Although this new law clarified who the expected beneficiaries were it did not address the flaws of the previous system. So in the same year (1996) The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act for welfare reform was legislated.
This bill contains strong work requirements, a performance bonus to reward states for moving welfare recipients into jobs, state maintenance of effort requirements, comprehensive child support enforcement, and supports for families moving from welfare to workincluding increased funding for child care and guaranteed medical coverage. (The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, ¶ 1)
This act placed the main responsibility of welfare reform in the states hands. This task was eagerly accepted as the states had been actively trying new methods even before President Clinton signed the bill. Some may argue that all of the information provided here is reasonable. Without the details it seems that the reform that has taken place thus far would inevitably lead to a positive outcome. Has it? I defend the position that The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act was not a step towards reform instead it was useless plan that only leads to more problems. With that I move on with the next step in our welfare lesson.
As with most new and untested systems there are defects with the reform plans put in place. For the most part these flaws have received little or no attention from Congress. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act resulted in a divided society by allowing the possibility of 50 different ways to modify and utilize the welfare system. Alth View More »