Child Care and Public Safety (5/01)
Caught in the Farm Squeeze (7/01)
Mothers, Babies, the State Budget (8/01)
Community Supported Ag (10/01)
Serving the Victims of Backlash (11/01)
Hope at Christmastime (12/01)
Disaster Relief Struggles (1/02)

This spring Congress will review the welfare reform act it passed in 1996. For those of us that felt the reform went too far, it is an opportunity to reform the reform. Considering that as Church charities we have been around since before most welfare laws existed, we have a unique perspective on this discussion.

Long forgotten in the current welfare debate is the previous epic change in family welfare, which happened at the turn of the last century. The early 1900s saw an about face in care for children, as cash aid—also known as "mothers' pensions"—replaced orphanages. Up until then, orphanages were a mainstay in caring for children of destitute parents.

Our immigrant ancestors were disproportionately housed in those institutions. A couple of generations before, epidemics raged through neighborhoods and even immigrant sailing vessels, decimating immigrant families and orphaning thousands of children. By the time one ship landed in Baltimore in 1879, for example, forty children were parentless. In response, orphanages were created by diverse orders of sisters. By the turn of the century, however, many orphanages had outlived their purpose, and the sisters running these homes transferred a number of kids back to the care of their mothers, who with new government assistance now had the means to care for their children. The sisters went on to other important ministries, including health care.

The development and expansion of cash aid to families began in earnest in 1909, as states embraced home care and began funding mothers' pensions. This cash aid culminated in the creation of the federal Aid to Dependent Children program, passed during the New Deal, later to be known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), an entitlement eventually known as "welfare."

Compared to its gradual adoption and evolution, the dismantling of entitlement aid was abrupt. In one year, the federal welfare reform act of 1996 eliminated the entitlement guarantee for families in need, established strict work requirements, and created a five-year lifetime limit for cash assistance.

The goals of the new law were to encourage work and to reduce welfare roles. In their zeal, however, Congress appears to have gone overboard. In setting work requirements, for example, even mothers of infants were required to take outside jobs. Children are now quickly moved out of the home and into some form of daycare. Aside from the deeper question of whether mothers should be able to stay at home with their little ones, there are serious problems with the quality of care these children receive. Newly working parents earning subsistence wages can't begin to pay for their children's care, and government funding for childcare hasn't kept up.

The current welfare law stresses work to the near exclusion of job training and education, so that recipients typically land low paying, dead end jobs. California has been providing limited education and training through the community colleges, but Governor Davis has proposed elimination even of this funding, in his current effort to balance the state budget.

California's Congressional representatives will be critical in the upcoming welfare debate, and two will be pivotal: Rep. Wally Herger (R- Marysville), who chairs the key subcommittee, and Rep. Bill Thomas (R- Bakersfield) who chairs the Ways and Means Committee. Their action will affect the lives of half a million families receiving aid in California and millions more across the country.

As in 1900, Catholics today are disproportionately represented among poor children, especially in California, where, for example, 46% of the welfare caseload is Latino. These are people that are playing by the rules. They are struggling to find jobs during an economic downturn, and when they do find work it is near minimum wage and typically without health benefits.

Right now, during a recession and with pressure on government budgets, it is tempting for legislators to balance budgets at the expense of the poor. Yet this moment also presents an opportunity to truly confront poverty. That remains the central question in the current debate: will the purpose of our welfare laws merely to move people off of aid, or to promote human dignity? Our commitment as a Catholic community needs to be to those who are poor and whom most need our support.