U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

63–034 2011

THE ROLE OF TANF PROGRAM 

PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO FAMILIES 

WITH VERY LOW INCOMES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INCOME SECURITY AND 

FAMILY SUPPORT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 11, 2010

Serial No. 111–42 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means 

( 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
ii 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

INCOME SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT SUBCOMMITTEE 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington, Chairman 

FORTNEY PETE STARK, California 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

KENDRICK B. MEEK, Florida 

SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan 

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois 

JOHN LINDER, Georgia, Ranking Member 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, Jr., Louisiana 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

PETER J. ROSKAM, Illinois 

PATRICK J. TIBERI, Ohio 

JANICE MAYS, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

JON TRAUB, Minority Staff Director 

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records 

of the Committee on Ways and Means are also published in electronic form. The printed 

hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to 

prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting 

between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process 

is further refined. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
iii 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

WITNESSES 

Advisory as of April 15, 2010 Announcing the Hearing ....................................... 2 

The Honorable Gwen Moore, a Representative from the State of Wisconsin ..... 53 

The Honorable Carmen Nazario, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for 

Children and Families ......................................................................................... 12 

Kay E. Brown, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security, U.S. 

Government Accountability Office ...................................................................... 37 

Mr. Russell Sykes, Chair Person, National Association of State TANF Administrators Center for Employment and Economic Supports, OTDA, Albany, 

New York .............................................................................................................. 63 

Peter Edelman, J.D., Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center .... 82 

Mr. Robert Rector, Senior Research Fellow, Domestic Policy, The Heritage 

Foundation ............................................................................................................ 88 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Christina Schnetzer ................................................................................................. 132 

Danny Flynn, Best Friends Foundation ................................................................ 133 

Legal Momentum ..................................................................................................... 134 

Rochelle Jackson, Just Harvest .............................................................................. 139 

Crystal Agnew, Trinity Church Peacemakers Family Center ............................. 144 

Vikki Finley .............................................................................................................. 151 

Agnes Zarcaro, Project Corazon .............................................................................. 153 

Earl Gardner, VFC Fatherhood Program .............................................................. 155 

Newton Sanon, OIC of Broward County, INC. ...................................................... 157 

Richard Albertson, Live the Life ............................................................................ 164 

James Mason, Beech Acres Parenting Center ....................................................... 166 

Linda Stacey, The Child Abuse Council, Inc. ........................................................ 168 

Phyllis Beckman, Operation Us ............................................................................. 169 

Carol Jones, You&Me.We ........................................................................................ 171 

Alicia La Hoz, Family Bridges ................................................................................ 173 

Frank Fincham, Florida State University Family Institute ................................ 176 

Greg Schutte, Marriage Works! Ohio ..................................................................... 178 

Sherron Parrish, Center for Healthy Marriages and Families ............................ 181 

Deborah Irwin, Operation Us ................................................................................. 183 

Virginia Datema, Operation Us .............................................................................. 185 

Catherine Sullivan ................................................................................................... 186 

Joneen Mackenzie, WAIT Training ........................................................................ 188 

M.P. Wylie, Relationship Research Foundation, Inc. ........................................... 190 

Lavern Nissley, Marriage Resource Center of Miami Valley ............................... 195 

Dina Kastner, National Association of Social Workers ........................................ 196 

Bridget Brennan, St. Louis Healthy Marriage Coalition ..................................... 206 

Alyce Davis ............................................................................................................... 208 

Jennifer Baker, Center for Professional Solutions ................................................ 209 

Kevin Aslanian, Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organizations, Inc. ..... 211 

Megan Krukonis ...................................................................................................... 219 

John Sciamanna, Child Welfare League of America ............................................ 221 

Stephanie Mckeen .................................................................................................... 229 

Julie Kashen, Single Stop USA .............................................................................. 230 

Brenda Beal, Community Voices Heard ................................................................ 236 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
Page

iv 

American Association of University Women ......................................................... 238 

Donald Roberts, Goodwill Industries Masota, Inc. ............................................... 241 

Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity ................................................................... 245 

The Honorable Shelly Berkley ................................................................................ 247 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

THE ROLE OF TANF PROGRAM 

PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO FAMILIES 

WITH VERY LOW INCOMES 

THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2010 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INCOME SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m. in 1100 

Longworth House Office Building, the Honorable Jim McDermott 

[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

[The advisory announcing the hearing follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
2 

HEARING ADVISORY 

FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

McDermott Announces Hearing on TANF’s Role in 

Providing Assistance to Struggling Families 

March 4, 2010 

Congressman Jim McDermott (D–WA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Income 

Security and Family Support of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing to evaluate the role of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program in providing assistance to 

families with little or no income. The hearing will take place on Thursday, 

March 11, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. in B–318 Rayburn House Office Building. In 

view of the limited time available to hear witnesses, oral testimony at this hearing 

will be from invited witnesses only. However, any individual or organization not 

scheduled to appear may submit a written statement for consideration by the Subcommittee and for inclusion in the record of the hearing. 

BACKGROUND: 

The TANF block grant provides fixed-funding to the States for several purposes 

including to ‘‘provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for 

in their own homes or in the homes of relatives.’’ In 2008 (the most recent data 

available), fewer than one out of every four poor children received cash assistance 

through the TANF program, a steep drop compared to the percentage receiving such 

aid in the mid 1990s. TANF caseloads (nationwide) climbed modestly last fiscal year 

in response to the worst recession in many decades, but this small rise significantly 

lagged the increased participation in other programs designed to respond to rising 

need, such as food stamps and unemployment benefits. 

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provides up to $5 billion to help 

States respond to rising TANF caseloads and to establish and/or expand subsidized 

employment programs. Funding for this TANF emergency contingency fund currently expires on September 30th. 

In announcing the hearing, Chairman McDermott stated, ‘‘During this time of 

great hardship, it is more important than ever to have a safety net that 

truly protects struggling families. However, our Nation’s primary program 

providing financial assistance to very low-income families—Temporary Assistance for Needy Families—doesn’t provide assistance to over three-quarters of America’s poor children. That’s not temporary assistance—it’s no 

help at all for the vast majority of our most vulnerable children and families. We need to work on both immediate steps and longer-term solutions 

to ensure a helping hand for those who need it most.’’ 

