From the Providence Journal: 16 January, 1998

Leading welfare expert denounces reform policy

Providence Journal Bulletin, 16 January, 1998

By SCOTT MacKAY Journal-Bulletin State House Bureau

PROVIDENCE -- At first glance, the welfare overhaul measure signed into law by President Clinton in the heat of the 1996 presidential campaign appears to be working: From Rhode Island to California, state welfare rolls are down and hardly a day goes by without a politician touting how many welfare recipients have gotten jobs.

But a look beneath the veneer of the welfare law shows that reality is much more complicated, Peter Edelman, one of the nation's leading welfare experts, told more than 600 children's advocates gathered at the Providence Marriott yesterday for the annual action conference of the Rhode Island Campaign to Eliminate Childhood Poverty.

``They are telling us, you know, it is a great success. The president of the United States stands up there and says this welfare reform. . . . he says this welfare reform is working. Well, what's the truth,'' said Edelman.

``The fact is, yes, the welfare rolls have gone down. Of course that should not be the objective, the objective is not arithmetic,'' said Edelman. ``The objective is not how many people did you get rid of from the welfare rolls, the objective is how many people got out of poverty.''

Nationally, welfare rolls are at about the same level they were in the late 1980s, with more than 10 million people, mostly women and children, relying on aid, Edelman said.

Many of those who have gotten jobs and left welfare, Edelman said, would be off welfare anyway, without the so-called welfare reform law. Relief rolls have always, to some degree, reflected the economic times and availability of jobs.

Thus, it is no surprise that with national unemployment the lowest in decades -- less than 5 percent -- states have been able to shed welfare recipients to the job market, Edelman said.

Now, the states are left with much tougher cases, recipients who have been on welfare for many years and have problems, such as learning disabilities or addictions, that make it more difficult to place them in jobs.

``Don't let anybody say this thing has already succeeded,'' said Edelman. ``The heavy lifting has not even started.''

Edelman cited various studies that he said show that at least 30 percent and perhaps 40 percent of all recipients present difficult cases. To successfully wean them off welfare and into work will require significant government investments in education, support services and job training, he said.

The 1996 law represented the biggest change in federal welfare policy since the Great Depression years of the 1930s. It removed the federal guarantee of government aid to the poor and established time limits -- five years in most cases -- for recipients to receive aid.

``It has the biggest negative potential of anything done through legislation that we've ever had in the history of our country for poor people,'' said Edelman.

Edelman was Mr. Clinton's top welfare strategist and a key official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. He quit in protest after the president signed the 1996 law.

The federal welfare law is administered, in large part, by the states. In his speech and at a news conference after, Edelman praised Rhode Island, saying it was one of a handful of states that have attempted to deal with the challenge of moving welfare mothers to work in a humane and effective manner. Rhode Island's measure, signed into law by Governor Almond in 1996 after a compromise he reached with advocates for the poor, emphasizes work over welfare by giving women support programs. The state's effort increased health-insurance benefits and child care for poor children and included education and training provisions.

``I would say Rhode Island is one of the better states,'' said Edelman. ``It happened as a result of the efforts of a lot of people.''

Some of the people who worked on the state's plan were organizers of yesterday's event, including Nancy Gewirtz, chairwoman of the Campaign to Eliminate Childhood Poverty.

Other states cited by Edelman included Maine, Vermont, Oregon and Minnesota. He said larger states, including California and New York, have used more draconian policies, such as barring welfare mothers from attending college at state expense.

``As this thing unfolds here in Rhode Island and around the country,'' said Edelman, ``we need to be paying attention to whether there are enough jobs available and if there are not we need to be talking about a real jobs program.''

There is no better time than the present, Edelman said, to begin helping the welfare population with education, counseling and meaningful job programs.

``All over this country right now there is money available to do these things,'' said Edelman. ``Here in Rhode Island and across this country, states are flush, state treasuries are full. We ought to be talking about investing in people . . . so people can go to work and succeed.''

Edelman is that rare man in public life these days, an unreconstructed liberal. A lawyer and law professor at Georgetown University, Edelman was a legislative assistant to the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and issues director of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's 1980 presidential campaign.

Even though he quit his job in mid-campaign, Edelman tried to keep from hurting Clinton politically. Edelman waited until after the election to write his oft-cited critique of the welfare plan. In an article for The Atlantic Monthly magazine, Edelman wrote a piece entitled ``The Worst Thing Bill Clinton Has Done,'' which depicted Mr. Clinton as an opportunist engaging in ``bumper-sticker politics.''

Yesterday, Edelman said he kept quiet until after the election because he didn't want to see Republican Bob Dole win the presidency and combine with a GOP Congress to impose even worse welfare programs on the poor than Mr. Clinton.

``I didn't want Bob Dole to be elected president,'' said Edelman. ``I have never thought worse is better.''