularly a six-year, $24 billion cut in food stamp help to 25 million poor Americans and the barring of future legal immigrants from most welfare assistance. Those two cuts account for most of the law's budget savings. Realistically, Mr. Clinton's VOW to return to Congress to fight those reversals, and to initiate job-creation programs for the poor, would require his leading the Democrats back to power in Congress this November. The President, already deep into his own re-election campaign, candidly admitted that he was hoping to neutralize the risky welfare issue, which has hounded him since his 1992 campaign VOW to "end welfare as we know it." "After I sign my name to this bill, welfare will no longer be a political issue, he contended rather wishfully even as Republicans claimed credit for forcing his hand through a combination of public pressure and his own re-election strategy of preferring centrist compromise to ideological standoff. "The two parties cannot attack each other over it," the President insisted moments before taking pen in hand. "The politicians cannot attack poor people over it. There are no encrusted habits, systems and failures that can be laid at the foot of someone else. We have to begin again. This is not the end of welfare reform; this is the beginning. And we have to all assume responsibility. Mr. Dole, former Senate majority leader, issued a statement welcoming the Page 17 The New York Times, August 23, 1996 President's signature on a bill that the Republican challenger pronounced similar to "my welfare reform proposal." "When they look beyond President Clinton's election-year calculation," he said, "the American people know Republican leadership delivered welfare reform.' The Rose Garden ceremony was remarkable for the dearth of Democratic leaders in attendance and the presence of beaming Republicans. Even Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the general chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who is now busily working for the President's re-election, had denounced the measure as an "unconscionable retreat." Democratic pickets have already begun dogging the President, notably at his birthday celebration last weekend in New York, and White House officials privately concede that there are likely to be some heated moments over the issue next week at Mr. Clinton's re-nomination convention in Chicago. Even before he signed the bill, the Administration was quietly granting last-minute waivers from current law to allow states to offer extensions beyond the five-year lifetime limit on aid, provided recipients keep looking for work. Republicans have accused the President of already trying to undermine the new law in the face of liberal counterpressure. Some Democrats hope this proves true. "I'm upset about the bill, but as I read it I figure most states will be able to get out from under the toughest parts with waivers,' said Representative Patricia Schroeder of Colorado. "After a lot of tinkering and tuning, this all may prove nothing more than an election-year brouhaha." Attending to the accusation that he was severing his party's New Deal taproot, the President declared, "The typical family on welfare today is very different from the one that welfare was designed to deal with 60 years ago. In contrast to needy Depression-era Americans, he said, modern Americans who get aid "are trapped on welfare for a very long time, exiling them from the entire community of work that gives structure to our lives." As he signed the measure, a long line of protesters stretched along the block north of the White House, out of sight of the Rose Garden, in a rally organized by the Children's Defense Fund, the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority. "We intend to fix the political climate that makes the President and Congress think they can get away with writing off the poor," declared Patricia Ireland, president of NOW. Mr. Clinton, to the contrary, depicted himself as delivering creatively on a promise. "Today we are ending welfare as we know it," he insisted. "But I hope this day will be remembered not for what it ended, but for what it began: a new day that offers hope, honors responsibility, rewards work and changes the terms of the debate SO that no one in America ever feels again the need to criticize people who are poor or on welfare.' GRAPHIC: Photos: While President Clinton signed a bill overhauling the welfare system, demonstrators on Pennsylvania Avenue protested the measure. (Paul Hosefros/The New York Times) (pg. A22); Lillie Harden, left, and Janet Ferrel, former welfare recipients, watched President Clinton sign the welfare bill yesterday in the Rose Garden. (Paul Hosefros/The New York Times) (pg. A1) Page 18 The New York Times, August 23, 1996 LANGUAGE: ENGLISH LOAD-DATE: August 23, 1996 **** **** * 18 PAGES 556 LINES JOB 36962 104PK2 * 3:02 P.M. STARTED 3:03 P.M. ENDED 11/02/00 * **** * EEEEE N N DDDD * * E N N D D * * E NN N D D * * EEE N N N D D * * E N NN D D * * E N N D D * * EEEEE N N DDDD * SEND TO: RICHTER, ANNA OPD - DOMESTIC POLICY COUNCIL ROOM 308 OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20502-0308