The other advisory board members are of the same political hue. This is a decidedly liberal group. Translated, this means that cutting off taxpayer support for welfare recipients who have declined to work for a year and a half leaves the non-worker without a welfare check, which is a terrible shame. The criteria Tufts used to rank the states are revealing. Give the same benefits to new arrivals in the state and to drug felons.
Increase benefits no matter how many more children a single welfare mother produces.
Create as many exemptions as possible, such as job search, job training, job readiness, job preparation etc., from any requirement of actually having to work. Never terminate anyone's welfare, Medicaid, or food stamps for refusing to accept work. Disregard as much earned income as possible in determining welfare eligibility. In short, to rank first in the nation under the Tufts criteria, a state has to not do almost all the things which are the key ingredients of what the nation has come to consider welfare reform, and which is producing dramatic results in states like Oregon, Mississippi, and Wisconsin. One of the features that made Vermont shine in the eyes of the Tufts group is the fact that no matter how long the recipient refuses to work, welfare support is never cut off.