Changing the face of welfare.

• Author: Tweedie, Jack
• Position: Includes related articles - Cover Story

Welfare reform is sweeping the country. But politicians in Washington, D.C., are not leading the charge. Instead, it is legislators in Austin, Hartford, Indianapolis and other state capitals. This year alone, 17 state legislatures enacted substantial reforms to their Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) programs. By the end of 1994, 12 others had already applied for federal waivers for significant changes.

State welfare reforms gained momentum in 1992 after the Bush administration made it easier to obtain waivers to the federal AFDC rules. States have been adopting extensive changes to their programs - not just tinkering with a particular policy. They have enacted statewide reforms rather than limiting changes to a few pilot areas as was once common. They also are eager to try the innovations developed by colleagues in other states and often have not waited until the effects of those policies have been evaluated. Many specific proposals - such as time limits on the receipt of welfare and family caps that eliminate benefit increases when a family on welfare has more children - are spreading rapidly.

State policymakers worry that welfare fosters long-term dependence and actually discourages recipients from finding work. The availability of Medicaid and child care assistance make many recipients financially better off on welfare than they would be working minimum wage jobs. Some critics believe welfare has led to more births to teenage and unwed mothers. States intent on putting more recipients to work seek to improve the transition from welfare to work, to push recipients toward self-sufficiency and to discourage teenage births and births to mothers already on AFDC.

Several political factors have influenced the pattern of welfare reform. Some analysts point to the large number of new governors as contributing to the wave of welfare reform. But states with new governors (seven of 19) were only slightly more likely to enact welfare reform than other states (10 of 32). Changes in party control of legislatures made more of a difference. Almost half the states where party control shifted made changes (seven of 16). Less than one-third where the same party remained in control enacted reforms (10 of 33). The governor's political party was also unimportant: Democrats and Republicans were almost equally likely to institute reforms. Party control of the legislature did matter, however. Republicans campaigned as the party of welfare reform in the 1994 elections, but legislatures under Democratic control enacted reforms more frequently (seven of 18). Four of 19 states with GOP legislatures have passed significant reforms...