{
  "id": "RL31371",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31371",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101164,
      "date": "2004-12-28",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T20:00:28.069973",
      "title": "Welfare Reform: Comments from the Public on TANF Reauthorization",
      "summary": "The 1996 welfare law repealed the previous Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)\nprogram and replaced it with a block grant to states for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families\n(TANF). This landmark legislation required that federally funded cash assistance be time-limited\nand conditioned on work, but also gave states great flexibility in the design of their programs. TANF\nfunding expired at the end of FY2002 and Congress has continued the program and its funding\nthrough a series of temporary extensions. Efforts toward a long-term reauthorization of welfare\nreform began during the second session of the 107th Congress and remain on the agenda for the\n109th\nCongress.\n  In preparation for the reauthorization debate that began in 2002, the Department of Health and\nHuman Services (HHS) solicited public input on TANF during the fall of 2001. HHS conducted a\nseries of regional \"listening and discussion\" sessions, and also invited the public to submit\ncomments, either through the mail or electronically through a specially created website. This report\npresents a summary of the comments received by HHS (more than 4,000 were submitted) and is\nintended to convey a general sense of the views and opinions expressed. Readers should note that\nthe persons and groups who submitted comments represented a self-selected and varied group and\nmay or may not be representative of the larger population.\n  HHS prescribed no format for the comments, so they were submitted in many forms and sizes. \nSome were long essays, others included lengthy lists of ideas, while others submitted just a\nparagraph. Some commenters urged comprehensive proposals that dealt not only with TANF but\nwith related programs and services. Some made comments without necessarily making\nrecommendations for change. The following general observations might be made about the content\nof these \"free-form\" recommendations:\n   All categories of commenters wanted Congress either to maintain or increase\nthe amount of funding available for the TANF block grant.  \n   There was concern that, although welfare reform has succeeded in promoting\nwork, jobs have failed to end poverty for some families and have not been possible for others\nbecause of personal barriers.   \n   Advocates for low-income families tended to urge substantial change in TANF. \nMany wanted to impose more mandates on states. They wanted Congress to require states to provide\ncertain services to certain groups and to adopt certain procedures. Some proposed repeal of existing\nineligibility rules.  \n   On the other hand, representatives of states and state/county welfare\ndepartments generally wanted to keep maximum flexibility to design and operate TANF.\n  \n   Among commenters on work and time limit rules, there was strong support \nfor allowing more education and training to be treated as work activities and for suspending the time\nlimit for some persons and under some circumstances.  \n   Child care was widely seen as a necessary work support and child support as a needed\nsource of family income.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31371",
          "sha1": "78aeab15d2c4b7d14b40f3b42c78303b296d1b49",
          "filename": "files/20041228_RL31371_78aeab15d2c4b7d14b40f3b42c78303b296d1b49.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20041228_RL31371_78aeab15d2c4b7d14b40f3b42c78303b296d1b49.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Domestic Social Policy"
  ]
}