Our Current US Welfare System Is in Urgent Need of Reform Essay

There are 109,631,000 Americans on welfare, and only 105,862,000 full time working Americans. The fact that the amount of people on welfare outnumbers those who work, shows how our country is deteriorating. Some individuals on welfare take advantage of the system and exchange the things given to them, such as food stamps, for drugs or alcohol. I think anyone who does that should be taken off of welfare. In order to prevent that from happening in the future, I believe a system should be made. The system would determine whether an individual is deserving of government assistance or not. In order to be on welfare, there would be a drug test that has to be passed to even be considered. If passed, there would be quarterly drug tests that have to be passed in order to continue to get help from the government. There should also be a standard set that determines if the severity of the person’s disability is worthy of governmental assistance. If they meet all the criteria and pass their quarterly drug tests, then they deserve to be on welfare. Those who do not meet the criteria and are qualified to work, should get a job in order to support themselves and their

The current US welfare reform comes with time limit that on benefit together with the work activity requirement (Weil & Finegold 20). An adult can only get federal welfare fund within five years. Moreover, if the beneficiary is not participating in any income generating activity, the assistance that the beneficiary receives from the government should be cut after two years. There is also a research that shows that the welfare reform has recast programs that have low incomes such as health insurance and work support to ensure that the citizens leave the welfare.

Author Ilan Wurman argues in this his publication, that drug testing to apply for welfare violates the fourth amendment of the constitution so changes must be made to the current system. A failed testing program in Florida required all applicants to complete a drug screening test before receiving benefits and the cost of the tests are paid for by the applicant, but reimbursed if the test results are negative. Wurman concludes by stating that suspicion less drug testing of government assistance recipients in

The welfare system first came into action during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Unemployed citizens needed federal assistance to escape the reality of severe poverty. The welfare system supplies families with services such as: food stamps, medicaid, and housing among others. The welfare system has played a vital role in the US, in controlling the amount of poverty to a certain level. Sadly, the system has been abused and taken for granted by citizens across the country. The welfare system was previously controlled by the federal government until 1996; the federal government handed over the responsibility to the states in hope of reducing welfare abuse. However, this change has not prevented folks from scamming the system. The

Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) replaced AFDC, ending some Federal responsibility to welfare assistance. States operate their own programs; determine eligibility services to be provided to needy families, within Federal guidelines. The Federal government cannot regulate the conduct of states except to a few requirements, and states have a wide latitude in administering the program to "provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes; to reduce dependency by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; to prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and to encourage the formation and

This paper will analyze the welfare reform system. Through my analysis I will examine several areas of concern in the welfare reform system. First, as an overview, I will look at the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Act. Second, I will look at the Welfare to Workfare program. We will then examine how welfare recipients with disabilities will be handled under this new reform and finally this paper will examine how the federal government plans on if at all ensuring job retention occurs.

Welfare, enacted by one of the greatest presidents of the United States’s existence, Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt, is an effective and useful means to assist American families in need. Throughout history, welfare has proven to help people get back on their feet and into society. Despite the system’s many useful benefits, like most attributes in this world, welfare has kinks in the system. In fact, welfare has yet to be perfected, even though it was established in the year of 1935 and is still in use today. The system may never be perfected, but it can be improved. There are many different thoughts and ideas pertaining to how welfare should change. Some believe it should be eliminated entirely. In doing so, many people all across the nation would be harmed in financial and mental manners. How can welfare be reformed? Is it even possible? The answer is absolutely. It must be reformed, and many would agree on the matter. It is, however, a sensitive and controversial topic to most. Political parties tend to take interest in the discussion of welfare reform, as well. The typical, left-wing Democrat wishes to give more to welfare users, while the standard right-wing Republican would like to decrease what is given to Americans. If everything has its imperfections, why should welfare be reformed? Why not leave it the way it is and let the government figure out the fine print? There are those that take this sort of stance on welfare reform, and there are some that believe differently.

The process of drug testing individuals who are applying or receiving welfare benefits has recently become the focus of a widely spread controversy. Florida, the first state to pass the law, now requires all individuals applying for public assistance to undergo drug testing. The state of Kentucky, among others, have considered following this trend. State lawmakers hope to prevent the squandering of taxpayer dollars on drugs by proposing similar guidelines. Alabama’s states representative Kerry Rich clearly affirmed his state’s position on the matter, “I don’t think the taxpayers should have to help fund somebody’s drug habit” (qtd. in Time).

