Surge in Welfare Rolls Testing Last Wave Of Reforms

One major fallout of our current recession that could gain some visibility in the coming months is the swell in welfare rolls, a result of a last month's sharp rise in unemployment. The Washington Post puts the issue in grave context, suggesting that this could be the first significant test for the nation's welfare system since it underwent an overhaul a dozen years ago. To refresh everyone's memory, the welfare legislation, enacted in 1996 and up for renewal in 2010, requires recipients to work in exchange for government assistance and places a five-year time limit on cash benefits. At the center of the debate at the time was the pervasive concern that the previous program placed many participants in an indefinite situation of "welfare dependency," rather than giving them temporary assistance that helped to lift them out of poverty.

Welfare rolls decreased after the new system was implemented, and the law was successful and popular on many fronts, but the Post points out: "How much of that decline, politicans and scientists debated, was due to the programs' tough new rules -- and how much to the good economic times?" Surely, the current shortage of jobs and surge in layoffs, not to mention a suffering economy, is bound to put an inordinate amount of strain on the entire welfare system. One expert who held a position in the Clinton administration is advocating for a suspension of these rules, saying "The whole construct is to go out and find jobs. So it's a Catch-22. It's kind of an impossibility."

Add to these questions the fact that many states are already facing budget deficits, having spent their fixed annual amount of federal welfare dollars to mitigate other areas of poverty like child care and training programs.

Most opinion surveys have been fairly silent on the topic of welfare, but public attitudes after the 1996 welfare legislation still carry a great deal of relevance to these issues. Those Americans who were informed about the reform law said it works well because of the work requirement, and in fact, people tended to resent the values of the old system more than the cost. Majorities of Americans said they believe government should be responsible for the needy, though they are divided on government assistance if it means going deeper into debt. Still, many were divided on whether we were spending enough to assist the poor.