For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
WELFARE REFORM & BIRTH RATES.
Term Paper ID:25340
Essay Subject:
Examines provisions, implementation & effects of welfare reform, including its impact on out-of-wedlock births & abortions in New Jersey.... More...
9 Pages / 2025 Words
15 sources, 27 Citations,
APA Format
$36.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Examines provisions, implementation & effects of welfare reform, including its impact on out-of-wedlock births & abortions in New Jersey.
Paper Introduction:
WELFARE REFORM IN NEW JERSEY & OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BRITHS/ABORTION
Introduction
This research examines the implementation of welfare reform in New Jersey in the wake of the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, the welfare reform law, at the federal level of government. A specific focus of this examination is the effect that welfare reform in New Jersey has had on the rates of out-of-wedlock births and abortions in the state.
Implementation of Welfare Reform
Substantive welfare reform was a contentious political issue in the United States from the day of the election of President Clinton in 1992 (Minow & Weissbourd, 1993) through 1996, when a welfare reform law was enacted (Riccio & Hasenfeld,
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
The definition of segments tends to shift (based onthe perspective of the examination), and the composition of segments tendsoverlap as the perspective changes. Critics contended, however, that the "familycap" provision would not attain that goal without costs. Public Interest, (125), 72-8 . In the welfare reform laws nationally and in the State of New Jerseyfunctioned as effectively as their proponents claimed they would, incomedistribution would be improved, welfare mothers would not continue to havechildren (as they would have jobs and not be on welfare, whether or notthey continued to have children), and, if the abortion rates increased, itwould be for reasons other than welfare mothers attempting to comply withNew Jersey's "family cap" provision. (1996). As welfare law stands today, the state imposes penalties onwomen who give birth while receiving welfare payments. Some of the more significant provisions of PL 1 4-193 (1996) endedcash assistance to the parents of children in the lowest income households,transferred substantial power to the states to develop and implementfurther welfare reforms, continued the Medicaid program for children in thelowest income households, continued funding for child care for children inthe lowest income households, mandated more strict nationally-assistedenforcement of child support payments by non-custodial parents, denied mostwelfare benefits to all non-citizens-both legal and illegal immigrants, andlimited the duration of most welfare payments to a maximum of 24consecutive months and a lifetime maximum of 6 months in total (Katz,1996). States may spend "their welfare block grant funds in any mannerreasonably calculated to accomplish the purposes of the program. (1993, Winter). Replacing welfare: Options for the future.Spectrum: The Journal of State Government, 7 (2), 17-21. B. Welfare is increasingly perceived by a majority of Americans as amajor casual factor for "a whole range of social pathologies, fromillegitimacy to disintegrating schools to violent crime. (1995, April). U. It would be self-defeating for the state toattempt to persuade these women to cease engaging in sexual intercourse. They are viewed aseconomically harmful because they sap the incentive of the producer tocontinue to produce, while they fail to develop in the non-producer andincentive to become a producer. Social Service Review,7 (4), 516-542. States willlose one-dollar in federal funding for each one-dollar they fall short ofthe requirement" (Katz, 1996, p. Conservatives, thus, tend to prefer flatrate tax structures, and tend to oppose social assistance for theeconomically deprived members of the society (Carson, 1996). S. ed.). Fromthis perspective, thus, the conservative views public policies designed toprovide greater equity in income distribution as both unjust andeconomically harmful. In fact, no economic or social assistance program is likely to reducethe exceptionally high rates of poverty among female-headed families-thepopulation group most affected by poverty (Kass, 1995). Moralists within society contend that anyone in the country requiringhealth care services, other forms of welfare, or public education or jobtraining should have access to such services, regardless of whether such anindividual can pay for the required services and regardless of whether suchan individual is in the United States under legal circumstances (Blankenau,1992). Campaigns & Elections, 16, 47-48. States that hadparticularly low welfare benefit payments in fiscal 1994 or particularlyhigh population growth between 1 April 199 and 1 July 1994 automaticallyqualify for the grant. L. Opponents of free access to publicly-funded welfare servicescontend that government, both federal and state, in the United Statescannot afford to fund free social services. Chi, K. The issue assumed even greatersignificance following the election of a Republican majority in theCongress in 1994. CongressionalQuarterly Weekly, 2996-27 5. (1996, December). New Jersey passes overhaul ofwelfare. One of thosecosts, charged the critics, would be an increase in the rate of abortionsin the State of New Jersey. Additionally, the state reported that abortions were notincreasing (Goertzel & Young, 1996). This action at thefederal level strengthened the position of the State of New Jersey inimposing the "family cap" provision of the state's own welfare reforminitiative (Goertzel & Young, 1996). What the State of New Jersey must do at this time is to implementactions to minimize any causal effect on the abortion rates of the welfarereform law. Eligible states will receive an additional 2.5percent of the federal funds they received in fiscal 1994 for AFDC andrelated programs" (Katz, 1996, p. The conservative positionholds that income differentials in the American society are the