 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
NOTE: Hyperlinks provided in this policy fax briefing were correct as of the time of publication. July 2001 - Vol. 3, No 5
 Two studies report troubling disparities by race and income A recent report from the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, Income and Racial Disparities in the Undercount in the 2000 Presidential Election, analyzed voting results from 40 congressional districts in 20 states, comparing districts with high poverty rates and minority populations to those with low poverty rates and a small minority population. The report found the following:
A second report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Pathbreaking CBO Study Shows Dramatic Increases in Income Disparities in 1980s and 1990s: An Analysis of the CBO Data, examines both the Congressional Budget Office data and the Bush tax cuts to conclude:
Update on legislation Child Support Distribution Is Still Waiting Action. Multiple versions of child support distribution reform have been introduced in the House and Senate (see the April and May 2001 Policy Briefings for summaries of the bills), but no action has been taken on them to date. The cost of limiting the amount of money states could retain as welfare repayment has surfaced as a potential obstacle to its passage, with some talk of revising this provision to make it a state option. On June 28th, the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources held hearings on child support and fatherhood legislation. A list of witnesses and copies of their testimony is available at http://waysandmeans.house.gov/humres.htm Victims' Economic Security and Safety Act to Be Introduced in Congress. The Victims' Economic Security and Safety Act (VESSA) will soon be introduced in the Senate. The bill expands on VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) Reauthorization passed by Congress in September 2000, and augments the safety provisions for battered women provided under VAWA with measures to protect battered women in the workplace. VESSA would provide protection in the workplace for women who are victims of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking through the following provisions:
The Act to Leave No Child Behind Incorporates Many Bills Directed at Children. On May 23, 2001, Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Representative George Miller (D-CA) introduced The Act to Leave No Child Behind (H.R. 1990 and S. 940), a bill that incorporates a broad range of policies and programs that would positively impact children. Included in the bill are the child support distribution and fatherhood provisions contained in other bills introduced separately, along with provisions that would apply to education, health, child protection and immigration. More information about the bill is available at the Children's Defense Fund website, www.cdfactioncouncil.org. -RM and AL President Bush's Faith- Based Initiative Stirs Controversy President Bush's faith-based initiative passed the House on July 19, with a vote of 233-198, despite the revision of the bill to allow religious agencies receiving federal money to pre-empt many state laws that bar discrimination in hiring, and the removal of a requirement that secular services be made available for those who do not want religious-based services. The bill allows religious groups to compete for and receive federal money for an expanded number of social service programs. The future of the bill in the Senate remains uncertain; Senate President Tom Daschle (D-SD) has stated that he is not likely to allow the bill to be considered soon. Supporters of the bill ran into controversy last week when it was revealed through an internal Salvation Army document that a potential private collaboration was formed between the Bush administration and the national charity providing the Salvation Army's support for the initiative in exchange for the provision allowing organizations to discriminate in hiring regardless of state and local laws. The White House has claimed that the agreement with the Salvation Army did not materialize, but the Salvation Army has been promoting the initiative since May, and the provision was inserted into the legislation prior to its passage. Furthermore, the White House originally disputed the involvement of senior staff members, but has since had to recant. - Washington Post articles 7/10/01 and 7/13/01 at www.washingtonpost.com. -AL Two articles take marriage promotion efforts to task Two magazines have recently published articles critical of the current trend toward promoting marriage among the poor. In the July 9, 2001 issue of The Nation, an article by Judith Stacey entitled Family Values Forever analyzes the politics behind the most recent clamor for a revival of family values and marriage by the Bush Administration, the pending nomination of Wade Horn as HHS Assistant Secretary for Family Support, and continuing debates around fatherhood legislation and welfare reform. Stacey, professor at the University of California, Davis, previously authored In the Name of the Family and Brave New Families. In a similar reaction to the current trend toward promoting marriage, the August, 2001 issue of The Progressive contains an article by Barbara Ehrenreich, titled Prodding the Poor to the Altar. Ms. Ehrenreich recently authored Nickel and Dimed: on (Not) Getting by in Boom-Time America (See the May 2001 Policy Briefing for a