help

NOTE: Hyperlinks provided in this policy fax briefing were correct as of the time of publication. March 2001 - Vol. 3, No 2 Supreme Court Lifts Some Restrictions on Legal Representation of the Poor; Upholds Others Marriage Promotion Likely to Become Central Feature of Bush's Domestic Policy Agenda Bush's Tax Plan Excludes Low-Income Families Distribution Problems Continue to Plague Many State Child Support Systems Website Offers Samples Of Successful Proposals New Reports Reveal Additional Impacts of Welfare Reform on the Poor Supreme Court Lifts Some Restrictions on Legal Representation of the Poor; Upholds Others The United States Supreme Court recently decided two issues related to legal services for the poor. In the Court's first ruling, issued on February 28, 2001, restrictions that Congress has placed on welfare litigation on behalf of the poor were determined to violate the First Amendment. Since 1996, the Legal Services Corporation, which distributes federal funds to local organizations that provide legal representation to impoverished clients, has been prohibited by Congress from funding any organization involved in litigation that challenges welfare law. The Court held that the First Amendment protections apply to legal services-funded lawyers and their clients regardless of the fact that the program is funded by the federal government, and that the restrictions interfere with the autonomy of the courts in violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine. The Court also found that the restrictions insulate current welfare laws from constitutional scrutiny. On March 5, 2001, however, the Court declined to consider an appeal to other restrictions on legal aid lawyers that were sought by legal services clients. The restrictions that were left in place bar legal services lawyers from taking on class actions and lawsuits seeking attorneys' fees or involving reapportionment or abortion, among other categories. To obtain more information, comment on the Legal Services Corporation's new regulations, or to assist in documenting the impact of legal restrictions on clients and communities, contact the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, 212/998-6363, or www.brennancenter.org. The cases are Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez, 99-603 and U.S. v. Velazquez, 99-960. Marriage Promotion Likely to Become Central Feature of Bush's Domestic Policy Agenda The appointment of Dr. Wade Horn to become the Assistant Secretary for Family Support, and a proposal by the Heritage Foundation to create an Office of Marriage Initiatives are two of the recent developments that signal a shift toward stronger emphasis on the promotion of marriage in the Bush administration. Dr. Horn is currently president of the National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI). In a publication written in 1997 with Andrew Bush for the Hudson Institute, Fathers, Marriage, and Welfare Reform, Dr. Horn proposed welfare-to-work services for low-income males, but with married fathers given first priority for the program, non-fathers second and unwed fathers last. He also proposed giving preference to two-parent, married households for certain "limited supply" welfare benefits, and using public education campaigns to restigmatize fathering children out of wedlock. His report can be obtained on-line at www.hudson.org; go to the Welfare Policy Center, Fathers and Noncustodial Parents page. In a second development, the National Journal reports that Patrick Fagan, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services during the previous Bush Administration, and currently a Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, has proposed a federal Office of Marriage Initiatives. Citing the absence of marriage among the poor as the "single most important reason that poor children and their single parents remain poor", Fagan would require states to use a portion of their welfare funds on marriage efforts by taking a percentage of existing funds from TANF, the Office of Child Support Enforcement, and the Office of Family Planning to fund the following efforts: The infusion of marriage promotion into all federal social programs. Research on marriage and divorce and on the economic costs to the taxpayer of unwed births and post-divorce single parenting among the poor. The placement of the current Offices of Family Planning and Adolescent Pregnancy within the Office of Marriage Initiatives. The Office of Marriage Initiatives could thus direct current federal family planning efforts toward the promotion of marriage and sexual abstinence. Bush's Tax Plan Excludes Low-Income Families According to a recent report on President Bush's tax plan from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), many low-income and lower middle-income families will see none of the tax deductions Bush promised during his campaign to help working class families. Thirty percent of all U.S. children, most of whom are from low- and moderate-income families, will receive no reduction in taxes from the new tax plan. In some states, the proportion of children who will receive no benefit from the tax plan is as high as 1 in 2. These families will continue to owe a large amount of their wages in payroll tax and state and local taxes. Bush's tax plan to reduce income taxes and large estate taxes will primarily benefit families with incomes greater than $100,000. 