Difference between revisions of "Work requirements"
From Conservapedia
DavidB4-bot (Talk | contribs) (→top: clean up & uniformity) |
DavidB4-bot (Talk | contribs) m (→top: HTTP --> HTTPS #3, replaced: http://www.nationalreview.com → https://www.nationalreview.com) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
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). [ | + | 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). [https://www.nationalreview.com/articles/315206/who-racializes-welfare-reform-editors National Review] |
Amy Payne writes, "The Obama Administration is denying that it has gutted the work requirements from the 1996 welfare reform law, despite all evidence that it has." [http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/08/heritage-legal-memo-welfare-reforms-work-requirements-cannot-be-waived/] | Amy Payne writes, "The Obama Administration is denying that it has gutted the work requirements from the 1996 welfare reform law, despite all evidence that it has." [http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/08/heritage-legal-memo-welfare-reforms-work-requirements-cannot-be-waived/] | ||
Latest revision as of 00:44, April 10, 2019
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Welfare reform. (Discuss)
Brookings Institute analyst Ron Haskins said that if the administration "wanted to undermine the work requirement," the new policy "is a way to do it." [1]
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). National Review
Amy Payne writes, "The Obama Administration is denying that it has gutted the work requirements from the 1996 welfare reform law, despite all evidence that it has." [2]
Ann Coulter wrote
- "What "every fair analyst" and "every fact checker" means when they call Romney's ad "false" is: We, the media, don't consider exempting welfare recipients from the requirement of having to work "gutting" the work requirements. [3]
