Clinton Wants to Help Families at the Bottom; Will She Change Her Mind on Welfare Reform?

[cali]

<snip>
But if she wants to be the candidate who champions the needs of vulnerable Americans, of those at the bottom of the economy instead of the top, of people of color and mothers and children, then she's going to have to wrestle with another legacy of her husband's that, at least at one time, had her support: welfare reform.

In 1996, President Clinton signed a bill that he said would "end welfare as we know it." And it did just that. It took the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program—which, at the time, was a cost-sharing program between the federal government and states to dispense cash benefits to poor mothers—and turned it into what we have today, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant. Ostensibly, its purpose was the same, but its block-grant structure meant that the federal government would no longer share a proportionate burden of the costs. Instead, TANF today hands a given sum to the states no matter what demand might be and issues them loose guidelines on how to administer the country's only cash-benefit program.

<snip>

The federal government hasn't increased the amount of money it gives to states since 1996, so that money has been eroded by 28 percent, thanks to inflation. Meanwhile, the few guidelines that states have to follow do little to incentivize them to help more poor people. Quite the opposite: They have every reason to try to reduce their rolls and free up more funds, which they often move around to cover things other than cash benefits. Sometimes that extra money goes to related programs like childcare and job training, but states often just use the money to plug budget holes. That means that the share of eligible families who actually get help through TANF keeps steadily falling, to the point where just 26 percent of poor families with children are enrolled, compared to 72 percent before reform went into effect.

<snip>

Hillary Clinton supported her husband's push for welfare reform, which may not be surprising, given how often she has stood by her man. But she also voiced support for it during her 2008 campaign, expressing no misgivings about how it turned out and telling The New York Times that she thought it was necessary and enormously successful.

That doesn't mean she won't shift her stance on the issue as she has on criminal justice reform and a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. The campaign didn't respond to a request for comment on whether she still supports it. But she needs to do some hard thinking about where she stands. In her first speech after she announced her campaign, she talked about her mother's experience growing up in poverty as a child. "No one deserves to grow up like that," she told the audience, saying this belief is part of her "core values." It's reflected in some of the stories in her launch video: a single mother moving to give her daughter a better education, a black couple preparing for their first baby, a young boy getting ready for a school play. Women, and particularly women of color, are more likely than men to live in poverty, and single mothers are particularly in need of support. These are the very people Clinton wants to vote for her.

<snip>
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/30761-clinton-wants-to-help-families-at-the-bottom-will-she-change-her-mind-about-welfare-reform

And many Clinton supporters frequently express outrage about those who just don't trust her evolution on issues.
What concrete evidence is there that she actually has changed her positions and isn't just pivoting left in the primary?

[DURHAM D]

1. Please list the exact changes you want to see. nt

[cali]

2. Why? I'm discussing damaging legislation that HRC supported, and

her new found progressive positions. Not sure what kind of gotcha game you're trying to initiate, but I'm not going to be drawn into it.

[DURHAM D]

6. Not a gotcha game - just a question addressed to you.

So you don't have any suggestions... you just want to post your usual tripe.

[jwirr]

29. The effects of that "reform" are not tripe. They were very real. I was a single mother with three

children. One was severely disabled and required 24/7 total care. The new law was written in such a way that I and my children could only get help for so many years. It was totally idiotic.

I was (and did for 45 years) taking care of that child for pennies a day. The alternative would have been a government facility that would have been very expensive and paid for by taxpayers - by you.

I was very fortunate to live in a progressive state. The social workers who were our case managers immediately went through the rolls and looked for alternatives. Some they referred to SSDI so that they could not be cut off. Those living far away from work without transportation applied for exemptions, etc. I also applied for an exemption and got it. At least my state had the sense to realize that the blanket laws in the reform were unworkable and ignored the truly vulnerable.

I am guessing that the red states did not make any changes in the "reform" laws.