outcome ofa system that rewards economic productivity-either the actual producer orthe owner of that which creates the production. One of the central features of PL 1 4-193 was a set of provisionsdesigned to move welfare beneficiaries from the welfare rolls to paidemployment-preferably in the private sector. Without a substantial reduction in the birth rate amongthe poor, however, poverty in the United States will be reduced onlythrough adoption of the radical position of massive income transfers, anaction that would likely lead to revolution. The radical position is that the conservatives arequite willing to let the poor starve rather than support an effectiveincome distribution policy. In the Fall of 1996, the State of NewJersey reported that the "family cap" provision and other provisions of thestate's welfare reform law were working. The average pre-reformbirth rate of 1 .95 per 1, dropped to a post-reform birth rate of 9.68per 1, . (1996, Fall). The liberal position contends thatprogressive tax systems in the past have failed to improve the lot of thepoor largely because benefits for wealthy individuals are built into thetax code, and that, in turn, these benefits result in higher rates oftaxation for the poor than for the wealthy. Social movements forchildren. It is proposed,therefore, that a program of health and social education be implemented theencourage and motivate women receiving welfare payments to increase theiruse of contraceptive devices. The state reported that both welfare case loads and birth rates amongmothers receiving welfare payments were dropping. The question has been raised,however, either about the effectiveness of New Jersey's welfare reform orabout the costs associated with the success of the reform. A specific focus of this examination is the effect thatwelfare reform in New Jersey has had on the rates of out-of-wedlock birthsand abortions in the state. Minow, M., & Weissbourd, R. (1993, 5 October). The politics of welfarereform: A democratic perspective. Social activists immediately scream genocide on hearingsuch a suggestion. A New York Times-CBS Poll in 1995found that 81 percent of those adults polled favored major reform of theAmerican welfare system, while only 16 percent favored minor reform, andthree-percent had no opinion on the issue" (Secrest & Walker, 1995, p. L., & Hattiangadi, A. In the 199 s, the conflicting opinions related to income distributionin American society are generally represented by the so-calledconservative, liberal, and radical positions. Preston, J. The policies are viewed as unjust because income istransferred from the producer to the non-producer. G., & Young, G. 2997). In particular, itis presumed by many to encourage the dissolution of the family" (Secrest &Walker, 1995, p. Under the new law, funds are distributed to eachstate based on its past federal funding for AFDC benefits andadministration, emergency assistance, and the Job Opportunities and BasicSkills (JOBS) program in "either fiscal 1995, fiscal 1994 or the average offiscal 1992-94, whichever is higher" (Katz, 1996, p. States that do not place the required percentage of welfarerecipients into the work force, as stipulated by the Welfare Reform Law,will be required to spend at least 8 percent of their funds. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act(PL 1 4-193), more generally known as the Welfare Reform Law, was enactedin 1996. New York Times, B4. Daedalus, 122, 1-29. PublicWelfare, 53, 34-37.(4) Katz, J. Poverty in a society is afunction of income distribution, Income distribution refers to theproportional share of economic benefits received by the different segmentscomprising an economy. TheWelfare Reform Law defines as a reasonable manner those activitiesauthorized under AFDC and the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills programfor welfare recipients, as well as those activities that help low-incomehouseholds with heating and cooling costs. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of1996. PL 1 4-193 provides for block grant funds to be distributed to thestates for temporary assistance for needy families (TANF) to replace TitleIV-A of the Social Security Act, which provided assistance through the AFDCprogram (Katz, 1996). Theformer welfare system failed to accomplish these goals, and PL 1 4-193appears unlikely to accomplish these goals. With respect to the liberals, the radicalposition is that, while the liberals are willing to provide some relief forthe poor, they are not willing to acknowledge that the problem lies in adefective economic system, and that without such acknowledgment effectivelong-term solutions to the poverty problem cannot be developed. Riccio, J., & Hasenfeld, Y. Goertzel, T. PL 1 4-193. (Rvsd. Washington: United States Government Printing Office. Effects of Welfare Reform Among other things, the federal Welfare Reform Law superseded the Aidto Families With Dependent Children Program (AFDC). New Jersey's experimentin welfare reform. The impact of waivers on children. A history of economic theoryand method. 2999). Proposed Policy Action The welfare system in the United States prior to the implementation ofPL 1 4-193 consumed approximately two-percent of the national budget(Secrest & Walker, 1995). Enforcing aparticipation mandate in a welfare-to-work program. Economists often distinguish betweenthe owners of capital and labor in considerations of income distribution,while social activists are more apt to be concerned with the distributionof income between the wealthy and the poor, white and non-white, and maleand female, and tax planners are interested in income distributionaccording to population-income quintiles (Ekelund & Hebert, 1996). B., & Hebert, R. 47). Secrest, A., & Walker, D. S. New York Times, A1 . Welfare Reform in New Jersey & Out-of-Wedlock Briths/Abortion Introduction This research examines the implementation of welfare reform in NewJersey in the wake of the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and WorkOpportunity Act, the welfare reform law, at the federal level ofgovernment. One of the most controversial provisions of welfare reform in NewJersey