Aid to Families with Dependent Children

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was the name of a federal assistance program in effect from August 14, 1935 to June 30, 1997, which was administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. The program was created under the name Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) by the Social Security Act of 1935 as part of the New Deal; the words "families with" were added to the name in 1939. By 1995 spending was $22.6 billion per year.

In 1996, President Bill Clinton negotiated with the Republican-controlled Congress to pass the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act which drastically remade the program. Among other changes, a lifetime limit of five years was imposed for the receipt of benefits, and the newly-limited nature of the replacement program was reinforced by calling AFDC's successor Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Many Americans continue to refer to TANF as "welfare" or AFDC.

In light of the results, by 2006 the welfare reforms appear to be less controversial. The New Republic suggested [Sept 4, 2006, editorial on page 7], "A broad consensus now holds that welfare reform was certainly not a disaster--and that it may, in fact, have worked much as its designers had hoped."

Part of the reason that welfare reform became so important was because of a changing view of welfare and poverty. In 1935, when the legislation was first enacted, the dominant view was that women should stay home for the benefit of their children; by the late 20th century (and probably due to the Women's Rights Movement of the 1970s), staying home with children was seen as a privilege and most mothers should have the obligation to work. Furthermore, in 1935, most of the single-mother beneficiaries of welfare were widows; by 1988, most of these women with children were either unmarried or divorced.

Evidence for this claim can be found in the work of Charles Murray, who suggested that welfare causes dependency. He argued that as welfare benefits increased, the number of recipients also increased; this behavior, he said, was totally rational, because why work if one can receive benefits for a long period of time without having to? While this ideology drove policy, the data, is not entirely clear. States with the most generous welfare policies have the fewest recipients and vice versa. For instance, Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama have relatively restricted welfare policies; these states have higher rates of welfare recipients than Minnesota, Wisconsin, and other states with more liberal welfare policies.

1 Criticisms of AFDC
2 Bibliography
3 See also
4 External links

[edit] Criticisms of AFDC

AFDC benefits for most families fell short of lifting families above the poverty line.

There were relatively lax time limitations for participation in the program.

There were few incentives to join or rejoin the workforce. Entry level jobs, especially net of taxes, could not provide the standard of living provided by AFDC.

[edit] Bibliography

Keith M. Kilty, Elizabeth A. Segal. The Promise of Welfare Reform: Political Rhetoric and the Reality of Poverty in the Twenty-First (2006)
Clarita A. Mrena and Patricia Elston. Welfare Reform: State Sanction Policies and Number of Families Affected (2000)
Robert P Stoker and Laura A Wilson. When Work Is Not Enough: State and Federal Policies to Support Needy Workers 2006