[DURHAM D]

39. In no way did I suggest that welfare reform was tripe. nt

[jwirr]

47. That is what I heard you saying in post #6.

[DURHAM D]

53. Nope. nt

[Oilwellian]

56. Since Cali's OP is about welfare reform

then indeed you did refer to it as tripe.

[Exilednight]

60. See post #6 and yes you did.

[Cali_Democrat]

8. So clearly you would like the law changed...

Nothing wrong with detailing exactly what changes you would like to see...

...a perfectly reasonable request.

[cali]

12. refer to the post downthread. that poster expressed quite well

what I'd like to see changed- brilliantly in fact.

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. Another day.. another BS Clinton attack

Makes DU hard to come to anymore.

[cali]

5. valid discussion of issues and candidates.

and pretending it's bullshit sure as shit doesn't make it so.

[Evergreen Emerald]

23. Stop

The "discussion" is so biased and twisted that it is certainly not worthy of the title "discussion."

[Scuba]

57. Blind obedience is not a progressive quality.

[Evergreen Emerald]

61. Right back atcha

Nor is blind.... (edit)

[Thinkingabout]

4. Training those for jobs who are down on their luck is helping.

[cali]

9. yeah, I see you addressed the facts in the article. NOT.

no, it's not helping. Did you miss the point entirely about the damage that block grants have done to people in poverty? Why yes, yes you did.

[Thinkingabout]

13. You are talking about welfare reform. Two years of job training and assistance

Was a part of welfare, perhaps you did not know this.

[cali]

17. Jaysus. it's hopeless. bye bye. You just don't have enough

knowledge to discuss issues. And you seem incapable of writing more than two sentences which more often than not, don't even address the topic.

[Thinkingabout]

26. Maybe you should research before accusing someone of not having

Knowledge to discuss the issues.

[KittyWampus]

27. Apparently you don't have enough knowledge of Hillary's legislative record

so you delve into her husband's legislative record.

[Thinkingabout]

38. The post spoke about BC in 1996, this is what I was posting in response.

I am familiar to Hillary and the issues. Actually BC worked on welfare reform in Arkansas.

[jwirr]

35. We had access to job training before the "reform". What the "reform" did not address was those

who would not benefit from job training. Like me.

Oh, yes I have a MSW degree which did me little good because my severely disabled daughter was placed (for 6 months) into an institution so I could work. Great I have a job welfare reform works - in the meantime my daughter is being abused at the institution. When I brought her home for Christmas her face was totally black and blue because of being beaten by another client. I quit my job -kept her home and did not sue the hell out of the state which was a mistake. And finally the state gave me an exemption from Clintons law.

[Thinkingabout]

40. Welfare reform will not work for everyone especially the disabled.

The welfare was for those individuals who was capable of working but lacked training. I do not understnd why a well bodied person would not want to participate in a educational training programs to better themselves.

[jwirr]

49. I got my education BEFORE the reform. And the problem with it was that it did not address those

who would not benefit from training and work. When the law finally reached the local welfare office it require everyone to get a job or lose their welfare.

BTW my family helped me get that education by coming to live with me so they could take care of my child when I was in school. But I do think that there were already training programs available then.

[Thinkingabout]

54. I am sorry for your difficulties. I know and understand not everyone is

Able bodied and there are some who needs lots of care. Those are not in the same category as able bodied people who
Needs an opportunity to receive training to secure employment.

[jwirr]

55. I totally agree with you on this. Training programs are very valuable. My own education was not

totally wasted. I have acted as an advisor and advocate for special ed clients and others for many years. And I have helped to educate a couple really good foster home owners. And thanks to LBJ's war on poverty most of my education was paid for so unlike the kids today I made out pretty well.