summary). In the article, she takes issue with government efforts to control marital choices among the poor. Among her points are that a marriage entered into as a result of a government financial incentive would be at far greater risk of breaking up than is the case for couples who marry after first cohabiting, a factor often cited as contributing to unstable marriages. -AL and RM Wisconsin Supreme Court prohibits father from having more babies On July 10, 2001, the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's ruling barring a noncustodial father from having additional children during a five-year probationary period. The father was $25,000 behind in child support payments for nine children. The decision is likely to create controversy over whether child support enforcement tactics take precedence over civil rights. Regarding the decision, Catherine Weiss, director of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project in New York, stated, "There's a long, ugly history of attempts by the government to control the reproduction of poor people." Referring to Wisconsin's aggressive reduction of welfare rolls, she also said, "Now they turn around and scapegoat the deadbeat dads." In her dissent, Wisconsin Supreme Court justice Ann Walsh Bradey wrote that the decision "places the woman in an untenable positions: have an abortion or be responsible for Oakley (the father) going to prison for eight years." She also said, "While the majority describes this case as 'anomalous' and comprised of 'atypical facts,' the cases in which such a principle might be applied are not uncommon. The majority's own statistical data regarding nonpayment of support belies its contention that this case is truly exceptional." -RM D.C. bill would criminalize child support nonpayment Legislation that would allow contempt of court actions for failure to pay child support moved one step closer to enactment when it passed out of a Council judiciary committee in the District of Columbia on June 27, 2001. The bill, the Child Support Enforcement Amendment Act of 2001 (B. 14-26), would criminalize the non-payment of child support, allowing for a six-month jail sentence and judicial discretion to allow for work-release sentences or court-ordered rehabilitation or job training programs. If a child support obligor were found in contempt, they would be held responsible for the payment of the District's legal and court fees. The bill would be applied to a potential pool of 31,000 cases in which, according to the D.C. Child Support Enforcement Division, there is child support owed and not paid. -RM Research done by American Friends Service Committee shows that TANF falls short The American Friends Service Committee has collected and reviewed a number of reports by government, researchers, policy experts, women's groups, and faith-based organizations which provide further evidence that TANF is falling short in meeting the needs of poor families. Five years after the inception of welfare reform, and with impending reauthorization and time limits, the review finds that:
Two states extend TANF benefits past 60-month limit Two states have adjusted their time limits for TANF benefits as the first families begin to reach their 60-month lifetime limit of federal benefits in the coming months. In a narrow approach, Pennsylvania has begun a Time Out Initiative in which families who are complying with work requirements but are facing barriers to work such as domestic violence or physical or mental disabilities can receive benefits that will not apply to their federal limit up to a 12-month lifetime limit as long as they are complying with their self-sufficiency plans. New York has created a plan in which cash benefits will be stopped at the 60-month mark, but safety net services will continue with payments made to third parties such as landlords and grocery stores. Based upon their state constitution mandating "the state to provide aid, care, and support for the needy", New York will be one of the few states that will continue paying the full amount in benefits on behalf of, though not directly, to its welfare recipients after the federal deadline. Critics cite the following problems, though, with the program thus far:
Reports can be accessed at www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol31/31-12-517.html and www.citylimits.org/mag/0106safetynet.htm. -AL and RM Two new policy briefs available from CFFPP The Center on Fathers, Families and Public Policy has two new Policy Briefs available on its website. Child Support Policy Concepts and Proposals that Will Impact Poor Families, by Rebecca May provides a description of child support policy changes that are currently under consideration federally, and their likely impact on low-income families. The Legislative Marriage Agenda and Its Potential Meaning for Programs Serving Low-Income Families, by Allison Lipscomb addresses the increasing emphasis on marriage in federal legislation for fatherhood programs. Both briefs can be requested in print at (608) 257-3148. Please note: If you are receiving this briefing by fax, and have e-mail available to you, we would like to change your subscription to e-mail. Please contact us with your e-mail address. Thank you! RM - Rebecca May AL - Allison Lipscomb |
|
|
 |
||
|
Copyright 2001, the Center on Fathers, Families, and Public Policy. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement | Copyright Statement | Disclaimer |
|
|
|
|||