The Robert MacNeil Report; Welfare Reform

the fb pics but you're

the following programmes made possible in part by grants from public television stations and the corporation for public broadcasting it's big we can

good evening i'm jim lehrer new york rahman is away in his white tie and tails covering the white house dinner for queen elizabeth tonight welfare reform the thing every politician talks about selling does anything about riordan's complicated head again this week the nation's governors did it with their demand yesterday that the president and the congress might reforming the welfare system a top priority item it's the eight year in a row the governors and nixon republicans and democrats liberals and conservatives that sounded such a call this time it came at their sixty eight national governors' conference in hershey pennsylvania they also offered a proposal for how the deed should be accomplished it's major plots consolidation of existing federal public assistance programs with a standardized national minimum welfare pain a requirement that most welfare recipients register for work and most important that the federal government make up roughly three quarters of the welfare cab to take some of the burden of state and local governments the vote to approve the proposal was twenty four to a lab

and follow today's of spirited debate mostly over the federal financing angle there was no debate however over how bad the present system mess here's a sampling of what the governors had aside the tape coverage comes from public station debbie it happened hersey congress should establish a minimum was just a blow for all americans that will serve as a nationwide standard need for unified income support program established very recently i believe to compensate the differences in the cost of living and to be periodically just to reflect changes in the cost looming over time that adds up to this level should be fully funded by the federal government i would remind all of us regardless of party the presidents of different parties president johnson president nixon president ford i've been advocating a restructuring of the welfare reform program congress's were endlessly on the heads of the forest and i feel that if we can go back to our state budget process knowing

frightening we're dealing with a bureaucratic maze and inordinate amount of red state mandates in the federal government because its fortune to administer it institutionalization problem that we don't need such programs because we've made individual to the community level if we can get together on this i believe that we do well worthy of the bison tell tale meeting of this governor's conference by attending to something that the founding fathers never saw this country getting into when we began doing frankly bureaucratic centralization of the welfare program it is a failure and that treats people as failures i think this'll we recognize that and for that we as taxpayers of our state it's a lesson about money will be going into bureaucratic red tape more borrowers are still be going to those who need them so they can put them back and work and say the basic unit of the family structure will be preserved and will be a stronger nation on any of the federal government yeah i'm

trying to put together many of the answers to the outstanding problems as the country we're not only are one and one given takes but we're in every one of our conference it seems to me that when we heard a presentation this morning as to what we investors century a statement on we accept that responsibility the first matter we consider surrendering our ministry responsible in view of wealth i mean i know the cause anchor three season particularly in view of the question of confidence one of the costs what is what's it going to do to confidence in government and confidence and freedom and dignity individual and what you gonna do for credibility of government now we talk about taxes in our respective state welfare double much every five years and only means that you have to raise taxes according to the reason we don't have a great many governors here they raise taxes they keep

up with amazing welfare and i'd like to make a motion to a man and to substitute the following language administration operation and funding a welfare programs including eight of families with dependent children should mention holy by the federal government i don't look for this the past but i will tell you a way of bombings of the nineteen seventy seven governor rhodes was right his motion was defeated all the plan they did adopt was a giant step in the same direction that falsetto ization idea gotten additional and coincident with his monday from the committee for economic development a high powered independent research group a corporation in university executives a cd report on welfare said the federal government should take over the whole flank to eliminate the current welfare chaos and bureaucratic waste the other aspect of the

governor's proposal that race he was to call for a standard welfare payment they tacked on a disclaimer saying it was not a guaranteed minimum income but it certainly a motive that why is not exactly a new idea or george mcgovern took a lot of electoral great the nineteen seventy two for proposing something similar and before that nineteen sixty nine president nixon offered a family assistance plan which included a federally funded minimum payment proviso it died in congress one of the major architects of an action plan was daniel patrick moynihan more recently the us ambassador to the united nations now a candidate for the us senate in nineteen sixty nine it was nixon's cabinet level chief domestic counselor first was more than the governor's cd and most everyone else has their definition also called welfare mass what yours my definition of those of the welfare mascots with me fancy nancy la times than playing cowardice

with switched the governors and the mayors of this country continue we approach this question we may have had the chutzpah to tell us this is the national welfare reform proposal is nothing of the time it's what the old tyrant was tinkering it takes to as informers and all around a little bit and jonathan little bit and so far there is one question about welfare and that is whether we are going to provide the same level of income support for intact families as we do from broken families what governor kerry said that we need a welfare system which will preserve the basic family you know we haven't done that the present system what's enormous incentive gives incentive to break up families there's only one sample the show a policy and that is really you provide the working poor the same levels of support that should provide that dependent poor after that you're talking about administrative budgetary details though i'm afraid we did almost get a guaranteed income in nineteen

