Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Martinez and members of the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training, and Life-Long Learning:

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on the reauthorization of the Welfare-to-Work program, an issue of importance to both welfare reform and its work-related provisions. As you may know, because of the demand for an extension of and changes in the Welfare-to-Work program, I introduced S. 1317 in the Senate as the counterpart to H.R. 1482, Welfare-to-Work Amendments of 1999, introduced by Representative Benjamin Cardin.

First and foremost, S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 extend the Welfare-to-Work program. As you know, Welfare-to-Work was created in Public Law 105-33, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, at $3 billion over FY 1998 and FY 1999. The program will expire very shortly. Although competitive grantees and states have up to three years from the date of award to exhaust their funding, a discontinuation of the program at this point would be harmful to concerted Federal, State and local efforts that have been undertaken thus far.

New systems have been put into place to provide the bulk of funding from State formula grants to local, private efforts through workforce development boards. In addition, the demand for competitive grant funds remains high, evidenced by the large number of applications that have been submitted for this money. These burgeoning efforts should not be disrupted through a suspension of the Welfare-to-Work program.

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 also make a number of important improvements to the program that are supported by a broad coalition of States, county and municipal governments, non-profit and community-based organizations, and service providers. At this time, I submit for the record copies of letters and other documents from entities in Hawaii and national and other organizations concerning S. 1317 and the Welfare-to-Work program.

I should note here, Mr. Chairman, that Hawaii has a special stake in reauthorization of Welfare-to-Work. My state has not seen its welfare rolls fall as other states have, and that is due in great part to lingering effects of the Asian financial crisis. Hawaii’s economy has shown small signs of recovery, but complete recovery will still be a long time in coming. Hawaii has been left out of the economic boom that has benefitted the U.S. mainland. As stated in the September 7, 1999, letter from Laura Robertson of Goodwill Industries Hawaii, “in Hawaii, many of our families...are not eligible to participate in current programs due to the restrictions of eligibility. With a lagging economy, we believe this group has little chance for success without assistance or participation in a Welfare-to-Work program.” Clearly, the Welfare-to-Work program is needed in Hawaii due to hard economic times, and this brings me to a major point about Welfare-to-Work eligibility.

Mr. Chairman, the vast majority of funds allocated to Welfare-to-Work state formula grants have not been spent. This is for one critical reason: the program’s eligibility criteria are difficult to meet, preventing agencies running Welfare-to-Work programs from enrolling enough participants to meet their program goals. As stated in the April 6, 1999, letter from the Kauai Private Industry Council to the Hawaii Workforce Development Division, “The Kauai Private Industry Council hopes that efforts will be made to amend the WtW legislation relating to the formula program’s eligibility criteria. KPIC would like to see as many TANF recipients as possible have the opportunity to become economically self-sufficient.” Changes proposed in S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 would greatly help toward this end for Hawaii’s private industry councils and other Welfare-to-Work entities across the country.

Under current law, up to 30 percent of Welfare-to-Work programs’ enrollment may be targeted to individuals with characteristics associated with long-term welfare dependence, including teen pregnancy. The bulk of participants, or at least 70 percent of those enrolled, must have two of three of the following characteristics:

• lacks a high school diploma or GED and has low math or reading skills;
• has a poor work history; or
• requires substance abuse treatment for employment.

As well-meaning as these criteria may have been in the beginning, they have instead served to exclude many applicants who, for instance, may have a GED or high school diploma but still cannot read. The criteria have proven unrealistic and must be changed.

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 would modify criteria to instead require participants to have one out of seven characteristics:

• lacks a high school diploma or GED;
• has English reading, writing, or computer skills at or below the 8th grade level;
• has a poor work history;
• requires substance abuse treatment for employment;
• is homeless;
• has a disability; or
• is a victim of domestic violence.

These revisions would better match the program to the pool of eligible participants and allow service providers to raise their enrollment rates closer or up to their stated targets.

Officials of the Hawaii Department of Human Services, the agency which administers the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program in my State, predict that unless the Federal law is changed, it is unlikely that they will be able to refer clients in sufficient numbers to meet Welfare-to-Work expectations. At this point, Hawaii’s subgrantees have found that they overstaffed their Welfare-to-Work programs for participants that aren’t coming and will be unable to fulfill grant targets, putting these entities’ credibility in jeopardy. Similar situations exist in all states. Criteria revisions included in S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 respond to State and local entities that have been doing the work of Welfare-to-Work and want to serve as many participants as possible.

Another improvement contained in S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 is that the legislation transfers any unallocated Welfare-to-Work formula grant funds into the competitive grant program. This competitive grant program has been tremendously popular. Out of the 1400 applications submitted requesting a total of $5 billion, only 126 applications for $470 million in funds were awarded in FY 1998. This portion of Welfare-to-Work needs more funding. Under my bill, preference is given to grant applications submitted from states that did not receive a formula grant.

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 also re-emphasize the whole family. Many non-custodial parents are dismissively labeled “dead beat dads” because they are not a presence in their children’s lives and do not pay child support. Some are simply not fulfilling their commitments to their children. However, Mr. Chairman, many others do not want to abandon their children. Rather, they are “dead broke dads” and face daunting barriers to finding and holding employment. This prevents them from fulfilling child support obligations, which many want to do. If these fathers can provide for their children, they will be more likely to see them more often. Renewed financial and emotional involvement of fathers in children’s lives can improve the well-being of the entire family.

