| Jeffrey Perez's History Project | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| States are enforcing laws differently. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
In order to effectively reduce the number of people on welfare, many steps have been taken; however, many of these steps simply are not working. The government has passed strict laws that can be used to remove people who aren�t being motivated to get off welfare; however, since different states interpret and enforce these laws in different ways, someone who really needs welfare might accidentally get removed in one state, while someone who doesn�t need it may keep it in a state with lenient enforcement of the laws. The new welfare laws put in place by President Clinton in 1994 are working so far, but I think it would be a small step to pass further legislation that would uniformly regulate how states enforce the laws so that everyone in the country can get equal representation. Also, for some people, who have never had to meet deadlines, these new stricter rules are difficult to follow, and some of them are removed for failing to show up for appointments on time. I think that removing them from welfare is not the way to deal with them. There was an elderly lady in Idaho, whose alarm clock didn't go off, which caused her to be late to a meeting and she got removed from welfare. She was looking for a job, and I think it is a shame that people like her are allowed to slip through the cracks. Since the time that the new welfare plan has gone into action, welfare recipients have dropped by 44%. This is such an abrupt change that it leads some to wonder whether all of those people were really ready to be on their own, and how many of them were just victims who, by some unfortunate accident, were forced to lose their benefits. I think that someone should only be removed from welfare when their tardiness causes them to perform poorly at work. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Most of the people on the welfare to work program quit within the first year. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
After a person on welfare gets a steady job for a certain amount of time, their benefits are revoked. I think that this may play a role in contributing to the unsuccessfulness of the job placement plan. I am not saying that I think people should stay on welfare indefinitely; I only think that for most people on welfare, it is a process that takes time, because most of them are dependent on welfare for living. I think that before repealing welfare the government should be sure that the person is well suited to the job, and that they are ready to quit. Second, President Clinton promised to have 1 million jobs for welfare recipients by the end of the millennium. That was four years ago. In four years, he has gotten the support of 105 companies. Eli Segal, a presidential supporter promised to get 1,000 companies involved in the next 6 months. Even if he enlists 1,000 companies to help with his worthy cause some of them provide only 30 jobs. To make the presidents goal each would have to provide 1,000 jobs. Personally I think this is a little unrealistic. I think we should start small, and give tax cuts to all companies who donate jobs, and give money that would have been going to welfare recipients to those companies who help out the most, providing the most jobs. Third, instead of everyone depending on the welfare to work program, I think the government should give money to welfare recipients who can find there own jobs and stick with them. This would take some of the pressure off of the government to find jobs for everyone. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| WElfare laws are creating racist divisions in the country. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Although as a whole the number of welfare recipients is decreasing, the number of African Americans, Hispanics, and American Indians on welfare has increased. This difference only helps to increase the racist views of some people. Although the distribution of races on welfare is different, there are logical reasons for these differences. The percents of white people who live in a big city where many people are poor, is less than half of the number of Blacks or Hispanics. Many American Indians live on reservations where jobs are rare and income is scarce. I think that providing housing for welfare recipients in suburbs where jobs are abundant would help many people get back on their feet. I am sure that there are companies who don't have extra jobs that could donate building supplies, and people who have received houses can help to build new ones, like habitat for humanity. | Another reason why there may be such a difference is education, 30% of whites on welfare didn't graduate from high school, while 43% of blacks and 64% of Hispanics haven't. I think all welfare recipients should be required to either have a high school diploma, a GED, or currently be in high school. Plus, I think all those who have trouble finding jobs should have to take extra job placement classes. As stated earlier there are not enough companies to hire people on welfare. Almost as important as finding companies who will donate jobs is finding employers who are unbiased. I believe that racism exists even today, and I believe that those who are racists are especially biased against the minorities on welfare, and so I believe that is important to find companies who will hire based on need and not on race.
|
Favourite links
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has been visited
|