sixty nine and seventy passed the house of representatives place that was voted on their side and past but to the one margins what they mean the primary issue is whether you include the working poor and unless you're going to do that you're going to continue in the presence as it was such a disaster and the lead a public official so i leave open carry of this very tough all they want is to get the horse to the present system out of their budget that's not welfare reform that's changing the budgetary situation for a bunch of mayors and governors the real issue is to change the system also always talked about santa will sanction is meaningless to do it would not change the income of a single welfare recipient it would leave the present system actually unchained so far is affection men and women and children and families because youth is not the budget of columbus ohio the issues that depended on guatemala's talk about bureaucratic chaos such a mass at the money's not going to the people

in the new view into areas that really that serious a problem from based on your experience the present system because it it it it makes that so many administrative judgments makes for all for bureaucracy no question about that a simple income guaranteed probably would be simpler but no money by play of the play really now than you would've hoped for isaac fong thank you one of the key people on the welfare on right now in washington and robert gordon is the new administrator of social and rehabilitation services for the origin of health education and welfare for the ford administration is in charge of the derby and welfare and the dubbing for welfare in other words is the welfare system as bad as the morning and says in his terms or would you agree with the governors the bureaucratic not a word how would you define that really never really serious problems of inequity in the design of this current programs the way they fit together the and balances among states in regard to think that to benefit levels we have administrative problems as evidenced by our our

problems in getting the error it's the corner at an inner interim administration of the ada families and children program i do think we're making headway on those administrative problems i decide i would also say i disagree with the investor moynihan relative to the contribution the governor's report makes to the dialogue that i do think that that it contributes to a re re ignition to some extent yeah a debate on this issue that is needed that it does commit the governor's to a process of working not only with the federal government also with counties and misspellings in their associations to to get on with said the question of what do we do in the short run what can we do in the longer run and i believe it does make a contribution to that to the battle now i don't think yet a bit about the specific proposal say the takeover the federal takeover of santa barbara some of the financially you grow it that they spend is a lot more looking because learning you know like well it means that death to me that that day

that you cannot endorse a candidate idea without doing a lot more review of that i simply having the federal government pick up seventy five percent of the cost that does leave the question of the of the working poor that at best one and talked about it leaves lots of unanswered questions it also probably at involves future costs that we don't that we get project without really a lot more study and i would say i would say that the year that that idea would have that would have to be looked at in terms of words taking us down the road we don't i don't think we would want as and as a nation do something and the fed are going to pick up the financing system that we're not sure we're gonna move way that well that goes to the to another aspect of the proposal it also ambassador more damage and in terms of a guaranteed annual income i call it in the governors' tying a standardized minimum payment do you believe that's the direction that we should be headed down the road i think ultimately we're going to have to get to a system that we can defend as being more equitable of being fair to people in different

walk thirty people and different walks of life and not dependent on whether or not there is a broken home or more a disabled person in the hassle but in getting their we have a lot of things to look at each step afdc in the so called guaranteed income question i think we have to look at how that relates to the unemployment insurance program the food stamps obviously you and other programs do you favor than a consolidation of the federal welfare programs which was another aspect all the happy ceo food stamps all these new programs under the federal government acting student one of the proposals of the governors and others is that these all be consolidated are you just that i don't think that day gains a lot in terms of benefits to low income people aren't in changing the state's financial problems relative to welfare we are working to energize our procedures and regulations for food stamps so that they recovered from an analyst with those of the house or afdc and we can we have done some things in those in those respects to tie them together so the benefits and food

stamps benefits and welfare are seen together but i don't think it changes the basic problem of of inequity in dallas also find a man what would be a fair interpretation of your position that the governor's report is a nice saying in terms of the base and stimulate some debate about welfare reform but their specific proposals you'll cool on it thinking of the study of the new year i don't have any specifics in their proposal and they invade they acknowledged at an airport they say that they would like to be a part of the process and they call on that on that the federal government to take the lead in that dialogue and it's all about art history occurred but but the specifics are not there and they they acknowledge that are left fall didn't like it let's move on now to the democrats in congress the welfare reform light say in jimmy carter's democratic party platt form lays out a plan that is almost identical to the one the governors adopted in congress they're already hundreds of those touching on various aspects of the welfare problem there either referred to are awaiting action by warner more the five congressional committees with jurisdictional klein's one of those committees ultimately is always