FOCUS OF THE HEARING: 

The hearing will focus on the role of the TANF program in providing assistance 

to families with very low incomes. 

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: 

Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of the Committee 

website and complete the informational forms. From the Committee homepage, 

http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov, select ‘‘Hearings’’. Select the hearing for 

which you would like to submit, and click on the link entitled, ‘‘Click here to provide 

a submission for the record.’’ Once you have followed the online instructions, submit 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
3 

all requested information. ATTACH your submission as a Word or WordPerfect document, in compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by close of 

business Thursday, March 25, 2010. Finally, please note that due to the change 

in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse sealed-package deliveries 

to all House Office Buildings. For questions, or if you encounter technical problems, 

please call (202) 225–1721 or (202) 225–3625. 

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS: 

The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing 

record. As always, submissions will be included in the record according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will not alter the content of your submission, 

but we reserve the right to format it according to our guidelines. Any submission 

provided to the Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for 

the printed record, and any written comments in response to a request for written 

comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission or supplementary item not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will 

be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee. 

1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in Word or WordPerfect 

format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official 

hearing record. 

2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not be accepted for printing. 

Instead, exhibit material should be referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material 

not meeting these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use 

by the Committee. 

3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons, and/or organizations on whose 

behalf the witness appears. A supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the 

name, company, address, telephone, and fax numbers of each witness. 

Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the World 

Wide Web at http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Good morning. Sorry I am late and for 

those of you who came to testify, I apologize for us moving this 

back an hour. The leadership is about to roll out a health care bill, 

I hear. We have been hearing that for a long time. 

They called what they call a mandatory caucus. For Democrats, 

I do not know what that means. We do not line up very well. 

We are here today to start a new conversation about the role of 

TANF in providing assistance to struggling families, especially during this time of great hardship for many Americans. 

The starting point is this question. Do poor children deserve our 

help as their parents struggle to find and prepare themselves for 

employment. 

I believe that the majority of Americans would say yes to that 

question. It may, therefore, come as unwelcome news to them that 

only 22 percent of poor children receive assistance from the TANF 

program, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, in 

this country. 

Furthermore, they may be concerned to hear that TANF seems 

far less responsive to the growing need than any other safety net 

program, such as food stamps or unemployment insurance. 

If you look at that graph, the top line is food stamps, and you 

can see it is going up. You can see unemployment is going up, the 

yellow line. The flat line at the bottom is the caseload nationally 

in TANF. Very little has happened since the recession started in 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
4 

November of 2007, while the other programs obviously have been 

going up. 

The number of households receiving food stamps, which are now 

known as ‘‘SNAP’’ benefits, went up close to six million. The number of individuals receiving unemployment benefits increased by 

eight million. The number of families receiving TANF benefits have 

increased by less than a quarter of a million since the start of the 

recession. 

We are likely to hear today a host of reasons for this very poor 

and low participation rate, but I believe the main underlying cause 

is the presumption that declining caseloads is always a measure of 

success. 

Specific features of the TANF program such as the caseload reduction credit, not to mention over a decade of rhetoric from every 

level of Government, has driven this contention into the human 

consciousness. 

We all want TANF caseloads to go down because more parents 

working and moving into jobs is a good idea, but if caseloads go 

down or stay flat, even as unemployment and poverty go up, then 

that should never be anyone’s definition of success. If it is, we 

might as well completely eliminate the TANF program right now. 

We would then have a caseload of zero. That would be perfect success. 

Expecting a program for needy families to respond to a huge increase in needy families should be a bipartisan expectation. Nevertheless, I know some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 

may be tempted to say that helping more families through TANF 

will reduce the program’s emphasis on work. 

However, the exact opposite is true. There are six people out 

there looking for every job in this country, and providing temporary 

assistance to more families in great need will also mean engaging 

more parents in work related activities and services. 

The alternative is to continue to ignore these families as they 

struggle to create a better life for their families and perhaps wait 

for their children in Child Protective Services. 

There are some steps we can take immediately to help more families and to help promote better work. The most obvious is the need 

to fund the TANF emergency fund which we put into the Recovery 

Act, and we have now got some money going into it shortly, we 

hope, which provides states money to respond to the rising need of 

this assistance and to establish and expand subsidized employment 

programs. 

Twenty-three states are already using the contingency fund 

money for the establishment of programs of employment. 

A broader discussion is needed on how other features of the 

TANF program affect this issue. Hopefully, this hearing will shed 

some light on all that. 

I now yield to my Ranking Member, Mr. Linder. John. 

[The information referred to follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
5 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McDermott follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Chairman Jim McDermott 

We are here today to start a new conversation about the role of the TANF program in providing assistance to struggling families, especially during this time of 

great hardship for many Americans. 

The starting point is this question: do poor children deserve our help as their parents struggle to find or prepare themselves for employment? 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.001
6 

I believe the vast majority of Americans would say yes to that question. It may 

therefore come as unwelcome news to them that only 22% of poor children receive 

assistance from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or TANF program. 

Furthermore, they may be concerned to hear that TANF seems far less responsive 

to the growing need than other safety net programs, such as Food Stamps or Unemployment Insurance. 

As you can see by the chart in front of you, the TANF program has moved very 

little since the recession started in December of 2007, while other programs have 

been much more responsive. 

The number of households receiving food stamps, which are now known as SNAP 

benefits, went up by close to 6 million. The number of individuals receiving unemployment benefits increased by nearly 8 million. 

But the number of families receiving TANF has increased by less than one-quarter of a million since the start of the recession. 

We will likely hear today a host of reasons for this very low participation rate, 

but I believe the main underlying cause is the presumption that declining caseloads 

always equal success. 

Specific features of the TANF program, such as the caseload reduction credit, not 

to mention over a decade of rhetoric from every level of government, have driven 

this contention. 

We all want TANF caseloads to go down because more parents are moving into 

good jobs. But if caseloads go down or stay flat, even as unemployment and poverty 

go way up, that should never be anyone’s definition of success. 

If it is, we might as well completely eliminate the TANF program right now. We 

would then have a caseload of zero—a perfect success. 

Expecting a program for needy families to respond to a huge increase in needy 

families should be a bipartisan expectation. 

Nevertheless, I know some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will be 

tempted to say that helping more families through TANF will reduce the program’s 

emphasis on work. 