[daredtowork]

7. I'd like to see

Drop time limits.
No work requirement since States tend to turn that into slave labor situations.
Housing stabilization first.
Real bridges/pipelines to work instead of just polishing resumes and practicing interviews for people with serious barriers to employment.
Subsidy for transportation if there is no free transportation in the area.
Direct cash or drug store vouchers for non-food necessities.
Revamping of Section 8 so vouchers aren't attached to particular localities and aren't "Waiting Lists" - instead the people who qualify for them get the vouchers, and they are automatically portable.
No more multi-year SSI application gap that allows thousands of people to die waiting (and often homeless) just so the State can save money in the delay.
Personal social workers for people who are in the system more than 6 months to see what's going on: flexible approach to aid for them.
Understanding that when the system itself takes months and years to get stuff done, then the person on welfare will be in the system for months and years. It's NOT THEIR FAULT.

Also, I'd like a massive educational campaign - as big as the "food plate" - to demolish the myth of the Welfare Queen so neither political party can ever use a poor person's devastated life to score their political points again.

[jwirr]

37. Thank you. That is exactly what should happen now.

[Scuba]

59. /\_/\_This right here_/\_/\

[NYC_SKP]

10. I imagine she'll do as she has in the past, tweet something that sounds like she cares...

...and then go about courting her bankster funding friends.

In the years to come, I imagine that the GOP and the Democratic Centrists will support publicly funded programs that take the heat off large employers like Walmart.

EBT cards paid by tax dollars where for the working poor, who don't earn enough to live.

That is what I think Hillary Clinton would support if she were president.

But she won't become president, thankfully.

[BainsBane]

11. Here is an example

Hillary Clinton supported her husband's push for welfare reform, which may not be surprising, given how often she has stood by her man.

Seriously? Come on.

[cali]

15. I knew you'd leap at that. I almost left it off because of that.

Yes, that's sexist. It doesn't, however, contradict the fact that she robustly defended the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, and I refuse to be diverted from what I consider to be more important than a line from an article. Sexist crap in reference to HRC is not of the same level of importance as the damaging results of bad legislation. I know it was bullshit at the time- a right wing scheme that would seriously harm the poor- for a long time into the future. You seem to want to ignore issues to focus on sexism directed toward your candidate. I won't claim that doesn't happen. It does, but when that becomes more of a focus than policies that harm millions, we have a problem. We can address both.

[BainsBane]

28. I think she will change her position

Remember that she initially sought to implement single payer but was defeated back in the 90s. Politicians change in response to the electorate, and people are now of a different mindset. I actually hope both candidates propose far more than welfare. We need a living wage. People who work full time shouldn't need food stamps. We'll see what plans the candidates come up with and how they propose to implement them.

[Scuba]

58. Oh, she'll change her stated position all right. Empty rhetoric is her forte.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. That's incredibly sexist language

"...given how often she has stood by her man..."


That's incredibly sexist language, especially in light of the fact that HRC said she is not a "stand by your man" woman:

You know, I'm not sitting here like some little woman standing by my man, like Tammy Wynette. I'm sitting here because I love him, and I respect him, and I honor what he's been through and what we've been through together. And you know, if that's not enough for people, then heck, don't vote for him.

[BainsBane]

34. That's why it's used

particularly to evoke Bill Clinton's philandering, which too many hold against Hillary Clinton. You see it all, but people insist it's not sexist because . . . a million reasons, but essentially nothing is sexist, particularly on their part.

[hifiguy]

14. When Goldman tells her what to think,

she will tell us.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Hillary Clinton opposed welfare reform

Moreover, after Bill Clinton passed his first budget, Hillary apparently opposed treating welfare reform as the next priority, again pushing for health care reform. Panetta also details this in his book, and it is significant given what we know about Hillary Clinton’s views on health care.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/05/don-t-be-fooled-hillary-is-way-to-bill-s-left.html

Since I'm not a fundamentalist I don't believe Hillary was made from Bill's rib and such.

[cali]

19. so she defended it and praised it in 2008 because of...

[KittyWampus]

20. Sexist bullshit. Her HUSBAND passed legislation. I don't like Hillary but this shows how

screwed up some DU'ers attempts to attack her really are.