the house budget committee and congresswoman elizabeth holzman as a member of that she was a liberal democrat from brooklyn new york congresswoman anything you edward which you've already heard about what's wrong with the welfare system as it now operates what that's attracting i happen to disagree a little bit with what's been said and perhaps it's because an hour a member of the house budget committee but it seems to me if you're going to talk about the welfare mess who pays for it is essential question as essential question because it's one thing if people are getting adequate or inadequate cyclists live on welfare and so it's another matter if the city that's financing that welfare system is destroying itself in the process of paying those bills for example to pay for the enormous cost of welfare in new york city the city of new york has had to increase its sales tax which is a regressive tax it had to increase its real estate property tax which is a regressive tax around the state of new york in order to maintain welfare levels teaches of had to be fired

probably taxes and then increased layoffs have been made that affect the quality of life in the city and in the state of new york only for wealthier recipients would forever but passionate and the fact is that the that requiring states and localities to pay this enormous wealth neighbor has undermined the quality of life in our city in our state and in states around the country and i think that for that reason the governor's proposal which by the way i was incorporating then i offer on the floor the house representatives namely that the federal government paid for at least seventy five percent of wealth because i think that that proposal sounds a important know for this country and i think that we fared better get about the business of having the federal government with the enormous cost of welfare of the burns of taxpayers and stays local level otherwise wouldn't find the fiber of our society and the money a very serious well as that is to minimize the other point about how the welfare system has to work but i think who pays for is an extremely important quote whether it comes

through the federal system or whether it comes to the state and local system saying people still pay for learning a different way level as i mentioned the system of pay well for is much more aggressive counties like basically on property taxes to pay for us city in your lives and real estate property tax and relies on sales tax policy which are aggressive federal government basically relies on an income tax to pay for and the icicles of the federal government as roman is likely to begin to pick up some of the scores of welfare the city and state that this point a really strapped somali unusual although certainly are no one would know i don't think it would balance out i think that if the federal government paid for the course of welfare that we would be able to have an educational system in the city that could ensure that children of welfare parents would get the kind of education that would enable him to get good jobs that we could begin to break the welfare cycle we could begin to build these and having to take your the problems of crime right now we

can't do that that money that would come out of the budget to pay for these additional welfare cost would have to come out of some other aspect of peanuts says he's ok what about the questionable money and cost in the us or down a lonely set in that a governor of maine said on that tape what are the costs are we gonna begin to fall you mentioned also answer a messenger that so many times people talk about welfare reform in terms of a way to save money but what are the realistic things about about welfare in the call somebody got a play as welfare reform is not an immediate cuts in welfare costs as it has been in the new expansion isn't that the real not have it in a nice thought add some definitions which we were getting pretty fuzzy here we always do in the system of in fifteen years this thing and i like it so i want the commission is so sad that the democratic platform has a provision which is virtually identical with the government's report

that there is a will it is that is absolutely not the case i wrote the democratic platform plank i'm on the drafting committee of the platform and let me put it to you what we say i have it right here and right here can we say that we should move toward a replacement of our existing inadequate ways the welfare system with a simplified system of income night and substantiation after the federal budget which includes a requirement doesn't able to work and provide appropriate available jobs but not this naked system should employ certain basic principles i wrote these words with my own hands and first and most important agent provided income for both for the working poor and the poor not in the labor market it must treat stable and broken families equally the governor is that we are as a nomad just incorrect for a ten years ago we were like

trying to get president johnson to put this in the poverty program we finally got up to president nixon would not pass the house but it will never got the letter and so the basic point about welfare reform is to change the incentive is that broken families and at that time ten years ago sixty nine semi we're pleading for the senate voted this thing we said look you know if that happened we don't get to fundamental reform the next thing you're going to hear if the governors and congress to hold when a muslim holzman it's up to iraq to the governors and the mayors are going to give up one reform and former slave get out of our budget we can't pay for them with federal government will pick up this disaster system annabel on forever but that doesn't bother anybody but what the director of the office a man mutter map of the city in iraq is just as councilman holds and that is being devastated by the cost of welfare well s and they are solid it's not just the costs about thirty it's the welfare system if you take and put the courses like putting the thing in the closet and forgetting about and i bet against forgetting about the system i think is just copies of people and