was the "family cap" provision. New York Times, A9. (1996, 23 October). Carson, R. Income differences,according to this conservative position, stem more from individualpreferences than they do from bias in the income distribution system. Welfare is perceived by the majority of Americans tobe a failure of government that hurts rather than helps the effort toalleviate poverty. Hospitals andHealth Networks, 67, 36-39. At the time that the law was proposed, Governor Christine Whitmancontended that the plan would not cause an increase in state spendinglevels of welfare and would not burden the poor in the state (Preston,1996). The intent of both the earlier welfare system and PL 1 4-193 was theelimination of poverty in the United States. (1998, 8 June). Universal access. (1998, Spring). The liberal position is that a progressive tax structure (as opposedto a flat rate structure) is required if the economically less fortunate inthe society are to be able to receive minimally acceptable levels of theeconomic fruits of the national income. The radicals also supportincome equalization polices and an end to all tax benefits. Kass, D. New York: St. Welfare to work:Building a better path to private employment opportunities, Journal ofLabor Research, 19(2), 2 5-228. Report tying abortion to welfare isrejected: New Jersey officials question its validity. To receive thefull share of federal welfare funds based on this formula in fiscal years1997 through 2 1, "states must spend at least 75 percent of the statefunds they spent in fiscal 1994 on AFDC benefits and administration,emergency assistance, JOBS, AFDC-related child care, and at-risk childcare. Across the United States,business firms-from large corporations to small businesses, along with somegovernmental agencies at all levels of government, have joined the effortto move welfare recipients to payrolls (Deavers & Hattiangadi, 1998). (4th ed.). Further, the radicalposition is that those individuals caught in the secondary market canseldom ever hope to make the transition to the primary labor market. Lewin, T. What is requiredis an educational and incentive program designed to reduce the birth rateamong the poor. The intent of the state "family cap"provision was to reduce the rate of out-of-wedlock births to womenreceiving welfare payments. On most national surveys, welfare reform rankedthird or fourth as an issue voters considered to be important-always behindcrime and the federal budget, and, in some instances, behind either healthcare or education, although never both of these issues in the same survey.The consensus for welfare change among American voters, as evidenced by thesurveys, was "broad and fundamental. No one in this poll favored the existing welfare system. 47). References Blankenau, R. Preston, J. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Thesystem, according to the radical position, contains both a primary andsecondary labor markets, and the secondary labor market provides itsparticipants with poverty-level income levels. This provision denies anyadditional benefits to a woman who give birth to a child while she isreceiving state welfare benefits (Goertzel & Young, 1996). Thus, in the view of the state,welfare reform was working well and the critics had been wrong all along.In the summer of 1998, however, independent research reported that theabortion rate in New Jersey was increasing. Both the Democratic Administration and the Republicanmajority in the Congress favored welfare reform; however, each side has adifferent set of priorities (Chi, 1997). 2997). Implementation of Welfare Reform Substantive welfare reform was a contentious political issue in theUnited States from the day of the election of President Clinton in 1992(Minow & Weissbourd, 1993) through 1996, when a welfare reform law wasenacted (Riccio & Hasenfeld, 1996). The liberal position alsocontends that an income distribution system, which for the last 5 yearshas provided the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans with over 4 percent ofthe total national income while providing the poorest 2 percent with lessthan five-percent of national income, is an inherently flawed system.Liberals, thus, tend to support social assistance for the economicallydeprived in society and to oppose flat rate tax structures and heavyreliance on sales taxes and user fees which tend to be far more severe forthe less wealthy (Carson, 1996). The state rejected thefindings as inaccurate (Lewin, 1998). Microeconomic issues today: Alternativeapproaches. As an incentive, those states "with above-average population growthand below-average welfare benefits per recipient will be entitled to asupplemental grant between fiscal 1998 and fiscal 2 1. Whileradicals tend to support social assistance programs, they also contend thatmost such programs in the United States tend to provide greater benefitsfor the well off than they do for the poor. Martin's Press. (1997, 22 February). Thedevelopment of public policy regarding income distribution must accordconsideration to each of the various perspectives on the issue, whilesimultaneously, addressing the underlying political imperatives. A second cost, according to the critics, wouldbe an increased burden on women receiving welfare payments and theirchildren when such women did give birth, as critics contended that some ofthem would continue to do (Goertzel & Young, 1996). Ekelund, R. Welfare overhaul law. 2997). (1997, Spring). (1995, Winter). The radical position says, in effect, to the conservatives andliberals "a pox on both your houses." The radical position on incomedistribution is that both conservatives and liberals place the blame on thepoor for being poor. New Jersey was one of the first states to revise its welfare lawfollowing the enactment of the national welfare reform law (Preston, 1997). (1996). States also are required tocontinue to provide Medicaid to those persons who would have been eligiblefor AFDC if that program were still in effect" (Katz, 1996, p. F. (1996, 21 September). Whitman proposes aid to help welfarerecipients work. Deavers, K.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject