Socialist Obama ends work requirement for welfare

[Harry Dresden]

Could the Pub propaganda machine lie, spin, and exagerate the the "Sky is falling" BS any more?

As usual, after 10 google pages of of BS Pub sites blaring "Obama guts welfare work requirement", you finally find some reality.

It;s a waiver that states could ask for (they won't) for experiments they could try, AND NEVER MENTIONS WORK REQUIREMENTS.

Pubs are totally FOS, so the dupes are too. Change the channel.

How bout ONE real jobs bill, "jobs, jobs, jobs" a-holes?


"Is there any information out there that refutes the apocalyptic Heritage take on HHS's new TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) waiver? Has the HHS "gutted" welfare reform?


It's at least cracked open the door for the people who might gut it. Robert Rector and Kiki Bradley write that section 1115 of Social Security law gives HHS limited waiver authority. "The work provisions of the TANF program are contained in section 407 (entitled, appropriately, 'mandatory work requirements')," they write. "Critically, this section, as well as most other TANF requirements, are deliberately not listed in section 1115; they are not waiveable."

Section 115 allows waivers for any "experimental, pilot, or demonstration project which, in the judgment of the Secretary, is likely to assist in promoting the objectives of title I [education for the disabled], X [family planning], XIV [aid to the disabled], XVI [social security disability], or XIX [medical assistance], or part A or D of title IV [grants to state for child aid]." Nope, nothing there about work requirements.

While the TANF work participation requirements are contained in section 407, section 402(a)(1)(A)(iii) requires that the state plan “[e]nsure that parents and caretakers receiving assistance under the program engage in work activities in accordance with section 407.” Thus, HHS has authority to waive compliance with this 402 requirement and authorize a state to test approaches and methods other than those set forth in section 407, including definitions of work activities and engagement, specified limitations, verification procedures, and the calculation of participation rates.
Mickey Kaus, who owns this beat, ponders what it all means. The only non-"gutting" theory I can come up gives HHS rather a lot of credit. It cites waiver memos from Utah and Tennessee for proof that the states are ready for more flexibility. Those states aren't likely to weaken the standards of TANF work programs, are they? But I want to see what other states try and do here, and how they interpret this.


The End of Welfare Reform

prove they won't ask for it, dumb ass.

listen to what Frankie has to say Conservative.....according to him....no one but him, knows what they are talking about......hey im just telling you how he sees the world....

 

[Stephanie]

You people SHOULD be getting hold of your Representatives..

 

[Harry Dresden]

Sorry, but I must support HHS on this.......

If you read it carefully you would note that HHS "quietly notified states that they may seek a waiver for the program's strict work requirements."

I would be willing to wager that several states have already requested a waiver and that this is in response to those requests.

When you consider the very high rate of unemployment in this country and that some states have been hit much harder, it is entirely reasonable for states to ask that "strict" rules be relaxed in one way or another.

Would you really expect those on welfare to be denied the means to survive because s/he was unable and beyond his control to abide by rules so rigid in a bad economy that they can't be met?

But Franco said no states would ask for waivers. Was he... lying???

Frankie would not lie to ya......he claims HE knows what he is talking about.....everybody else......not so much.....

 

[Moonglow]

I personaly kno0w people on food stamps, they are having the requirement to work.
I know of one that lost the benefits when he didn't show up for a meeting at the employment office.
So I believe Fox is lying again.

 

[francoHFW]

Absolutely NOTHING has been gutted, or even CONSIDERED. Your sources are fear mongering BSers, and so are you, dupes. Change the channel.

TEN google pages of this lockstep Pubcrappe. You're idiotic corporate tools. Thanks for the depression, lets do it AGAIN!!

A t least now you know there IS a work requirement, dumbazzes LOL.

 

[swizzlee]

I hardly think Franco is in any position

to state so emphatically that NO state will request a waiver.

To be labeled a liar, one must be aware they are lying.

Should we assume Franco is aware?

 

[francoHFW]

"Obama guts welfare requirement" is the lie, repeated ad nauseum by every Pub propagandist, AND you dupes...

NO ONE is stupid enough to do that. morons, including the states this measure allows to ask for waivers to try other ideas. This is pro states rights if anything. Whatta bunch of stupid a-holes...

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOZ-Etb0k0Q]Obama Money - Where Did it Come From? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[francoHFW]

So go with ANOTHER piece of stupid Pub propaganda. Fegging zombies...

 

[koshergrl]

"

"When the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program was established as part of welfare reform in the 1990s, it was intended to give states flexibility to design effective programs to help parents move from welfare to work. Today, however, Federal rules dictate mind-numbing details about how to run a welfare-to-work program. Most States and experts agree that these aren't helpful."
The hard-fought welfare reform agreement in 1996 was struck between the Bill Clinton administration and a Republican-led Congress. It is still considered a signature legislative achievement from that period."


Read more: Republicans accuse HHS of gutting welfare reform with quiet policy change | Fox News​

 

[koshergrl]

We were told months ago that the work program attached to foodstamps exists in theory only. Everybody is exempted as a matter of course.

The same with the jobs requirements for tanf. It used to be you had to go to class, you had to turn in work search forms, you had to apply for work and if you didn't get a job within a certain period of time, you were expected to volunteer somewhere.

Not since Obama came to town.

 

[Greenbeard]

But how can the president via HHS or HHS arbitrarily change any law that was voted on by Congress?

What is the point of Congress if Departments are going to grant waivers to their laws?

*POINT* ^ Exactly. Why pass laws if some weenie can just circumvent it?

Section 1115 waivers have been around for a long time.

 

[Harry Dresden]

"Obama guts welfare requirement" is the lie, repeated ad nauseum by every Pub propagandist, AND you dupes...

NO ONE is stupid enough to do that. morons, including the states this measure allows to ask for waivers to try other ideas. This is pro states rights if anything. Whatta bunch of stupid a-holes...

you tell them Frankie......everyone is wrong but you....like you keep saying....

 

[Neotrotsky]

Of course

The left wants as many people dependent on gov't
It also means more votes for the Left

 

[Care4all]

"Obama guts welfare requirement" is the lie, repeated ad nauseum by every Pub propagandist, AND you dupes...

NO ONE is stupid enough to do that. morons, including the states this measure allows to ask for waivers to try other ideas. This is pro states rights if anything. Whatta bunch of stupid a-holes...

you tell them Frankie......everyone is wrong but you....like you keep saying....

nope Harry, on this one Frankie's right....the work requirement is not being GUTTED...that's just propaganda, and spin spin spin spin and twist and turns on what was actually done.

Although changes were made giving the State Governors more freedom to handle the programs in the best way for their own states, Gutted just doesn't fit what happened.

I'm certain you can find information that describes specifically what was done.

Care

 

[The T]

Of course

The left wants as many people dependent on gov't
It also means more votes for the Left

Buying votes from the dumbmasses.

 

[FJO]

This is more racism. He wants to take from working whites and give to deadbeat blacks. It's NOT about getting votes since he has always had 95%+ of the black vote. Blacks are racist and always vote black but whites do NOT always vote white.

If white people had been racists in 2008, Obama would not be President now.

 

[The T]

This is more racism. He wants to take from working whites and give to deadbeat blacks. It's NOT about getting votes since he has always had 95%+ of the black vote. Blacks are racist and always vote black but whites do NOT always vote white.

If white people had been racists in 2008, Obama would not be President now.

True. I'm glad you had the guts to address that post...because it in of itself was rascist.

 

[Care4all]

Of course

The left wants as many people dependent on gov't
It also means more votes for the Left

Buying votes from the dumbmasses.

hmmmmm, really? me thinks you are the one playing dumb on this...the T

Obama didn't advertise this measure...he didn't go out and tell all of the people on welfare that he was doing this...they don't even know it.....maybe now they might know about it because of the ruckus and tantrums those in the right wing blogosphere and FOX are reporting on this....so I have no idea why you said what you said, other than just trying to get in a partisan jab.

all he did was respond to the request of the State Governors, both Republican and Democratic alike, who wanted more flexibility to actually get people to work as the program intended. the governors still have to meet most all federal requirements, will still be fined if they don't meet them, and the Governors, if asking for a waiver, have to present their new plan to the Feds, and will be monitored going forward.

There is much more to it....the program's work requirements are not GUTTED, some of the reports and requirements of paperwork, that took the Welfare/social workers away from their primary goal of getting people back to work, now can be modified by the State Governors, with fed approval, so that those working the TANF program can actually spend more time helping those on the program find a job.....and other things that governors feel would work best in their states during this recession.

a WAIVER given, is also a WAIVER that can be taken back.

NONE OF THIS IS PERMANENT.

 

[The T]

Of course

The left wants as many people dependent on gov't
It also means more votes for the Left

Buying votes from the dumbmasses.

hmmmmm, really? me thinks you are the one playing dumb on this...the T

Obama didn't advertise this measure...he didn't go out and tell all of the people on welfare that he was doing this...they don't even know it.....maybe now they might know about it because of the ruckus and tantrums those in the right wing blogosphere and FOX are reporting on this....so I have no idea why you said what you said, other than just trying to get in a partisan jab.

all he did was respond to the request of the State Governors, both Republican and Democratic alike, who wanted more flexibility to actually get people to work as the program intended. the governors still have to meet most all federal requirements, will still be fined if they don't meet them, and the Governors, if asking for a waiver, have to present their new plan to the Feds, and will be monitored going forward.

There is much more to it....the program's work requirements are not GUTTED, some of the reports and requirements of paperwork, that took the Welfare/social workers away from their primary goal of getting people back to work, now can be modified by the State Governors, with fed approval, so that those working the TANF program can actually spend more time helping those on the program find a job.....and other things that governors feel would work best in their states during this recession.

a WAIVER given, is also a WAIVER that can be taken back.

NONE OF THIS IS PERMANENT.

it shouldn't have been done AT ALL. What part of imperial overreach by this president don't you understand? He is acting outside the Constitution, and should be called out on this an a myriad of thngs.

And remember? the INCOME TAX wasn't supposed to be permanent either.

Sorry Care...I like you...but you're gullible.