Child Care Concerns: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconcilliation Act of 1996, TANF, and Work First in Mississippi

“The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) signed into law in August of 1996 (PL 104-193) shifted the focus of public assistance from long-term preparation for work to immediate job placement” (Parisi et. al., p. 66). While the focus of this program is to find employment for low-income families so that they may become self-sufficient, there is much criticism of this program, especially in the poorest state in the Nation: Mississippi (Deparle, 1997). In an article written for the New York Times, Jason Deparle outlines the struggle of several poor single mothers in Mississippi, and it seems that their struggle hinges on more than just gaining employment. Their struggle on this program seems to hinge upon the issue of child care (What About Mississippi?, 1997). While no one will argue that it is important that low-income families earn wages through jobs, policies need to accommodate more than just the employment status of low-income single-mother families.

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, TANF, and “Work First”

In Mississippi, Bill 766 authorized the Mississippi Department of Human Services (DHS) to implement a program known as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Work Program (TWP) (Paris et. al. 2005). The idea behind the TWP is that any job is better than no job, even if the wages earned from that job are substandard or the hours are not compatible with the family life. A sub-program of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, this welfare-to-work program is designed to get low-income families off of welfare and into the work force, but in the impoverished state of Mississippi, this program seems to do more harm than good.

According to Clare Nolan (2000), “If the overhaul of the nation’s welfare system meant poor families would replace public aid with paychecks, that has not occurred in Mississippi” (para. 1). In fact, only 18-25% of Mississippi’s former welfare recipients have found full time employment. (Parisi et. al. 2005; Nolan, 2000). The Mississippi program requires that a participant spend 35 hours a week looking for work or accept a job offer regardless of the hours and wages or risk losing any benefits received, not just for the individual, but for the entire family (Nolan, 2000; Deparle, 1997). This policy does not take the problem of child care into account at all.

What happens to the families on the Work First program in Mississippi?

According to Jason Deparle (1997), “mother dropped from the welfare rolls are now turning to relatives, boyfriends or other Federal programs – most notably disability payments” (para. 3). Mr. Deparle followed the stories of several mothers thus affected by removal from welfare rolls in Mississippi. One woman who lost her benefits moved in with her sister “raising the number of children in the two-bedroom house to 15” (Deparle, 1997, para. 4). Another woman accepted a job at a catfish-processing plant but refused to return to work when her babysitter did not know where her six-year-old daughter was. (Deparle, 1997). Scenarios like these only illustrate the need for quality childcare among these women, but the program does not provide for these needs.

As I have previously reported, Mississippi has a federally subsidized program designed to help with the expenses of childcare wherein a parent would pay a co-pay, or a small portion of the expense of childcare so that she can work. This program, however, does not cover childcare while the parent-beneficiary searches for a job for the minimum 35 hours per week. In its requirement that a parent accept any offer of employment, the program also fails to consider the hours of available jobs and whether or not the hours of available childcare will coincide. As was pointed out by Parisi et. al. in the Journal of Poverty (2005), “many childcare facilities do not operate during the night hours that low-income parents are at work . . . This forced many low-income people to leave their children in informal childcare arrangements that lack educational and safety standards” (p. 76). If the parent can find no suitable informal arrangement, what is he or she to do? A single mother who can find no childcare to apply for jobs or accept an offer of second or third shift employment will still lose all of her benefits for her entire family. Additionally, Nolan (2000) reminds us that “only eight percent of eligible children receive subsidized child care [once the parent obtains work]” (para. 39).

A Change is Needed

Despite Mississippi’s experience with the ineffectiveness of the Work First program, Mississippi’s program does not change. Parisi, Harris, Grice, Taquino, and Gill (2005), suggest that “welfare reform comes with an obligation to assure that those who are in need receive adequate assistance so that they do not fall further behind due to forces beyond their control” (p. 79). What does this mean for the future of Mississippi’s welfare-to-work programs? I submit that the Department of Human Services, who administers these programs and the Mississippi Child Care Development Fund need to re-examine the state of childcare in Mississippi. Childcare needs to be available for these families around the clock throughout all stages of employment. If a woman is required to spend 35 hours each week away from her children searching for work lest she lose the food stamps that feed her children, she needs to be provided with care for her children during this period. If she must accept any offer of employment regardless of hours and scheduling, then she must be assured of quality childcare during the hours she will be required to work. Only if parents can be assured of adequate childcare can a welfare-to-work program such as the one in Mississippi succeed.

References

Deparle, J. (1997, October). What about Mississippi?: a special report.; welfare law weights heavy in delta, where jobs are few. New York Times Online Archives. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B05EED6153FF935A25753C1A961958260

Nolan, C. (2000, April), Mississippi poor leave welfare, but for what?. Stateline. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=13992.

Parisi, D., Harris, D., Grice, S., Taquino, M., & Gill, D. (2005, March). Does the TANF work-first initiative help low-income families make successful welfare-to-work transitions?. Journal of Poverty, 9(1), 65-81. Retrieved August 6, 2008 from EBSCOhost Database.