Difference between revisions of "Work requirements"
(If I believed in the work requirements, I wouldn't put in language encouraging states to lift them all) |
(sending out welfare checks without requiring that nearly half the recipients perform 30 hours of work-related activities) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Prof. [[Douglas Besharov]]of the University of Maryland said, "If I believed in the work requirements, I wouldn't put in language encouraging states to lift them all." | Prof. [[Douglas Besharov]]of the University of Maryland said, "If I believed in the work requirements, I wouldn't put in language encouraging states to lift them all." | ||
| + | |||
| + | One of the ways in which states could be allowed to “meet the work requirement” is by not meeting the work requirement, i.e., by sending out welfare checks without requiring that nearly half the recipients perform 30 hours of work-related activities (which is not a particularly burdensome standard to begin with). [http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/315206/who-racializes-welfare-reform-editors National Review] | ||
[[category: welfare]] | [[category: welfare]] | ||
Revision as of 18:54, August 31, 2012
Brookings Institution analyst Ron Haskins, who as a Republican committee aide helped draft the historic welfare reform measure -- and who favors granting states more latitude. But he also told The Fiscal Times that if the administration "wanted to undermine the work requirement," the new policy "is a way to do it." [1]
Prof. Douglas Besharovof the University of Maryland said, "If I believed in the work requirements, I wouldn't put in language encouraging states to lift them all."
One of the ways in which states could be allowed to “meet the work requirement” is by not meeting the work requirement, i.e., by sending out welfare checks without requiring that nearly half the recipients perform 30 hours of work-related activities (which is not a particularly burdensome standard to begin with). National Review