However, the exact opposite is true. 

Providing temporary assistance to more families in great need will also mean engaging more parents in work-related services and activities. 

The alternative is to continue to ignore these families as they struggle to create 

a better life for their children. 

There are some steps we can take immediately to help more families and to better 

promote work. 

The most obvious is to continue the TANF Emergency Fund, which now provides 

funds to help States respond to the rising need for assistance and to establish or 

expand subsidized employment programs. 

A broader discussion is needed on how other features of the TANF program affect 

this issue. Hopefully today’s hearing will begin to shed light on that topic. 

I now yield to the Ranking Member, Mr. Linder. 

f 

Mr. LINDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for calling 

this hearing today. 

This subcommittee has had five solo hearings in the last year. 

The first was last March entitled ‘‘Protecting Low Income Families 

While Fighting Global Warming.’’ 

Our Democrat colleagues discussed their plan to create the largest welfare program in American history, called ‘‘Energy Stamps.’’ 

The policy found its way into the House-passed energy tax hike, 

and thankfully has appeared to have died in the Senate. Since 

then, 2.5 million more jobs disappeared. 

Our second hearing on the Democrats’ 2009 stimulus law was in 

April. That was a bill promising to create 3.7 million jobs. It was 

about jobs, jobs, jobs, as the Speaker said. Since then, the number 

of unemployed workers has soared 21 percent to a record 16 million. 

Our third hearing last June was on a new $8 billion entitlement 

program that was stuffed into their trillion dollar health bill. Since 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
7 

then, an unprecedented six million people gave up trying to find a 

job and dropped out of the labor force. 

Our fourth hearing last September was on foster care and adoption changes. A worthy task, but presumably foster and adoptive 

youth will want jobs as they become adults, too. Since then, the unemployment rate among people under 25 has reached a staggering 

19 percent. 

Our fifth hearing on the safety net was in October. As Chairman 

McDermott said, ‘‘It goes without saying that job creation is our 

first priority. Since then, the total job losses after stimulus reached 

3.3 million.’’ 

Given the incredible gap between our hearings and reality, perhaps it should not be surprising that today the hearing is about the 

Democrats’ desire to increase welfare rolls. Which they claim will 

somehow create jobs, presumably just like their stimulus bill did. 

Which is to say it will not and it will instead make matters worse. 

To be fair, the Democrats have already tried increasing the welfare rolls but apparently it has not worked as well as they had 

hoped. The latest data suggests the welfare rolls have grown about 

five percent since the stimulus law passed and ten percent since 

the recession began. So I should give them their due and say they 

are now trying to increase the welfare rolls even more. 

Last year’s stimulus bill had $5 billion in new welfare funds, including if states increased their welfare rolls. According to the latest HHS figures, states have tapped less than a third of that $5 

billion, mostly because they do not want to spend more of their own 

money. Washington can fix that. 

Now Democrats propose billions more in welfare funds for states 

and making that money 100 percent Federally funded because unlike states that actually must balance budgets, Washington can 

spend any amount on anything, provided we call it an ‘‘emergency.’’ 

As we will hear from Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation, 

there are two real goals here. First, accelerating spending on welfare in the name of stimulus, and second, repeal the successful 

1996 welfare reforms, which led to less welfare dependence and 

poverty through more work and earnings. 

Mr. Chairman, Americans want us to work together to solve 

problems. We should not cause more problems. Instead of bribing 

states to increase welfare rolls, or make fund make-work that will 

go away as soon as the funding ends, we should help more low income parents train for, look for, find and keep real jobs the a real 

economy to support their family. That is what the 1996 reforms 

did. Returning to the previous failed system will lead to more poverty and despair, not less, and we should not do it. 

Thank you. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much. I will ask 

unanimous consent to enter into the record the letter from the National Governors Association imploring the Congress to extend the 

emergency contingent fund. 

[The information referred to follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
8 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.002
9 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.003
10 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.004
11 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Linder follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.005
12 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. They are using the money. It is not 

just Republicans or Democrats. It is both. I think even Haley 

Barbour, and I was surprised to see his name, but he is using this 

money in his state. We will have a hearing on that down the road. 

We will first start with Ms. Nazario, who is here. Please come 

and take a seat up here. We were going to have Representative 

Gwen Moore from Wisconsin but she is over in the mandatory caucus under lock and key or something. 

We will begin with you. Assistant Secretary Nazario is the Secretary for Children and Family Services of HHS. Ms. Nazario. 

STATEMENT OF CARMEN NAZARIO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY 

FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ADMINISTRATION FOR 

CHILDREN AND FAMILIES 

Ms. NAZARIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the 

Subcommittee. I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss 

the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and its role 

as part of the nation’s safety net. 

Given the time constraints this morning, I will read a brief statement and submit my long statement for the record. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.006
13 

It is fitting that my first hearing as Assistant Secretary for Children and Families is before the Subcommittee, since you have 

shown such commitment to helping families in poverty, including 

support for the significant changes made by the Recovery Act. 

We are witnessing dramatic results from these changes, including the development of innovative subsidized employment programs that are giving thousands of out of work parents what they 

most want and need, a job. 

Unfortunately, unemployment remains high as does the need for 

subsidized jobs and assistance to families. 

Thus, the President’s budget calls for a one-year extension of the 

TANF Emergency Fund. I want to thank the Chairman for introducing H.R. 4564 which provides a one-year extension and makes 

important improvements to the emergency fund based on the experience of the past year. 

This extension will provide a powerful tool for states to create 

jobs and reduce hardship until the economy gets back on its feet. 

The TANF program is one of the nation’s primary safety net programs for low income families with children. Under TANF, states 

have broad flexibility to design programs that promote work, personal responsibility and self sufficiency and strengthen families. 

In the early years of implementation, unemployment among single mothers rose. Unfortunately, these positive trends have not 

been sustained. By 2008, the child poverty rate had risen to 19 percent and the percentage of poor single mothers that did not work 

and did not receive assistance increased from 16 to 35 percent. 

Last year, the President signed the Recovery Act which included 

significant legislative provisions to bolster the safety net for low income children and families. 

This legislation impacted the TANF program in several key 

ways, including the establishment of a new $5 billion emergency 

fund supporting basic assistance, short term needs, and subsidized 

employment to help families during an economic downturn. 

Today, 41 states and 12 tribes have received emergency funds for 

a wide range of programs. 

Just to highlight a few that might be of interest to the Subcommittee, Michigan offers payments to domestic violence shelters 

and refundable state earned income tax credit payments. 

Maryland funds a homeless counselor’s program and Alabama 

provides case management services related to child welfare activity. 

The most exciting category from a job creation perspective is subsidized employment. More than 18,000 jobs have been established 

and by the end of the fiscal year, this number could grow to 

120,000, making it the most extensive use of subsidized employment in the history of the TANF program. 

San Francisco’s subsidized employment program has been expanding due to the positive response from potential employers and 

employees. Its original goal of 1,000 placements has been increased 

to 2,000. 

Florida has hired 75 temporary workers from their TANF eligible 

caseload to serve as call agents in a new state center set up to handle increased volume of public assistance inquiries. The state is 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
14 

about to expand the initiative to a broad spectrum of public and 

private organizations. 

Georgia will subsidize 100 percent of the wages in its Teen Work 

Program, offering Summer jobs for youth who are in foster care, 

are developmentally disabled, or part of the state’s Grandparents 

Raising Grandchildren program. 

Although there are encouraging signs that an economic recovery 

is underway, serious challenges to sustain employment remain. 

Without action by Congress to extend availability of the emergency 

fund, states will soon begin to scale back this critical support effort. 

In closing, I would like to mention the administration’s proposal 

for a new $500 million investment in the creation of a Fatherhood, 

Marriage and Families Innovation Fund to encourage and rigorously evaluate demonstrations of proven and promising strategies 

to help fathers and mothers succeed both in the labor force and as 

parents. 

I appreciate the Subcommittee’s work in supporting responsible 

fatherhood efforts and particularly the leadership of Congressman 

Davis on this important issue. 

States continue to face budget shortfalls and the impact of high 

unemployment rates. The Recovery Act took important steps to 

shore up the economy and provide aid to those who have borne the 

harshest impacts of the recession, and help states maintain critical 

services, but the job is not finished, too many people remain out 

of work and too many families struggle to make ends meet. 

I look forward to working with the Subcommittee to ensure that 

states can continue their innovative subsidized jobs programs and 

to strengthen TANF child care and child support efforts. 

I will be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Nazario follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
15 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.007
16 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.008
17 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.009
18 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.010
19 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.011
20 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.012
21 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.013
22 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.014
23 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.015
24 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.016
25 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.017
26 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.018
27 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.019
28 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.020
29 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.021
30 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.022
31 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.023
32 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.024
33 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.025
34 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Fabulous testimony. Ten seconds over. 

Wonderful. We will invite you back. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Linder, would you desire to inquire? 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.026
35 

Mr. LINDER. Ms. Nazario, the President’s budget proposal this 

year indicates they want to delay the re-authorization of TANF for 

another year. Why is that? 

Ms. NAZARIO. We have been through this very tough economic 

period of time and we are learning a lot about how states are able 

to respond to these changing needs and to the various needs of 

families. 

I think that working with Congress and particularly with the innovative approaches that we have in the 2011 budget, we will be 

able to have better information that will guide us in improving the 

program even more for where we need to go to help families. 

Mr. LINDER. Coming on the next panel is Robert Rector of The 

Heritage Foundation, and he says ‘‘By fiscal year 2011, total Government spending on means-tested aid will rise to $953 billion, 

nearly a 50 percent increase since fiscal year 2007.’’ 

He said ‘‘Dividing total means-tested aid by all persons with incomes below 200 percent of the poverty level results in average 

welfare spending of $7,700 per person, roughly $30,000 for a family 

of four.’’ 

First, have you had a chance to review that testimony or that 

statement? 

Ms. NAZARIO. No, sir. I have not. 

Mr. LINDER. Is it your testimony that $953 billion is not 

enough? 

Ms. NAZARIO. Who is to say what is enough. I think the important thing is that these programs are set up to help families and 

children in need so they can become self sufficient and contributing 

members of our community. 

We have allowed our society at many levels of Government the 

opportunity to assist people with Government funding or tax credits and these are just opportunities for us to continue to serve the 

most vulnerable members of our society. 

Mr. LINDER. You said who is to say what is enough. Is anybody 

to say how much is enough? 

Ms. NAZARIO. I think together the Congress and the administration can work towards understanding the situation so that we 

can develop programs that really meet the needs of families. 

I think TANF has demonstrated through the years that cash assistance is not the preponderant service that it used to be, so it has 

demonstrated that we can develop our thinking and provide assistance in work support and other means that can help families towards self sufficiency without maintaining the modalities of just 

cash assistance. 

I think together, we can work towards a path that is responsive 

to families and responsible with public funds. 

Mr. LINDER. There has been a fairly large increase in food 

stamps and an extension of unemployment insurance. Some of that 

is going to people qualifying for TANF also. Do you not consider 

that cash assistance? 

Ms. NAZARIO. These other programs have a much larger eligible 

pool than TANF. TANF is a $16.5 billion fund. Even together with 

all state dollars, it is a $28 billion fund. Those other programs like 

unemployment insurance and child support or mortgage interest 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
36 

credits, tax credits for taxpayers, I am not sure where we draw the 

line. 

I think while TANF is one of the most important safety net programs, it is modest in relation to other much more comprehensive 

programs in terms of eligible pools. 

Mr. LINDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you, Mr. Linder. 

My understanding is that the increase that Mr. Linder is talking 

about largely is increased spending on Medicaid, that Medicaid’s 

funding is really the big item that has increased over the last number of years. Is that correct? 

Ms. NAZARIO. I am not prepared to answer that question. I can 

get an analysis for you. I have not seen Mr. Rector’s testimony. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I have a chart in front of me that 

shows 49 percent of the increase in spending is limited to people 

on Medicaid. That is almost half the money goes to the medical situation. It would be good to have confirmation from the Department 

on that. 

Ms. NAZARIO. I will certainly do that. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I think I had better withhold my questions although I have one question I would like to ask you. 

Tell me the kinds of programs that people are creating jobs in. 

A lot of people have always felt like well, welfare, they just do 

make work, there is some kind of give them a sharp stick and go 

out and pick up papers or something. 

Tell me the kinds of programs that have been developed by 

states in terms of both public and private use of the money. I know 

there have been a lot of states that have used it all for private jobs. 

Ms. NAZARIO. I mentioned a few in my short testimony. I think 

I was trying to give you a flavor, Mr. Chairman, of the variety of 

activities that are being employed by the states in the subsidized 

employment programs, from Government workers assisting people 

in need who are applying for assistance to Summer youth programs 

for teens to grandparents who are raising children, to handling 

child protective services and child welfare situations, to various 

forms of community jobs, case management services, also jobs in 

the private sector and even in the for profit sector as well as nonprofit. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I appreciate your testimony. We will 

have you back. This will not be our only hearing on this issue as 

we move toward re-authorization. 

Thank you very much for coming. 

Ms. NAZARIO. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Our next panel, if they would take 

their seats at the table. As with Secretary Nazario’s written testimony, her testimony will be entered into the record, and so will all 

of yours. I hope you will use your time in some other way than just 

reiterating what is in there. 

Our first witness is Kay Brown. She is the Director of the Education, Workforce and Income Security part of the GAO. She has 

done a report. 

Ms. Brown. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
37 

STATEMENT OF KAY E. BROWN, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, 

WORKFORCE AND INCOME SECURITY, U.S. GOVERNMENT 

ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for inviting me here today to discuss our work on the 

TANF program and its assistance to low income families. 

My remarks are based on our GAO report that was released 

today. I would like to talk about four findings from this report. 

First, we studied the significant decline in the TANF cash assistance caseload from 1995, the year before welfare reform, to 2005, 

the most recent year for which we had data. 

The solid line on this graph depicts the number of families receiving cash assistance. We found that a small part, about 13 percent of the decline, occurred because fewer families were eligible for 

cash assistance, either because of changes to eligibility rules or because of increased family incomes, which resulted from the strong 

economy in the 1990s, TANF’s focus on work, increases in the minimum wage, and other factors. 

A much larger share of the caseload decline, 87 percent overall, 

resulted from a decline in the number of eligible families who participated in the program, and these you can see in the shaded area 

in the graphic. 

In fact, while 84 percent of eligible families received cash assistance in 1995, only 40 percent did in 2005. This drop likely results 

from families’ responses to changes in state welfare programs, such 

as mandatory work activities, time limits, sanctions and diversion 

strategies and the value of cash benefits. 

Second, we asked what if the participation rate of eligible families was the same in 2005 as it was in 1995, that is what if the 

rate was 84 percent instead of 40 percent. 

We found that if this were the case, 800,000 fewer children 

would be in extreme poverty with incomes below half the Federal 

poverty level. Further, an estimated 3.3 million families would gain 

TANF benefits and would experience an increase in their net income. 

However, this increase would not significantly change the number of children in poverty overall, in part, because TANF benefits 

are typically too low to raise the incomes of participating families 

above poverty. 

Third, we compared the characteristics of families participating 

in TANF cash assistance in 2005 to those eligible but not participating that year, and we found that although all eligible families 

had low incomes, those not participating in TANF generally worked 

more, had relatively higher incomes, and were less likely to receive 

other public support. 

However, we did identify a subgroup of eligible non-participating 

families who did not work or receive supplemental security income 

benefits. These families were more disadvantaged with lower incomes than families participating in TANF, and as shown on the 

graphic before you, this subgroup accounted for 11 percent of all eligible families in 2005 or about 732,000 families. 

Fourth, we gathered information on the changes that 21 states 

were experiencing in caseloads and TANF related spending in the 

current recession. In 12 of these 21 states, the number of families 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
38 

receiving TANF cash assistance increased between June 2008 and 

June 2009. 

However, changes in caseloads varied widely by state. For example, in one state, the caseload increased by 22 percent while in another it decreased by nine percent. 

Further, we found no clear association between the change in 

TANF caseloads in the states and unemployment rates in this time 

frame. Unemployment is one of many factors that may affect a 

state’s caseload, including specific TANF program characteristics. 

In the recession, states reported drawing on their reserve funds, 

TANF contingency funds, which are now depleted, as well as the 

emergency contingency fund created by the Recovery Act. 

Since the time of our state review, conditions have continued to 

deteriorate and the full effect of changes in the economic climate 

on TANF cash assistance programs is unknown. 

This concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer any questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Kay E. Brown follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
39 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.027
40 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.028
41 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.029
42 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.030
43 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.031
44 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.032
45 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.033
46 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.034
47 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.035
48 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.036
49 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.037
50 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.038
51 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.039
52 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Sykes, I would ask you if you would yield for a second to 

have my distinguished colleague, Ms. Moore, come up to the table. 

She managed to escape from that mandatory caucus. I would like 

to give her an opportunity. She was supposed to start off this whole 

thing. 

Gwen, you are on for five minutes. Your whole statement will be 

in the record. Say whatever you would like for five minutes. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.040
53 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. It is certainly 

my privilege to be here with this very distinguished panel. 

I will leave my testimony to be entered in full into the record and 

I would also like to ask your consent, unanimous consent, to put 

any other materials that I may refer to in the record as well. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Without objection. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE GWEN MOORE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you. We are here today talking about the 

systematization of poverty, I think. Many of you already know the 

history of welfare reform. I can say I was at the scene of the crime 

in Wisconsin when we ended welfare as we knew it. 

Critics of the AFDC program really talked about all the welfare 

queens that were on welfare, the moral hazard involved in giving 

aid to people who were not working. Others talked about how we 

were trapping people into a cycle of poverty by not forcing them to 

work. Some even went as far as to say we were driving males away 

from the home and alienating male participation in the household. 

One of the real clear focuses of ending welfare was to declare 

that only work benefits families and that only work begets work, 

and they were very critical of education and training programs in 

which many women were engaged. 

Indeed, on the day we passed welfare reform in Wisconsin, 

10,000 women across the State of Wisconsin were thrown out of 

their educational programs, even high school programs. 

The promise of TANF, of course, was to end the entitlement and 

to block grant the funds locking in the maintenance of effort, giving 

states flexibility, which in the case of Wisconsin in the first year 

of those contracts ended up with about $18 million of bonuses that 

were paid to CEOs in our privatized welfare system. It rewarded 

states and created a very perverse incentive to decrease the rolls. 

It severely restricted education and training. 

You will hear testimony here today, Mr. Chairman, about how 

there has been a tremendous increase in the SNAP program, the 

food stamp program, and even in this very harsh recession where 

we see childhood poverty accelerating, where we see unemployment, intractable unemployment, where we see the stimulus proposal provide contingency funds that have rescued states from the 

increase in Medicaid and poor people, that the TANF rolls have remained flat. They have remained flat because in fact this program 

is not responsive to a recessionary problem. 

There are a few things that I want to emphasize. Number one, 

I think when we consider re-authorization, we should look very 

carefully at a few things. 

First of all, we should look very carefully at the education and 

training programs. Here we are changing our economy, focusing on 

energy, jobs, jobs of the 21st Century, and the kinds of jobs that 

women were able to get, jobs that were temporary jobs, the kinds 

of pink collar jobs that women always get. They certainly were not 

jobs that were sustaining in any way. 

We should work very, very hard to re-authorize a TANF program 

that will focus on eliminating poverty rather than just kicking 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
54 

women off the rolls, and providing them with experiences that will 

give them a career ladder. 

We should also look at increasing the maintenance of effort, both 

from the Federal level and the state level. The 1996 levels certainly 

as we can see from our experience have not been enough. 

We ought to look at child care, which is this bottomless pit of 

need. There are many states that do not even keep waiting lists. 

This is an area where we are forcing women into the workforce and 

not necessarily providing them with safe child care. 

We should re-authorize the TANF program and guarantee 

women child care. 

We also need to make sure that for victims of domestic violence 

states are required to provide options to women who face domestic 

violence, and there ought to be programming to help them escape 

domestic violence treatment, and not just the option of returning 

to their abusers. 

I can see that my time is waning. I do want to point out that 

I very, very much support many of the recommendations that have 

been made by the Center for Law and Social Policy, also known as 

CLASP, for re-authorization purposes, and with that, I will yield 

back. 

[The prepared statement of the Honorable Ms. Moore follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
55 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.041
56 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.042
57 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.043
58 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.044
59 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.045
60 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.046
61 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.047
62 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much for your testimony. We have about eight minutes until this vote, so we probably 

have about 13 or 14 minutes to get to the floor. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.048
63 

You came all the way from Albany, and I feel bad not giving you 

five minutes, but you two guys are local and we will get you back 

on another day. 

Mr. Sykes, who is the Chairperson for the National Association 

of State TANF Administrators from Albany, New York. 

Mr. Sykes. 

STATEMENT OF RUSSELL SYKES, CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION OF STATE TANF ADMINISTRATORS 

Mr. SYKES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking 

Member Linder. I am very proud to represent the 50 state TANF 

directors and territories in talking to you today. 

In the interest of time, I will focus just on three areas; the critical need to extend and replenish the TANF emergency contingency 

fund; try to answer your question about whether TANF has been 

responsive to the recession, and ask if the question is premature, 

and how we should measure performance, and finally, states’ concerns with postponing a full re-authorization discussion this year. 

The emergency contingency fund was the right response at the 

right time, and I will tell you that my state, when the final quarter 

ends on September 30 of this year, will access all $1.2 billion available to us under both the regular and emergency contingency fund. 

In fact, a large amount of that is going to subsidize employment 

and one time payments, not simply caseload reimbursement. 

Some have been concerned about the slower start in accessing 

these funds, but candidly, start up in a new program such as this, 

and as helpful as HHS was, requires guidance whcih takes some 

time. Program rules take time to assimilate, and states did have 

to put up 20 percent funding of their own at a time of huge deficits 

in order to access the fund. 

I will say to you that subsidized employment particularly takes 

start up time. We are trying to fill 5,000 slots in New York of subsidized jobs at a time when our unemployment rate is almost ten 

percent. 

States have put great infrastructure in place. And we are in 

agreement as to why we can we not wait until later for the ECF 

to be replenished. None of our placements are for less than 90 days 

and longer. 

In fact, we will have to begin to dismantle some of these programs as of July 1 at the latest, discouraging employers further. 

Frankly, subsidized employment is critical because it reinforces the 

work message at a time when jobs are scarce. 

We simply need an extension. We were very disappointed with 

the action that was taken on procedural grounds in the Senate two 

days ago. Mr. McDermott, we know frankly you and the administration both have proposals to extend the fund. 

States are in desperate need of this money. We spend it wisely. 

We track it wisely. We are really trying to help people through a 

difficult time. 

The second point is you have asked how TANF has responded to 

this recession. Let me say clearly that states, if there is indeed a 

problem, will study it and want to know more about it. We want 

to see further research and we want to help craft a solution if necessary. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
64 

We ask three things. Please do not rush to judgment on access 

problems. Please do not assume that states are limiting access. 

Please do not undermine the core message of TANF being work focused. It is a false choice because we can have both strong work 

rules and program access. 

I can tell you that in my state when families provide necessary 

documentation and comply with the rules of the program, they get 

benefits. 

I also want to tell you that the existence of extended unemployment insurance benefits, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, child support collections, many of them for people previously 

TANF or never on TANF, provide a buffer before assistance is often 

needed from the TANF program. 

The GAO report today shows that TANF can respond in many 

ways beyond offering permanent assistance. Clients themselves are 

often not seeking ongoing assistance as indicated by the explosiveness of one time payment, transactions to help with utility costs, 

prevent eviction, repair cars, secure transportation, provide stop 

gap child care, and numerous other forms of help. 

Clients also want jobs, help finding them or subsidized employment opportunities. Many clients would get very small benefit from 

ongoing assistance and the transaction costs of navigating the program rules simply do not appeal to them when they have other 

avenues available. Others simply do not want to comply with work 

requirements. 

The most important point I want to make is I think TANF is a 

lagging indicator of the recession. I think we are too early in asking the question about its responsiveness. 

I think we expect in the next 12 to 24 months to see the caseload 

continue to grow as unemployment benefits begin to expire, even 

though other programs will remain available, I think we are just 

seeing the tip of the iceberg. 

I would hope we would look at some of these things, not create 

invalid measures, until we have a little maturation of the process. 

Finally, I will also say as my time is waning, that we were very 

disappointed frankly as states that we are not having a full re-authorization discussion this year because it is only in that context 

that we can answer some of the questions that you pose. 

