Senate Journal: Page 1417: Tuesday, April 25, 1995

         Welfare reform.  Ive already said, we have now given more welfare
    reform waivers to states to get out from under the federal government
    than were given in the last 12 years put together.  In two years, weve
    given more than 12 years.  I am for you figuring out how you want to run
    your welfare system and move people from welfare to work.   I am for
    that.

         But here are the questions.  Number one, should we have cumbersome
    federal rules that say you have to penalize teenage girls who give birth
    to children and cut them off?  I dont think so.  We should never punish
    children for the mistakes of their parents.  And these children who
    become parents prematurely, we should say, you made a mistake, you
    shouldnt do that -- no child should do that. But what were going to do
    is to impose reesponsibilities on you for the future, to make you a
    responsible parent, a responsible impose responsible student, a
    responsible worker.  Thats what your program does.  Why should the
    federal government tell you that you have to punish children, when what
    you really want to do is move people from welfare to work so that more
    people are good parents and good workers.   You should decide that.  We
    do not ned to be giveing you lectures about how you have to punish the
    kids of this country.  We need a welfare bill that is tough on work and
    compassionate toward children -- not a welfare bill that is weak on work
    and tough on children.  I feel that that should be a bipartisan
    principle that all of us should be able to embrace.

         Now, the second issue in welfare reform is whether we should give
    you a block grant.  Instead of having the welfare being an individual
    entitlement to every poor person on welfare, should we just give you
    whatever money we gave you last year or over the last three years and
    let you spend it however you want?  There are two issues here that I ask
    you to think about, not only from your perspective, but from the
    perspective of every other state.

         In Florida, the Republicans in legislature I spoke with were not
    for this.  And heres why.  The whole purpose of the block grant is
    twofold.  One is, we give you more flexibility. The second is, we say in
    return for more flexibility, you ought to be able to do the job for less
    money, so we wont increase the money youre getting over the next five
    years, which means well get to save money and lower the deficit.  If it
    works for everybody concemed its a good deal.

         But what are the states -- there are two problems with a block
    grant in this area, and I want you to help me work through it, because I
    am for more flexible for the states.  I would give every state every
    waiver that I have given to any state.  I want you to decide what to do
    with this.  I want you to be out there creating innovative ways to break
    the cycle of welfare dependency.

         But there are two problems with this.  Number one, if you have a
    state with a very large number of children eligible for public
    assistance and theyre growing rapidly, its very hard to devise any
    formula that keeps you from getting hurt in the block grants over a
    five-year period.  And some states have rapidly growing populations --
    Florida, Texas, probably Califomia.

Iowa General Assembly

Index: Senate Journal (76th General Assembly: Session 1)

© 1995 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa

Comments? sjourn@legis.iowa.gov.

Last update: Sun Jan 14 23:40:00 CST 1996
URL: /DOCS/GA/76GA/Session.1/SJournal/01400/01417.html
jhf