Abstract

Social Disservices: Why Welfare Reform Is a Sham

The U.S. Congress is about to enact legislation that turns the controversial Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program on its head. The changes made in this program; which was designed to help needy single mothers stay home with their children, represents a sharp break with the philosophy of the landmark Social Security Act of 1935, of which AFDC is a part. The new law transforms AFDC from an income-support into a mandatory work and training program and shifts social welfare responsibility from the Federal government to families and the states. The new welfare program meshes well with current conservative thought. It claims to be forging a new social contract that spells out the reciprocal responsibilities between AFDC mothers and the state. Welfare reform has captured the support of many liberals because proponents initially promised a national minimum benefit, child care and Medicaid benefits, increases in services and an extension of AFDC, to two-parent families in all states. The original promise of enriched employment services for welfare mothers also was eroded. Instead of mandating the states to provide education, training and job placement programs as initially proposed, the Federal bill makes most services optional.