In 1996, the Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed welfare reform legislation, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), allowing states the flexibility to craft their own plans to move families living in subsistence poverty towards self-sufficiency. In 1997, as a State Senator from Aurora, I led the bi-partisan effort in Colorado by writing the welfare reforms that would require those receiving cash assistance, under TANF, to participate in work, training, or education in exchange for receiving public assistance. The legislation was signed into law by former Democratic Governor Roy Romer. The new program became known as Colorado Works and it still exists today.
However, the 1996 federal law did not provide the same reforms to the other programs such as food stamps, public housing assistance, or Medicaid.
Recently, the House passed H.R. 3102 the Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act of 2013, which extends the same 1996 TANF reforms to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These reforms will require able-bodied individuals, without dependents, receiving food stamps to find work, attend an educational or training program for twenty hours a week, or participate in volunteer activities. It also reforms the application process so that one must specifically request food stamps instead of automatically receiving them when they become eligible for other assistance programs.
Although critics of the legislation claim the purpose is to take food out of the mouths of children, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The truth is that under this legislation, anyone who falls under the work requirements and who is an adult under 50 years of age and able-bodied will not be denied benefits so long as they are willing to sign up for the opportunity to get a job, participate in training, education, or even volunteer work. Conservatives like me believe in a strong safety net and the House reform bill maintains that for those in need.
However, the idea that an individual who is able to work or volunteer should be doing something in exchange for receiving public assistance has been and remains a strongly supported principle in our country. Since the reforms in the 1990s, this link between work and public assistance has helped reduce the size of the welfare rolls by providing a path for those in need to move towards becoming self-sufficient.
Some states, like Colorado, have already moved forward with reforms of their own, throughout its 30-year history, the Colorado SNAP Employment First program has seen 90% of its participants successfully complete the work requirements to receive benefits. I commend the important work this program does for Coloradans and the House-passed reform will build on that and require all states to have these much needed reforms in place.
It is important to note that the just passed House reforms, the federal 1996 welfare reform law, and the Colorado Works program are all designed to give people help when they need it without encouraging anyone to be permanently dependent on the government. Moreover, the projected savings from the House reform bill will come from recipients moving towards self sufficiency and not from arbitrary cuts to the program.
Most people would rather work than rely on government assistance. Most people want to go out and be productive so that they can earn a living, so that they can support their family, and so that they can have hope for a better future. The Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act of 2013, is designed to give help in what is often referred to as a “hand up” instead of a “hand out” to those in need.
Republican U,S, Rep. Mike Coffman represents the 6th Congressional District, which includes Aurora.
let’s reform the 40 billion dollar subsidies given to the oil and gas industry
instead of taking food stamps away from disabled veterans, seniors and
those in need. Betcha Coffman would like to see social security
“privatized” also. Republicans so worried about what the unfortunate
“takers” are getting. Truly disgusting.
You sound angry.
We’re concerned about the $17 trillion debt and no end in sight to the spending because the Dems won’t design or vote for a responsible budget. There is a lot of fraud and abuse of the SNAP program and it is important to weed out the lazy from those truly in need.
Actually, SNAP, or food stamps, has one of the lowest fraud rates of any gov’t program, around 2%. Get your facts straight. Coffman is more concerned about nit-picking a stable, economically viable program (produces $1.70 in economic activity for every dollar spent) preventing people from going hungry than doing his job and passing bills that will improve the economy.
At best, SNAP recipients “stimulate” (smaller) retail industry that accept food stamps in the short term while adding to the debt and taking money out of taxpayer other parts of the economy. No one is going to support spending a trillion dollars on SNAP or unemployment checks over the 10 years, because at some point they know where that money will be taken from.
It’s not rare for families to earn around 2,000-2,300 a month, and they manage to feed their family for less than 270 dollars a month (the average snap benefit for household). The kids probably get lunch at school.
If you’re earning like 800 bucks a month and borderline homeless, then you’re probably on all kinds of welfare and subsidies and the amount of money the government has to spend to put you on your feet will be ginormous.
There’s no cuts to SNAP, only cuts in future spending and some restrictions on eligibility. If you’re kid is going hungry and you just bought a new iphone with a credit card, your priority is a bit off.