We know your plates are full but there are issues around TANF, 

including the erosion of the real dollar value of the block grant, 

state flexibility that has been greatly taken away, program focus 

on rules that make it difficult, continued unrealistic 90 percent two 

parent work rates, and I could go on and on, but I will not because 

my time is ending. 

I am happy to take any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Sykes follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
65 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.049
66 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.050
67 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.051
68 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.052
69 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.053
70 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.054
71 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.055
72 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.056
73 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.057
74 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.058
75 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.059
76 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.060
77 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.061
78 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.062
79 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.063
80 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.064
81 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much for your testimony. Your full testimony will be in the record. 

Mr. Edelman and Mr. Rector, each of you will have three minutes. 

Mr. EDELMAN. Everybody knows him. He was here when welfare was being reformed and knows what it was like before and 

after. 

Peter. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.065 63034A.066
82 

STATEMENT OF PETER EDELMAN, J.D., PROFESSOR OF LAW, 

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER 

Mr. EDELMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to have 

the opportunity to testify before you and Mr. Linder. 

I just want to say a couple of things. Welfare caseloads actually 

fell in 20 states in 2008, and it seems to me that there is something wrong with that picture when we are in the middle of a recession. 

This is about women and children. It is about children and 

women. 

The welfare rolls are now down from the peak in 1994 from 

about 14 million to just over under 4 million people. That is one 

and a third percent of the population of this country. That is only 

a tenth of the number of people who are counted as poor in this 

country. Of course, some of those are elderly and so on. Still, it is 

a tiny fraction. 

In 1991, 12 percent of poor women in this country had no job and 

no welfare. It is now 34 percent. At the same time, we have seen 

a very disturbing increase in extreme poverty, poverty below half 

the poverty line, which is now up to 17.1 million people. Again, it 

is very disproportionately families headed by single mothers and 

disproportionately people of color. 

That is what we need to be looking at. To me as a lawyer, that 

is res ipsa loquitur, it speaks for itself, and we need to look at 

every state. 

In Wyoming in 2008, they were down to 281 families in the entire state who were receiving welfare. Again, what is it about that 

picture? We need to know about that. It is very troubling. 

We have six states that have under ten percent of poor children 

in their states on welfare. Again, very troubling. 

We have 51 stories to look at because this is a block grant. Some 

of them are good and some of them are very disturbing in terms 

of what I just said. 

Too many states are—again it is state by state that we need to 

look at—not letting people on in the first place. Forty-two states 

have rules that discourage enrollment. 

Sanctioning people off, 22 states use a full family sanction for the 

first offense. Time limits have an increasing effect as time passes. 

More and more families are hit by them. Seventeen states have initial time limits of under five years. Then the recession comes and 

we have this lack of responsiveness. 

We need to look at all of this. We want to pursue two aims, I 

would suggest. One is helping people get jobs and get out of poverty. That is absolutely vital, but we need to do it right. We need 

to do it better. As Ms. Moore said, more emphasis on education and 

training. And we need to have TANF be a safety net. The conversation here is about a program of $16.5 billion, not $950 billion. that figure includes many other things. When we have 

so many women and children who are in poverty, without welfare 

and without a job, we really need to figure out why that is, and 

we need to do better. And I hope I can have a chance to work with 

you, Mr. Chairman, as you undertake the inquiry for re-authorization. 

Thank you. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
83 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Edelman follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.067
84 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.068
85 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.069
86 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.070
87 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. We will have some of you back. I feel 

like I am doing this on the back of a galloping horse, and I hate 

it. I want a chance to question you. 

Mr. Rector is a Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Mr. Rector. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.071
88 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT RECTOR, SENIOR RESEARCH 

FELLOW, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION 

Mr. RECTOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

When you are talking about increasing welfare spending, it is important that you have to look at this picture holistically. There are 

over 70 different means tested programs, and if you simply look at 

one program in isolation, you can create an image of need when in 

fact you have extravagant spending. 

The simple reality is that in 2011, Government will spend 

around $475 billion on means tested assistance to low income families with children. That is over $30,000 for each family with an income below 200 percent of poverty. 

I have spent 25 years on the budget of welfare. I cannot even 

begin to fathom where all that money is going. 

I would think that before we increase spending, we at least figure out where the $475 billion is going. 

We just heard the administration say they did not know how 

much was enough, but they certainly knew they wanted to spend 

more money, and that is the way the Congress operates here. 

Most of the statistics that you hear in this hearing and hear 

today are the result of not counting almost all of that assistance. 

TANF cash is three percent of total spending, means tested 

spending, on families with children. If you focus on that three percent and ignore the 97 percent, then you can create an image of 

need. 

What we know from just one example is the CRS has told us if 

you look over the first years of reform up through 2008, every single level of single parent families showed an increase in income if 

you count all their sources of income. 

If you ignore major sources of income such as income from relatives or EITC or food stamps or something, then you can create 

this picture of decline. 

Similarly, most of these numbers concerning TANF receipt are 

based on the current population survey, which misses half of the 

TANF caseload. It is just not there. We pretend that is some kind 

of valid number. It simply is not. 

The whole point of reform was to reduce dependence on TANF, 

increase things such as earned income tax credit earnings, support 

by relatives, support by boyfriends. 

When you look in that holistic manner, what you see is not only 

did single mothers advance, but every category of single mothers 

advanced under this program, and in complete distinction to what 

happened prior to reform. 

Again, the simplest thing is we are going bankrupt as a nation, 

and before we decide to spend $1 billion here, $1 billion there, you 

have to have some kind of sense of how much we are spending. 

It is like going into a store and I would like that, this, I would 

like that, and you never add up how much the whole bill is when 

you come to the check-out counter. 

Well, the bill is very, very large. Spending has increased by 50 

percent over the last four years, and it is almost like you say well, 

all the other 70 means tested programs, they got a 50 percent increase, so this one has to have a big increase, too. 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
89 

No, it really does not. It is not necessary for all 70 programs to 

be growing gang busters. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rector follows:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.072
90 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.073
91 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.074
92 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.075
93 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.076
94 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.077
95 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.078
96 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.079
97 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.080
98 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much for your testimony. I am frustrated by having to terminate this hearing because 

we have no time left and about 150 members have not voted with 

six votes over on the house floor. We have to go. 