12.2 million U.S. families with incomes below and even slightly above the federal poverty level of $18,000 will see no benefit. CBPP suggests that the Earned Income Tax Credit and a reduction of the federal payroll tax will better serve to reduce the tax burden for low-income working families newly off the welfare roles since welfare reform. The report, In Many States, One-Third to One-Half of Families Would Not Benefit From Bush Tax Plan, along with several other reports on the effect of the Bush tax cut proposals, are available on-line at www.cbpp.org. Distribution Problems Continue to Plague Many State Child Support Systems Many states are continuing to experience difficulty in distributing collected child support payments to families, particularly as they implement the federal requirement to have a central state disbursement unit (SDU) for the collection and distribution of child support. Undistributed child support totaled more than $400 million in 1999. Among recent problems: In Illinois, Governor Ryan is facing opposition from some state legislators to his proposal to let families who were issued emergency child support payments last year keep the payments. Families received a one-time payment from the state in the fall of 1999 to tide them over when the state's disbursement unit failed to distribute child support payments to custodial parents. Some legislators argue that families should be contacted to reimburse the state for the payments, which totaled $9 million. According to the director of Ohio's Department of Job and Family Services, difficulties in meeting an October 2000 deadline to get the state's child support tracking system up and avoid federal fines required so much attention that the state made a choice to ignore a computer glitch that resulted in the state retaining back payments owed to welfare recipients. In all, $1.3 million was withheld from 8,800 families. In North Carolina, a lawsuit has been filed against the state over the inefficiencies of its child support distribution system. In Mississippi, undistributed child support income for fiscal year 2000 totaled $3.2 million, an increase from $2.8 million in 1999. A Kansas House Judiciary Committee has held hearings recently on a bill that would officially sanction Tier Technologies, Inc., a private firm that has contracted with the state to run its child support payment center. Lawmakers cited numerous complaints from custodial parents about late payments and rude treatment by the company's staff. Website Offers Samples Of Successful Proposals Nonprofit organizations may find a new website useful for writing grant proposals. The site, www.tgcigrantproposals.com, allows readers to search more than 600 successful proposal abstracts, chosen by government funders as their highest-rated grant applications. Proposals are organized by subject area including education; children/youth and families; health; housing; law enforcement; substance abuse; jobs/training, and community development. New Reports Reveal Additional Impacts of Welfare Reform on the Poor Three recent reports consider aspects of welfare reform and find effects on families that have not typically been reported from other research sources. The following is a brief and partial list of findings from each report. The first, Unemployment Insurance and Welfare Reform: Fair Access to Economic Supports for Low-Income Working Women, by Annisah Um'rani and Vicky Lovell for the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR Publication #A125), finds that Unemployment Insurance (UI) should be a useful resource for welfare recipients who lose jobs, but is not for a number of reasons: Most former welfare recipients do not qualify for UI benefits because of low-wage or part-time employment that fails to meet earnings requirements. Many states do not allow workers to receive UI if the reason for job loss is inadequate child care, sexual harassment or domestic responsibilities. Women who leave or lose jobs due to domestic violence are ineligible for UI benefits in 34 states. The authors argue that the UI system should be changed to remove these barriers for low-income working women, particularly since public policy is now demanding that women enter the workforce regardless of their earning capacity. Family Violence, Employment Status, Welfare Benefits, and Alcohol Drinking in the United States: What Is the Relation?, by Eunice Rodriguez was published in the March 2001 issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. The study analyzed data on 4,780 married or cohabiting individuals who were in both the 1987 and 1992 National Survey of Families and Households, and found that: The marginally employed - people whose low pay makes them eligible for welfare payments - are almost four times more likely to be violent with their families than workers not on welfare or even than other unemployed workers. The author suggests one explanation for the increased risk of violence is the additional stress of working in low-skill jobs while coping with poverty and childcare. Cruel and Usual: How Welfare "Reform" Punishes Poor People, by Rebecca Gordon has been published by the Applied Research Center. The report, based on 1,512 surveys of welfare recipients, finds that: More than a third of survey respondents experienced personally invasive behavior, particularly with regard to their sex lives, from welfare staff. One in six had experienced sexual harassment at her work activity. Among those who received job training, women were significantly more likely to be sent to "dress for success" classes than men. Asians and Latinos were much less likely than any other respondents to be provided with job training. If you would prefer to receive this policy briefing by e-mail, you can now do so! contact Rebecca May at 608/257-3148 OR rmay@cffpp.org with your e-mail address to begin receiving it as a word attachment

Copyright 2001, the Center on Fathers, Families, and Public Policy. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement | Copyright Statement | Disclaimer