Once again, have no idea where you are getting your “facts” from. The USDA, who is in carge of SNAP, says the average benefit is about $133 in 2012, and its even less now. Only 2 states had an average benefit of over $200. Less school lunch, SNAP, Afterschool meals etc, are all anti-hunger programs that are necessary because one program does not adequately meet all the need out there, and some folks need one program but not another. Welfare is actually extremely hard to get,; people who think otherwise usually have never been on it, and the benefits are not very good. Average cash assistance per month for things like TANF is $300. You wanna argue about whether you like the morals of SNAP, you are free to insist people should go hungry and die in the streets like we are in 18th century Europe, but not sure what qualifies you to argue with multiple economists that have measured the economic benefit of SNAP and other assistance programs for years and years. Your characterization of people using SNAP buying iphones is neither accurate nor relevant to whether or not this program ought to exist and with what funding.
Sonnera, I would not want to be someone so defensive of our government welfare programs. Although at the margins they have purpose they’ve largely hurt our country, not to mention the huge administrative costs to run them. Too many have become dependent on it because the government has eagerly volunteered to do this. Because of this non-profit charities have backed out. In my view churches and charities would be a better resource for the poor and do a better job of motivating and helping people get out of it, tied to personal responsibility, development and personhood, much more effective than just a plastic card
And I would not want to be someone so skeptically that government can be the best solution for many problems. People conveniently forget we nearly eliminated hunger in the U.S. in the 70’s due to the effectiveness of government food programs. Nixon in fact spearheaded many of the programs utilized today. We had this problem solved until we started cutting funding for already cost effective programs and relying solely on charities, which are already overwhelmed, and many of whom are asking for SNAP NOT to be cut, knowing they cannot meet community need. The truth is, government can and does work for some problems. Stopping people from being hungry is one of them, and SHOULD be part of a 1st world government’s priority.
Sonnera, Since you are so enthusiastic about giving even more money to the government, I challenge you to happily pay more taxes than you are required to pay. There’s a box on the tax return for this. Somehow I doubt you will do this since liberalism is steeped in hypocrisy.
What a pointless response. How about everyone pays their fair share of taxes (which doesn’t happen now), and government does its job supporting its citizens like a civilized nation.
You are correct and many feel the same that everyone pays their fair share. Most low income Americans don’t pay any federal income taxes!!! In fact they get money back from the government. Agreed, everyone should pay a minimum percentage of their income regardless how low it is. Thank you.
Sorry, no. Another conservative misconception about how taxes work. We have a progressive tax system, in which low income people often have income too low to pay income taxes, especially after anti-poverty tax credits like the EITC. They however, pay payroll tax, sales tax (which is regressive, meaning harder on poor people), state tax, local tax, and property tax. Thats more than fair. You wanna talk about corporations like GE making billions in profit and paying ZERO tax, then we can talk about who is really manipulating the system and stealing money. Doubt you’ll agree though.
Sorry, no. Another conservative misconception about how our taxes work. We have a progressive tax system, in which poor people often have income too low to pay income taxes, especially after anti-poverty tax credits such as the EITC. They DO, however, pay payroll tax, sales tax (which is inherently regressive, meaning harder on the poor), state tax, local tax, and property tax. That is more than a fair share, given their lack of income. Why people like you are so bothered by poor folks not paying “enough taxes” (which you supposedly hate anyway), but seem fine with people like Mitt Romney making millions putting people out of work, then paying at a 15% capital gains rate, well below the national average, is beyond me. I guess you people really hate poor people that much. Now, if you wanna talk about companies like GE, making billions in profit, yet paying ZERO in taxes, then we can tak about who is really manipulating the system and stealing from the American people. Doubt you’ll agree though. Pity.
You don’t need to worry about Mitt Romney paying enough taxes, probably paid well into six figures to Uncle Sam. Good luck with your life of poverty.
Funny, the assumptions you make, about everyone except yourself. Common flaw. Im sure you’re an upstanding member of society. Good luck with your “life.”
Good luck defending government run programs and waiting on the government to solve people’s financial problems. I wouldn’t want to be you.
And thats really all you can say to me, having no actual, intelligent points to make. For the record, I am not waiting for the government to do anything other than its job, working for and supporting the people of this nation, which includes helping to keep people from starving. Sorry you disagree. Move to Namibia where they barely tax, every man for himself, and people just die if they get sick or hungry. Sounds like your kinda place. Apparently having the last word is very important to you, so go ahead and post a response. You will be having the rest of this conversation with yourself however, as Im bored of this. Peace.
Do you really think you are the only “intelligent” one? Don’t think so.
If you only knew how much money I loan to small businesses in poor countries. Again, you are encouraged to pay extra taxes, just check that box okay.