Welfare: It Ain't Over 'Till It's Over

In 1996, the Clinton administration and the Republican congress successfully sought to "end welfare as we know it." In effect they replaced Federal guarantees of income subsidies for needy families and replaced with the a temporary work-based aid. Some conservatives, look at subsequent data, have proclaimed the program to be a success, particularly since, according to several indicators, the number of poor did not increase. At the time critics of the change were fearful of a "race to the bottom" in which states decrease the amount of aid to avoid an influx of refugees. Such a feared phenomenon never occurred, and American (seemed) to prosper throughout the 90s and the earl 00s.

In today's gloomy economic climate, however, it is unclear whether ending welfare was a good idea after all, and welfare may not fully be "over" until we see what effect these policies on ameliorating poverty in a time when people really need help.

These concerns are expressed quite well in a recent New York Times article (see it here).

Liberals argue that the new cash welfare program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, has cut caseloads but left many people poor. And they say it is only now meeting its truest test, with the onset of a crushing recession.

Calling the current suite of "safety net" programs a success without testing them is important; we will see within a few years whether Clinton and congress in the 1990s had the right idea in "ending" welfare.