- Schwarzenegger’s plan could cut deep for those who depend on state stipends, By Susan Ferriss, February 1, 2010, Sacramento Bee: “For Capitol insiders, it’s easy to chalk it up as a bluff when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposes terminating welfare-to-work and in-home care for the disabled if California doesn’t get billions in federal money he’s requested. But it’s no chess game for a welfare-to-work mother seriously trying to find a job, or a person in a wheelchair whose living stipend has already been slashed twice in one year. Social services spending is a big chunk of the state budget and is often cited as a prime example of runaway spending. Indeed, national comparisons show California is home to nearly a third of all welfare-to-work recipients. The typical $694 monthly welfare-to-work grant a mother and two children receive in California trails only Alaska and New York. The $845 monthly grant for low-income elderly or disabled individuals under the SSI/SSP program likewise is third-highest in the nation. But numbers also show that California’s safety net is getting less generous all the time…”
- Missouri governor’s budget proposal would trim into social safety net, By Jason Noble, January 31, 2010, Kansas City Star: “About $1.4 million in state funds reaches 844 teen parents and at-risk youths in nine sites across Missouri, connecting them with mentors and delivering parenting tips and life skills. Come July 1, however, state aid may drop to zero dollars under the budget proposal released earlier this month by Gov. Jay Nixon. ‘This is tragic what’s happening right now in the state,’ said Amy Beechner-McCarthy, executive director of the Community Partnership in Rolla. ‘And, unfortunately, it’s those with the least voice that are hurting the most.’ In his budget, Nixon strived to make $253 million in cuts with scissor snips rather than machete swipes. The effort was lauded by many in the social services arena, who feared deep cuts to education and aid to the poor. But even the smallest cuts will have real effects on the state’s social safety net, service providers said. The cuts, if carried through by the General Assembly, will cause populations in difficult circumstances to lose services. Advocates worry it also may end up costing the state more in the long run…”
Day: February 1, 2010
Drug Testing and TANF – Missouri
Mo. bill ties drug testing to welfare, By Juana Summers, February 2, 2010, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: “Welfare recipients in Missouri would have to undergo drug testing under legislation expected to hit the state House floor this week. Supporters of the proposal say the state shouldn’t subsidize drug use. But critics say the law targets the poor and that the state’s drug treatment programs already have lengthy waiting lists, leaving few options for people who want to get clean. Applicants for the state’s welfare program who tested positive for drug use would be ineligible to receive benefits for some time under the proposal, at most three years. However, other family members would still be eligible for assistance through a third-party provider. Proponents of HB1377, sponsored by Rep. Ellen Brandom, R-Sikeston, say the state needs to protect taxpayers, who might be unintentionally giving drug users money to feed their addictions, not their families…”
State Jobless Funds – Utah
Officials wary as more state jobless funds go broke, By Tony Semerad, February 1, 2010, Salt Lake Tribune: “Policymakers are growing wary as Utah finds itself in an ever-shrinking group of states whose unemployment insurance trust funds haven’t gone broke yet. Last week, Colorado and New Hampshire became the latest of 26 states to declare their trust funds wiped out by the recession’s surge in jobless claims. Industry watchers predict as many as 40 states will run out of money for unemployment benefits before the economy rebounds. Insolvent states are being forced to borrow from the federal government, raise taxes or cut benefits to keep unemployment aid flowing. Borrowing states now owe the feds almost $30 billion and face cutting benefits further and increasing premiums on employers when the loans come due…”