During the endgame of the budget deal last month Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Republicans began trotting out a new claim: that California has unusually high welfare expenditures and recipients – 30% of the nation’s recipients but only 12% of the nation’s population.
Scott Graves at the California Budget Project points out that although technically true, the context makes all the difference – much of those welfare recipients are children:
First, California, unlike most other states, chose to maintain a strong safety net for children after federal welfare reform was enacted in the late 1990s. In response to federal welfare reform, which established the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, California created the CalWORKs Program, with an emphasis on work and services to help low-income families move toward self-sufficiency. California’s leaders, including Governor Pete Wilson, made a bipartisan commitment to provide ongoing subsistence grants for children in CalWORKs, even if their parents ran afoul of program rules or “timed off” the program. Most other states, in contrast, implemented full-family sanctions and do not provide ongoing assistance for children once their parents reached the lifetime limit on aid.
It’s no surprise that the states that enacted the most restrictive rules saw the steepest declines in their TANF caseloads. Between 1995 and 2008, for example, the number of welfare recipients plummeted by 92 percent in Illinois, by 86 percent in Florida, and by 84 percent in Texas, compared to a 55 percent drop in California. These numbers help to explain why California now has 30 percent of the nation’s welfare recipients. As other states have shredded their safety nets for low-income children – dramatically shrinking their welfare caseloads – California’s share of all TANF recipients has grown proportionately, even as the number of Californians receiving assistance has been cut by more than half.
In short, California only looked anomalous because we hadn’t made children suffer so that Republicans could slash budgets. Of course, the recent budget deal included Republican-inspired attacks on aid to children, from CalWORKS to Healthy Families to education cuts, so children are most definitely going to suffer now thanks to the cuts.
The right-wing wouldn’t want you to know that some of the earliest forms of government cash assistance to private individuals came in the form of payments to low-income families, dating back to the 1910s. The predecessor to TANF, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was created in 1935 as part of the New Deal, and as we know Republicans hate anything associated with the New Deal.
Graves also noted that the media has typically been repeating Arnold’s claim about California welfare stats without providing the context. I’d like to say that might change now that the facts are out there…but I am doubtful. The state’s media has been stacking the deck for cuts since 2007, and they don’t look to be in any mood to stop now.
at their parents. Their belief is that only minorities get those benefits, and republicans hate minorities. It’s the truth, albeit an unfortunate one.
If you are a single adult with no kids in California, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS WELFARE from the state! That’s right. Cash assistance, which is called general relief, is a county program, and not every county probably even has it. LA does, Orange county does, but considers it a LOAN, not welfare. You have to pay it back. For either county, it’s 200$ a month. That might feed one person for a month, but it won’t do anything else…housing, clothing, etc. And the strict rules attached to GR are designed to prevent one from getting more than 3 months out of the year. So the homeless people on the street don’t have a GR card usually, because one can only have on 1/4 of the year. Just to get GR, you need two forms of ID, a SS card, and participation in a daily job search ritual at a building of GR’s choice.
200 a month IF you qualify and meet daily demands. That’s adult welfare in this state. Anything else is for the kids, and we know how republicans feel about kids. About the same way they feel towards endangered species (just get rid of them).
I’m a permanently disabled person who gets an SSI/SSP check from the Social Security Administration every month(SSA), At the start of the year I got $907 a month, Then after 2 months that was rolled back, Now I get $850 after 3 such roll backs in the State Supplementary Payment(SSP) which is funded by the state of California as this state is an expensive place to live in, I don’t even get enough to qualify for a loan for a newer used car(payment and insurance), Just enough to maintain what I have now(My “less than mobile” home and My car are both paid off, I pay space rent for the land) and I live in one of the least expensive areas of the state to live in and still be near a city, Even if It is a HOT place during the summer(103F+ all summer long for the most part during the day), Thanks to the legislature My check will be reduced for a 4th time this year on October 1st to $845 a month, Our dear Arnold wanted to cut My check to $830, Thankfully I can still receive a Federal COLA(Cost Of Living Allocation) on the Part from SSA($674 this year), But until there is some inflation or a change in the law, There won’t be a new COLA until about either 2012 or 2013 I’ve read and then It will most likely be only 1.4% which is pretty small, The legislature also eliminated Medi-Cal benefits like Vision and Dental and also eliminated the state COLA which was around since about 1991 or so(It has been suspended since before I started receiving SSI, So I don’t miss It since I’ve never received It). I’m lucky I got a new pair of prescription bifocal glasses as I really can’t see too well without them anymore.