When House Republicans finish crafting a budget resolution for the next fiscal year, it may include language that would incorporate the most dramatic attempt to reform the federal welfare system in 15 years. Members of the GOP’s most conservative House faction earlier this month introduced a bill that would reduce funding for the nation’s welfare programs to 2007 levels. In addition, the legislation would impose a work requirement for those who receive food stamps.
“We need a smarter approach that promotes self-reliance and acknowledges the interconnected nature of all our anti-poverty programs,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee and sponsor of the legislation.
Recommended Stories
Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., a co-sponsor and member of the House Budget Committee, wants the funding cap language included in the House budget resolution, which sets spending limits for the upcoming fiscal year and could be on the floor by April. The work requirement for food stamps could move later in a separate bill.
Sponsors say the cut in funding is needed to control inefficiencies in some 77 welfare programs and to stop out-of-control government spending on welfare, which has increased 40 percent since President Obama took office and could cost $10 trillion over the next decade, according to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
“It’s a visionary bill for what the next step is for welfare,” said Katherine Bradley, a visiting fellow at Heritage who oversaw the nation’s largest cash-assistance program for the Bush administration. “It could end up being the benchmark bill for Republicans on reforming the program. It has that kind of potential.”
While the bill could never clear Congress with Democrats in control of the Senate, its prospects could improve if the GOP gains control of the upper chamber in next year’s elections.
The food stamp requirement may be the easier of the two provision to pass, Bradley said.
“With the work requirement for food stamps, they are not going against the grain of the will of the people,” she said.
Deborah Weinstein, executive director of Coalition on Human Needs, an advocacy group for the poor, opposes the cuts and the work requirement.
“It’s really a declaration of war on the poor,” she said, adding that there are still five job seekers for every available job. She called the food stamp work requirement “cynical,” and said it would reduce the amount of food available for children.
But backers of the food stamp proposal point to the success of the 1996 welfare reform law signed by President Clinton that put time limits and work requirements on federal cash assistance for the poor, helping shrink the rolls by 2.8 million. The program is still considered a success and some believe it should be expanded to other welfare programs, starting with food stamps.
“It’s just not a good idea to run welfare programs in which people are not required to do anything for the benefits,” said Ron Haskins, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who is a former senior adviser to President Bush and who helped craft the 1996 welfare reform bill.