This will not be our last hearing. I would say to any member on 

either side, most of them were not able to get here today, if they 

want to submit questions in writing, and to the people in the audience, go home and tell your members they can submit questions in 

writing to the various panelists. 

I appreciate all of you coming. I again apologize for a truncated 

hearing and delays and all the rest, but what can I do? I am not 

in charge. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:5 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Questions for the Record follow:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.081
99 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.082
100 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.083
101 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.084 63034A.085
102 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.086
103 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.087
104 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.088 63034A.089
105 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.090
106 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.091
107 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.092
108 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.093
109 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.094
110 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.095
111 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.096
112 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.097
113 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.098
114 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.099
115 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.100
116 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.101
117 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.102
118 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.103
119 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.104
120 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.105
121 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.106
122 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.107
123 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.108
124 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.109
125 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.110
126 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.111
127 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.112
128 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.113
129 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.114
130 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.115 63034A.116
131 

[Submissions for the Record follow:] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.117 63034A.118
132 

Testimony By Christina Schnetzer 

I have been on and off the system, for more years than I’d like to admit, but I 

have almost always worked, at least part time and raised two wonderful girls, and 

went to school. To better myself and my children, but what I find most disturbing 

is that in this horrendous economy, where unemployment rises and extensions dry 

up, people are going to be desparate enough to steal and hurt each other to feed 

their families. It’s already happening. I feed a family of two for $207.00 a month. 

And I deeply appreciate it. We usually run out by midmonth. I am a thrifty woman, 

but when a meal with meat a veggie and a starch or roll costs about ten dollars 

to prepare, the 6 dollars a day allotted doesn’t go far, and that’s for one meal. I don’t 

get monetary assistance at this time, but my meds are over $800.00 a month, for 

complications of a brown recluse bite, I take no pain pills, and my doctor doesn’t 

do pain management, so my many problems that include: Spondolathesis, 

sponolytis, vertebral bones spurs, compressed and deteriorated spine, two bones separated in a car crash, at the shoulder, and now, problems with bladder cyst, an inability to eat because of stress and gall bladder removal and the complications, 

someone should be equipped to send me to a specialist. My doctor said he would 

refer me to a Ear Nose specialist, if I could find one, that takes my medicaid plan 

and I can’t. All the while I am losing my hearing due to an inner ear infection that 

has gone through 3 courses of antibiotics to no avail, I have to arrange for the 

injectible antibiotic, which still hasn’t arrived 2 weeks later. But at the same time, 

I can and want to contribute, I have been blocked from several jobs, because my 

daughter getting medicaid is a conflict of interest in my county, so I was even forced 

to leave a job on the premises, twice . . . because I received Govt. benefits. I was 

denied PRC’s I was never granted one, and lost another job because of not being 

able to fix my car, while a neighbor received $3,000.00 to fix their car, and THEY 

WEREN’T EVEN WORKING, while I was. There are some people who have to ruin 

things for everybody and I realize there is fraud that takes place on behalf of recipients, but there are corrupt folks within the agencies, and Legal Aide . . . Does Not 

HELP . . . anyone. We feel as poor citizens, that we would like to see stimulus jobs 

of the same nature as the California Model. We need extensions on benefits and unemployment, at least until the unemployment rate dips back below 8%, some people 

are never going to work . . . More expedient service from SSA, as people have to 

be FLAT BROKE, NO UNEMPLOYMENT, ETC FOR A YEAR BEFORE THEY 

FILE, AND WAIT 5 TO 10 YEARS FOR AN ANSWER . . . this is how we treat 

the downtrodden in our society, as parasites, when in fact I will come clean your 

trash cans and commodes for a living wage job, I have in the past, and now two 

college degrees later, I will again if needed. 2 weeks ago I saved a director of the 

Treasury’s life, as she was choking, in the senate lunchroom, I do have value as a 

human being. I do want to work! I live in a society of closing stores, emptying 

houses, joblessness and hopelessness. Don’t yank out the safety nets that are much 

needed at this time to keep me and mine alive. Give time for education, make the 

biological dad fill the work requirements, instead of babying him, so the mother can 

raise the babies, make 50% of first shift work open for moms who want to work, 

but don’t want to turn their kids to the streets from unsupervision. Extend food and 

shelter benefits, why are there so many empty houses and no one who can afford 

to live in them? There are so many obvious solutions, but maybe they can only be 

seen, by looking up, not down. Thank You. 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING
133 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.119
134 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.120
135 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.121
136 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.122
137 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.123
138 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.124
139 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.125
140 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.126
141 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.127
142 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.128
143 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.129
144 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.226
145 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.227
146 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.228
147 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.229
148 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.230
149 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.231
150 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.232
151 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.233
152 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.234
153 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.235
154 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.236
155 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.130
156 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.131
157 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.132
158 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.133
159 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.134
160 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.135
161 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.136
162 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.137
163 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.138
164 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.139
165 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.140
166 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.141
167 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.142 63034A.143
168 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.144
169 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.145
170 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.146
171 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.147
172 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.148
173 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.149
174 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.150
175 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.151
176 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.152
177 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.153
178 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.154
179 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.155
180 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.156 63034A.157
181 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.158
182 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.159
183 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.160
184 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.161
185 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.162
186 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.163
187 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.164
188 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.165
189 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.166
190 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.167
191 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.168
192 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.169
193 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.170
194 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.171
195 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.172
196 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.173
197 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.174
198 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.175
199 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.176
200 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.177
201 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.178
202 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.179
203 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.180
204 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.181
205 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.182
206 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.183
207 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.184
208 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.185 63034A.186
209 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.187
210 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.188
211 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.189
212 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.190
213 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.191
214 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.192
215 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.193
216 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.194
217 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.195
218 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.196
219 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.197
220 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.198
221 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.199
222 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.200
223 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.201
224 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.202
225 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.203
226 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.204
227 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.205
228 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.206
229 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.207
230 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.208
231 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.209
232 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.210
233 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.211
234 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.212
235 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.213
236 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.214
237 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.215
238 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.216
239 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.217
240 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.218
241 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.219
242 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.220
243 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.221
244 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.222
245 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.223
246 

f 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.224
247 

Æ 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with HEARING63034A.225