The Personal Responsibifity and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, which ended welfar

Question

The Personal Responsibifity and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, which ended welfare as we knew it is an example of devolution in action. lain the factors that lead to this major overhaul of welfare policy Discuss whether welfare reform has been successful. What are the advantages and Intergovernmental Relations disadvantages resulting from the federal government's disengagement from this important issue? Explain public-choice theory What government service, in your opinion, is best handled at the local level? Why?

Explanation / Answer

The personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act introduced in 1996 by the Bill Clinton administration, led to the introduction of the temporary assistance for needy families programme. Act was supposed to change the way welfare was defined and implemented because the earlier welfare schemes did not ensure that benefits percolated to the most deserving of cases, and the need for identification of effective methods for dispersion and allocation of benefits needed to be introduced. Welfare schemes huge burden on the exchequer without essentially resulting in breaking the poverty cycle by elevating the beneficiaries of the schemes gradually, to higher levels, by improvement in lifestyle and education provided. This 8 introduced infected system for identification of the deserving welfare cases which resulted in reduction of number of welfare cases by more than 60% from the earlier system, saving large funds for the government. This was due to previous programs which were relatively ineffective in adding definite value or quality today life and future of the beneficiaries, such as, 82 families with dependent children program which was exceptionally expensive for the Government and largely ineffective. This was replaced by the temporary assistance for needy families program which provided benefits to low income families in the United States. Delegation of Control for the schemes to the states what's the major advantage as it became easier to identify the deserving and disperse funds, while maintaining greater monitoring and control systems. This was undertaken in the form of a federal block grant to the states there by, doing away with the requirement for Federal funds be utilised for paying TANF benefits.

The Reform received excellent banking from all legislators as it achieved several objective which would result in improvement of family welfare. assistance provided to needy families would ensure that children will be cared for in their own homes, it would in the dependence of parents on government benefits comma it would take measures to prevent and reduce teenage and out of wedlock pregnancies and it would encourage existence of to Parent families. The impact was significant on society through an unprecedented decline in number of families existing on social welfare participation among single mothers depicting a dramatic fall. It leads to Mini earlier recipient of welfare actively seek employment as the identification and eligibility for beneficiaries was more stringent, the simultaneously resulted in an increase in reported earnings from employment from 6. 7% in 1992 to 28. 1 percent by 1999. This welfare scheme also greatly impacted other government programs, foreign nationals were excluded from such programs and medicaid was provided to family is supported by tnf, distribution of food stamps was changed. States has greater control and operation and coordination system became much more streamlined and efficient, under the state governments as the implementation was much better facilitated. Able-bodied adults were denied benefits and book provided employment expansion of existing work rules. Benefits delivered through modern technology by utilising digitised electronic payment methods. As the state line approach to finding was introduced states had to we plan the entire strategy for welfare schemes and became much more careful and frugal, as the federal block grant meant that welfare schemes had to be find it directly through the state pockets.

The Act was exemplary and revolutionary, it was also followed up with excellent implementation at the ground level which was proved by evaluation of performance. The stakeholder engagement involved throughout as it essentially make the state governments incharge of the reforms resulting in better networking, cooperation and communication within all stakeholders. The political commitment was excellent as Bill Clinton had won the election with actively pushing for welfare reforms and promising to introduce schemes which would radically change the way welfare was provided. It also found support among the republicans as it believe then a strong connection between benefits and employment and also look to reduce cost to the exchequer, through introduction of more strict eligibility guidelines. Public confidence in the Welfare Reform was high as most citizens felt that welfare expenditure was very high under the existing act, and the poor need to be encouraged to seek employment rather than depend upon welfare. The policies had clear objectives and was plant on the basis of player evidence from research that was published prior to the reforms. It was a well analysed and informed decision.

The management and implementation of the Act was exceptionally good, as the power center was shifted from the federal to the state level. Alignment and fine tuning of objectives and timelines, was excellent however this power shift, also gave rise to one of the major weaknesses within the Reform as happens with every major change in management alignment of the Reform at state level was left to the discretion of state legislatures. This resulted in discrepancy in policies between different states leading to variation in eligibility criteria and application of the Act.

Public choice theory is essentially theory which tries to provide an explanation for the basis of public decisions. How individuals make public decisions on the basis of interaction the voters, the politicians, the political Action Committee and the bureaucracy. This theory developed by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock has several segments to it. These can be listed as, irrationality of voting for the individual, the logic of elections, the existence of social welfare functions, government special interest groups and special models of political competition.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.