Action Alert Update June 24, 2002:
Senate Committee to Start Voting on TANF June 26

June 24, 2002

ACTION NEEDED NOW!

The Senate Finance Committee will begin voting on its version of TANF reauthorization on Wednesday, June 26, using as the basis for its work the Chairman’s Mark (explained in detail below). Please contact your Senator if he/she is a member of the Finance Committee and urge her/him to:

- Support the education and training provisions of the Chairman’s Mark;

- Increase funding for child care to at least $11.25 billion over five years;

- Oppose any amendment that would sanction a whole family for the failure of one member to comply with program requirements;

- Support any amendment that would:

-- count caring for a disable child as complying with the work requirement;

-- extend Medicaid to legal immigrants;

-- expand education and training options, especially ones like Maine’s Parents as Scholars;

-- increase funding for public jobs.

ACTION NEEDED IN THE NEXT TEN DAYS

Congress leaves town this Friday for the July 4 recess. While your Senators are at home, please communicate with all of them to urge them to support the best possible bill in the Senate. It is absolutely essential that there be 60 votes for passage of this legislation. The Senate must pass the strongest bill possible, because it will have to compromise with the House bill, and the stronger its bill is, the stronger its position in negotiations will be.

The President is threatening to veto any bill that does not meet his requirements.

ANALYSIS

As you know, the Senate Finance Committee will begin to mark up its version of TANF reauthorization over the next two days. The Committee will discuss the issues on Tuesday and begin voting on their bill’s specifics on Wednesday, Today the Committee leadership released what is known as the Chairman’s Mark, which is Chairman Max Baucus’s preferred version of TANF reauthorization. It is essentially the Tripartisan proposal (described in an earlier posting), with some additions supported by Baucus.

The Chairman’s Mark is, generally, far better on the issues of concern to the religious community than earlier reports suggested it would be. It is clear that Finance Committee members have heard and -- to a significant degree -- responded to the pleas of constituents. Congratulations! You have done a great job! Now it is crucial to keep up the pressure, especially in the area of child care, where the Mark is seriously deficient.

The National Council of Churches has built its advocacy around five major points. The report below shows how each is treated in the Chairman’s Mark. The NCC contends that TANF must:

1. FOCUS ON POVERTY REDUCTION: The Mark does not address the issue of making poverty reduction a TANF goal, but many of its provisions are directed toward helping recipients become employable at family-supporting wages.

2. BE ADEQUATELY FUNDED: To the Council, this means that, at a minimum, the current funding of $16.5 billion annually should be maintained and adjusted annually for inflation. The Mark maintains current funding without an inflation adjustment.

3. PROVIDE EDUCATION AND TRAINING AND ELIMINATE BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT: This is where the Mark comes closest to meeting religious community expectations. It maintains the current work requirement at 30 hours, not the 40 approved by the House. It maintains the current requirement that parents of pre-school children work 20 hours a week, not the 40 in the House bill. It agrees with the House to increase the mandate on states to have 70% of their caseload work (up from the current 50%) but provides a credit in the form of a reduced mandate for good performance.

The Mark would expand the current allowance for a TANF recipient to be in vocational education from 12 months to 24 months, which is what most such programs require to be successful. The House would reduce the figure to 4 months. Attendance at a community college in a course intended to lead to employment would count toward meeting the work requirement. Six months of "barrier removal activities" (such as substance abuse treatment) would count as work.

Transitional Medicaid would be reauthorized for five years to allow TANF leavers to continue having health care. Housing, child care and transportation aid would not be defined as assistance, so their receipt would not cause the time limit clock to run.

One serious weakness in the Mark is that it fails to fund child care adequately. The lack of decent child care is probably the biggest barrier to employment for poor women. The Mark proposes only $5 billion in additional funding over five years, which is far below existing need. Only one eligible low-income child in four now receives a child care subsidy from all federal sources combined. Other TANF reauthorization bills would increase child care funding by figures ranging from $8 billion to $11.25 billion over five years. A total of $20 billion is needed to double the current supply of subsidized child care slots, which would still serve only a small part of the need.

4. SERVE ALL WHO NEED HELP: The Mark would give states the option of restring TANF benefits to legal immigrants. It does not address Medicaid, but Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) is likely to introduce an amendment to create a state Medicaid option as well. Currently, legal immigrants cannot receive TANF for the first five years they are in the U.S., or Medicaid for the first ten. The earlier years are most often when help is needed.

GIVE STATES FLEXIBILITY WITH REGARD TO TIME LIMITS: The Mark does not address this directly but several of its provisions would have the effect of extending eligibility for people who are complying with the rules but cannot escape the need for TANF.

Amendments likely to be offered during mark up would:

- count caring for a disabled child as work, stopping time limits for such families;

- increase funding for child care;

- extend Medicaid to immigrants;

- expand education and training options; (Sen. Snowe, R-ME, will propose wider use of programs such as Maine’s highly successful Parents as Scholars program, which allows TANF parents to get college educations.)

- increase funding for public jobs (with full labor and civil rights protections).

One very negative amendment likely to be offered by Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) should be rigorously opposed. It would require that an entire family, including children, lose benefits if an adult fails to comply with program requirements, even if the failure is not intentional.