[cali]

22. Sorry, no. fail. Sexism? what crap.

In her own words:

Bill & I, along with members of Congress who wanted productive reform, believed that people able to work should work. But we recognize that assistance & incentives were necessary to help people move permanently from welfare to employment & that successfu reform would require large investment in education and training, subsidies for child care and transportation, transitional health care, tax incentives to encourage employers to hire welfare recipients, and tougher child support collection efforts.

The third bill passed by Congress had the support of the majority of the Democrats in the House & Senate. It contained more financial support for moving people to work, offered new money for child care and restored the federal guarantees of food stamps & medical benefits.

The President eventually signed this third bill into law. Even with its flaws, it was a critical first step to reforming our nation's welfare system. I agreed that he should sign it and worked hard to round up votes for its passage.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Hillary_Clinton_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm

TANF has been a disaster. It was a predictable disaster.

In 1996 58.7 percent of children below the poverty line were enrolled in AFDC, while by 2011 only 20.9 percent were getting help from TANF. And this is happening when the United States is already an international outlier in the percentage of children living in poverty.

<snip>

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/letter-to-hillary-clinton-lets-talk-about-poverty

[KittyWampus]

25. Totally sexist. SHE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. She has a record as Senator-

use that. That is relevant.

[cali]

44. FLAT OUT FALSE

In her own fucking words she was involved in it. And she has endorsed it as recently as 2008. Even if that wasn't FACT, her position on it is fair game.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. Mea Culpa. She supported the same position as Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the race for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said in an interview that the welfare overhaul had been greatly beneficial in eliminating a divisive force in American politics.


http://tech.mit.edu/V128/N18/long5.html

[jwirr]

42. Wonder what he meant by that?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. Maybe because it perpetuates negative stereotypes of certain groups being dependent and lazy ...

Maybe because it perpetuates negative stereotypes of certain groups being dependent and lazy when they aren't any more lazy or dependent than any other group.

[jwirr]

50. Okay that sounds reasonable. Thanks.

[KMOD]

24. You can find her positions on welfare reform

here: http://vote-ny.org/politicianissue.aspx?state=ny&id=nyclintonhillaryrodham&issue=buswelfare

I also want to add this.

Washington, DC -The Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) celebrated forty years of changing the odds for children and honored Former Secretary of State and CDF alumna Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday, September 30, 2013. Secretary Clinton was recognized for her dedication and contributions to child advocacy.

“CDF is pleased to recognize Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been a tireless voice for children. She’s brilliant. She cares deeply about children. She perseveres. She’s an incredibly hard worker, and she stays with it. She’s done extraordinarily well in everything she’s ever done. and I’m just so proud of her,” said Marian Wright Edelman, President of the Children’s Defense Fund.

http://www.childrensdefense.org/newsroom/cdf-in-the-news/press-releases/2013/honoring-hillary-clinton.html

[Thinkingabout]

33. Yes, Hillary has been a long time advocate for children, she has also advocated for women and their

Issues. Assisting women to get training in order to be able to care for their needs is a very good starting point. Getting early education for children is another issue Hillary has advocated.

[still_one]

30. How many people you know part of an administration are going to voice an opposite view point in

public when they are part of that administration?

Cyrus Vance, he resigned from the Carter administration is one

Hillary was First Lady she could not do that

How many First Ladies do you know that publicly went against a policy of their husband? It doesn't happen


Judge Hillary on Hillary, not on Bill

[Thinkingabout]

36. Good post

[upaloopa]

43. Eleanor went against Franklin's policy all the tine

[still_one]

45. Point is not many

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. It would have been hard for HRC to resign as First Lady./NT

[still_one]

52. The media would have loved it

[TBF]

31. Maybe she can fly them to Malaysia to work

there will be plenty of jobs available there after Obama pushes through TPP.

[daleanime]

32. K&R.....

[upaloopa]

41. Hillary is not Bill Clinton nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Has she bought a newer and more efficient waffle iron?

"Maybe", "someday", "reposition", "my advisers are looking at", "it's under consideration", "it has some flaws", "not everyone is satisfied", etc, etc, etc.

All stock in trade for politicians.