The fate of a proposition to drug tests in Indiana welfare beneficiaries in in doubt after the provision’s creator formally pulled back his support and the state organization would control the system and it would cost $2.3 million during the next two years. However, that is after taking of consideration $213,000 in foreseen funds expecting that 5 percent of those tested fail and are temporarily removed from the program. Also, it was mentioned that this program would help stem a HIV outbreak which would be brought into play by sharing needles among drug abusers. According to state officials, just around 9,400 adults get installments or accept them in the interest of children, statewide and around 17,000 children get the advantage. If TANF beneficiaries fail a drug test, they would have a chance to get counseling. In any case, if they keep on failing drug screenings after counseling, they would be ineligible for welfare advantages for no less than three months. Beneficiaries would be in charge of the expense of counseling and positive drug tests. The drug testings proposition could accelerate an already steep decrease in the quantity of Indiana TANF beneficiaries. Normal installments are less than $90 a month for each beneficiary. Supporters of such drug testing measures say they help keep open help from being spent of unlawful

There has been an ongoing controversy as to whether welfare recipients should have to have drug testing done. Drug testing will ensure that recipients will not abuse the money they’re given by the government. Having people on welfare take drug test is advantageous because it could save the system money, it would help social workers identify children who are around drug abuse, and it would deter people from purchasing and using illegal drugs; however, it does have a downside such as people who are on prescription medication will show false positives, it can be an invasion of privacy and drug testing can take hundreds and even thousands of dollars to administer.

In 1935, Franklin Roosevelt signed into law the Social Security Act which, among other things, provided for the financial, medical, and material needs of the poor (Komisar 125,128). Since then, there have many additions and reforms to the bill, none of which has served to quell the controversy surrounding the effectiveness of the welfare system in the United States. The main concerns of the distribution of welfare dollars and resources can be answered by the questions ?Who gets assistance?? and ?How much do they receive??. The U.S. welfare system is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services, which attempts to answer these questions through a system of minimum incomes, government-calculated poverty levels, number of children, health problems, and many other criteria. This complicated system leads to one of the critiques of the welfare system?that it is too large and inefficient. President Lyndon Johnson declared a ?War on Poverty? in 1964 designed to alleviate the burden of the poor and established the Food Stamp program the next year (Patterson 139). In 1996, a major welfare reform bill was passed that placed time limits on welfare assistance, required able participants to actively seek employment, and implemented additional services for the needy (Patterson 217).

Considerable research has previously been conducted to analyze the effects welfare reform has had on its intended purposes such as employment, caseloads, or familial cohesion. And while there have been a few studies that examined the correlation between women receiving welfare and drug use, the effects of reform in regards to illicit drug use, specifically women, had not been previously evaluated. As legislation passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996, the intended objective was to place restrictions on welfare recipients by applying a 5 year life-time limit, felony drug conviction disqualifications, and move people off the welfare rolls and into the workforce. States were given more

United States Government Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt thought of this system as an aid for low-income families whose men were off to war, or injured while at war. The welfare system proved to be beneficial early on by giving families temporary aid, just enough to help them accommodate their family’s needs. Fast forward almost 90 years, and it has become apparent that this one once helpful system, has become flawed. Welfare itself and the ideologies it stands on, contains decent fundamentals; furthermore, this system of aid needs only to be reformed to better meet the needs of today’s society.

While this may seem to some like it is an unrightfully needed search, the money being given to those is a privilege not a right. The drug tests would be done before the money is given to those receiving benefits. Those unwilling to comply with the mandates can face the consequence of not receiving welfare. The privilege of receiving government aid is one that should be able to be controlled by the government. If those receiving the benefits would like to argue about their rights being infringed upon, they can refuse the aid being offered to them as it is not a right

If a time limit is set people are less likely to become dependent on government for assistance. I would set mandatory job and interview training sessions. These sessions would teach welfare recipients how to search and obtain jobs. A program such as this one would free thousands of recipients from government dependency. I would expand drug testing, but not to withhold welfare from needy families. If drug testing was implemented then it would help find and treat drug abusers. If I was able to find the underlying issue for why welfare recipients are unable or unwilling to work, which may be cause by drug dependency furthermore, getting them help might enhance their quality of life and economic standing. I would expand base on income child care, so parent with young children can search and obtain jobs. I see a lot of you high school age mother who drop out of school because they cannot afford child care. This would give them the option of going to school or get a job. I would also partner with the education systems, such as high schools and colleges to help the welfare recipients who want to further their