children and the heavens like let's not fight this is just like that and it's not what the fed or answer it i stand corrected if i'm guilty of anything that was my interpretation of the way into it i would it was a new world as you know i think you know it's not the one the documentary said ok let's let's mr russo under the seventh how do you feel about the money is that era we are somebody taking somebody when they say that to reform the welfare system under the way and that's from one end of the way the governor's your way anybody was too is going to say it's the taxpayers' money i don't think you can know eliminate the inequities are deal with the on the media needs that he's spoken out without it costing more money i am a survey the fema assistance plan the other alternatives that have been developed and in the congress and the administration for consideration of allies assume that you would have to invest substantial new income in federal money in

order to implement the canisters to talk about so this brings me as to a conclusion ambassador as an outsider on the tests that we've been operating under a charade that the rhetoric on this is always let's reform the welfare system caught up in bureaucratic waste and will save money not only us climate to poison so and readmitted to be very clear first of all when you hear the question of the federal public pays seventy five percent of the cost that the potato salad like thirty five they went up by seventy eight percent because mississippi they pay fifty percent at least of every state's carson somewhere between fifty one and seventy four the rest is tinkering joseph announced fifty nine or sixty votes so suddenly you're not what we estimated to cost the polls on the democratic platform we estimated about sixteen billion dollars to the company about where you would think and what they are nervous not just about their fbi if you don't market with this comedian proposal congresswoman giffords before canceling holzman really work in that medium

proposal about sixteen billion in that region our lives no let's move on the world where it's really going to happen or not happen unless this whole area the politics the welfare reform reform here again anyway any of you all want to reform why everybody seems to be in favor of the democrats republicans conservatives liberals a surfer on down a law and local governments state governments and yet nothing ever gets dark now why is that in congress why is there that you could mean that congress would enact ernest moniz but why hasn't that nothing really big ever happened they didn't enact line then that would say are york city eight hundred and fifty million dollars which is no small amount and i don't know the whole answer to it on the show at some thoughts first of all there's no real lobby you don't have people on welfare making substantial campaign contributions and members of congress in the senate there for have not paid same kind of attention to this if they have the sample some promise affecting the oil interests secondly the problem in substances very complicated

how you construct a program that will treat people with dignity and at the same time women a fraud at the same time creating incentives that people will go back to work at the same time raise the so called cycle of welfare to accomplish all of these things these are really difficult matter people may disagree on it as extremely complex and substance so people are not always eager to learn the details of how to make a system really were and then finally there's been a lot of demagogic rhetoric on the subject welfare cheats eliminating money saving taxpayers money by cutting down the cost of welfare is probably not possible to cut down the cost of welfare and the congress as other objectives at the same time but i can be a very good example in this area by looking at the ssi system which is a federal welfare system guaranteed income system if you will for the elderly blind and disabled or lose your social security administered by social security pay for nsa by the federal

government this is save the federal government has set a floor nationwide with states able to supplement that usually paying themselves i would say that the program they've been a success in places like mississippi and they've been a success in other states that aren't really as well off it's been a disaster in new york it's been a disaster because the amounts of people got worse simply too small for personal live with any kind of economic dignity and this is a system we don't have to wait at work instead as in this a system where you don't have is we have a federal takeover of the ministrations of what we have not been three years since this program didn't exist in spain able to modify even those areas are the program that everybody agrees with that modified because there's really no strong lobby perhaps the people in wheelchairs in the blind and it can be stricken aged just can't get the ear of worship mr fuld i think get on the ssi of them to stay away from because it is not part of it

but and the reform question i think there are a couple of factors in in what has happened in the past haven't been discussed here and one of them is is the reality that the sea this is a costly proposition even the sixteen day in than the original estimates for the family assistance program are quite a bit smaller than that but even even that had an initial anchorman which sounds like a small percentage of the federal budget at a time when the federal budget is great at a balanced already is that is a real concern but more importantly perhaps is what are the future costs how does the program developed over time does it as it began to to grow to the point where we have a very heavy percentage of the american public getting some benefit under if you include the working poor and intact families live within the program that most people would believe would agree with investor on should be done if we have a parade for we may need but the other thing i would mention is that perhaps we've tried to be too

mobile at the outset i think we have to have the picture were growing as a nation with with nature before but perhaps we have to get there by building blocks and that's reading cadavers may have something to say to us that we are less active they are saying in essence we have fifteen seconds left so i can only sell assume that you disagree with and testimony in that we should go for a dramatic thing rather than step by step i would my judgment is that the politics are such that he would get something dramatic whereas the tinkering just never hurts to thank you john and i'll be back tomorrow night robin will also be that are thanks to the wii it anymore she and jim lehr thank you the program

york york one when this program was produced by wnet grants from public television stations an operation no question the euro moon named