Rhode Island's welfare cases have continued to drop during the
national recession, despite the financial strain that has seen rolls increase
in a majority of the states. This is a good omen, and not just for Rhode Island
taxpayers.
It seems to reinforce the arguments in favor of our state's gentler -- and
some would say, more practical -- approach to welfare reform. The theory: by
reducing the caseloads at a slower pace, to better prepare recipients for
higher-paying, longer-lasting jobs, the state might be able to make a more
substantial and permanent reduction.
So far, the figures seem to bear out this proposition.
During the recession, which began March 2001, Rhode Island has had a 10
percent decline in caseloads, to 13,723 families, as of September 2002. The
comparable figure has climbed in 27 states, including Massachusetts, where the
numbers increased during the same period by 12 percent, to 47,339.
The figures come from the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), a
non-profit Washington, DC, research organization that specializes in welfare
issues. "I'm pretty heartened by the fact that they [the number] continue to
decline at a time when other caseloads are increasing," says Nancy H. Gewirtz,
a Rhode Island College professor of social work and head of RIC's Poverty
Institute.
Gewirtz, who was among the chief designers of Rhode Island's brand of welfare
reform, notes that for those who get jobs leaving welfare, and have a had a
chance to increase their training and skill levels, hourly pay averages more
than $10, compared to $8 to $9 for those with fewer skills.
Jane A. Hayward, who was recently reappointed as director of the state
Department of Human Services by Governor Donald L. Carcieri, also says the
figures seem to back Rhode Island's approach. "We wanted to give people the
skills necessary to be able to make a long-lasting transition to work, not
simply an in-and-out work environment cycle," Hayward says. "I think we've been
successful."
Progressives were initially apprehensive about the federal approach to welfare
reform, which began during the administration of Democratic President Bill
Clinton and limited families to a lifetime entitlement of five years' worth of
welfare as an inducement to get jobs.
Gewirtz and others argued that what welfare mothers needed were education and
training to help them find the jobs that would support their families over
time.
Further, the state's heralded RIte Care health insurance program for poor
families and relatively generous child care support were designed to help
families stay off public assistance once they moved into the workplace.
As a result, Rhode Island's case loads declined only by about 25 percent in
the initial years, while most states saw much steeper declines, an average of
56 percent nationally. Advocates argued that the true test would come during
economic hard times, when people pushed too fast from welfare to work might be
more likely to return to welfare.
So far, this theory seems to have held up, and since Rhode Island began its
program in May 1997, caseloads have fallen from nearly 19,000 to the 13,723
cited by CLASP.
Gewirtz isn't sure, though, that Rhode Island is out of the woods. "I'm
worried," she says. "Historically, caseloads always moved with the economy."
Issue Date: January 31 - February 6, 2003