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 will make it easier for non-custodial parents to participate in Welfare-to-Work. Currently, non-custodial parents face the same problems in attempting to qualify for Welfare-to-Work as other applicants because of the overly-restrictive criteria. Under my bill, the eligibility requirements for non-custodial parents will be revised to allow them to demonstrate that they are unemployed, underemployed, or having difficulty paying child support payments. In addition, at least one of the following characteristics must apply to the minor child or non-custodial parent:

• the child or non-custodial parent has been on public assistance for over 30 months, or is within 12 months of becoming ineligible for TANF due to a time limit;
• the child is receiving or eligible for TANF;
• the child has left TANF within the past year; or
• the child is receiving or is eligible for food stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Improvement Program (CHIP).

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 require that at least 20 percent of state formula funds be used for non-custodial parents. The bill also provides that a non-custodial parent will enter into an individual responsibility contract with the service provider and state agency to say that he or she will cooperate in the establishment of paternity and in the establishment or modification of a child support order, make regular child support payments, and find and hold a job. These revisions are an attempt to permit and encourage non-custodial parents to provide for their children, become more involved in their children’s lives, and pursue better lives for themselves and their families.

Native American communities will benefit from S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 through a doubling of the Native American set-aside from $15 million to $30 million. This funding increase is necessary because Native Americans currently receive one percent of the total Welfare-to-Work funds but serve 3.2 percent of total program participants, according to a recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Welfare-to-Work Evaluation. Furthermore, in recognition of the sovereignty of Native American tribes, S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 provide tribes with the flexibility they need in designing effective programs for their territories. It is a gross understatement to say that our Native American communities have not had the chance to experience the economic success that our nation has been enjoying. We must do what we can to make up for this shortfall, fulfill our Federal responsibilities to Native Americans, and help families and children in Native American communities who face obstacles to self-sufficiency.

Mr. Chairman, children who leave foster care at age 18 make up another hard-to-help population that faces numerous barriers to employment. S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 introduce new support for these individuals when they attempt to start out on their own by allowing them to participate in Welfare-to-Work programs. According to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), 20,000 children leave foster care annually. Of these, 32 to 40 percent receive some type of government assistance within the first 18 months after leaving the foster care system. This bill provides funds to help them find alternatives to welfare as they leave their state care system.

S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 simplify Welfare-to-Work reporting requirements so that the program can be evaluated effectively. Proper evaluation will allow Congress and DOL access to better statistics on how the program is performing nationwide. In addition, one percent of the funds are provided for technical assistance so that DOL can ensure cooperation between states, local governments, TANF and child support agencies, and community-based organizations so that all are able to work together and be better able to provide services to those who are in need.

Finally, S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 ease “work first” requirements mandating that TANF recipients must find jobs first, before they are able to take advantage of stand-alone programs such as job training, basic education or vocational education programs. My bill would designate these as allowable work activities under Welfare-to-Work. This change is in response to requests from states who want to use program funds to better prepare recipients for the workforce before sending them off to a job. This approach seeks to improve TANF recipients’ chances at maintaining steady employment.

Although my colleagues may have disagreed on welfare reform in the past, Welfare-to-Work is a program that all should be able to support. It represents a Federal-state-local partnership, as well as a partnership between government, private industry, and community-based organizations. It encourages people to take responsibility for themselves, find work, and contribute to their families and society in a meaningful way.

Mr. Chairman, we must continue to be driven by great need when it comes to welfare reform. The job is far from over. We cannot deny the record reductions in the number of people who have left the welfare rolls since the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 was enacted. The figure is now at more than 40 percent. However, this still leaves a tremendous number who are unable to support their families, having difficulty in finding jobs, and left out of the economic boom the country is currently experiencing.

Many of those remaining on the welfare rolls are trying their best to look for work on the little that they have. Some have no permanent address, no telephone, or no money to purchase clothing that would be presentable during a job interview. In my State of Hawaii, many welfare recipients do not have access to the transportation that they need to travel between home and job, particularly on the neighbor islands. For some, the solution would be to buy a car. However, car insurance rates place a further burden on participants.

Mr. Chairman, Welfare-to-Work is even more important now as TANF recipients begin to run into benefit cutoffs for being unable to fulfill work participation requirements. According to the Hawaii Department of Human Services, 1,055 families will not receive their welfare checks this month, and 1,000 more will be terminated every month through the end of this year. The Welfare-to-Work program can help many of these families, but an inadequate number will be served if the eligibility changes found in S. 1317 and H.R. 1482 are not passed.

The Welfare-to-Work program has closely followed goals as stated in 1997 during Welfare-to-Work’s creation by Representative Bill Goodling, Chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. At a June 12, 1997, full committee markup on education, job and welfare provisions in the FY 1998 budget, Chairman Goodling stated that (1) Welfare-to-Work program funds be directed through existing State and local employment and training systems; (2) a vast majority of Welfare-to-Work funds go directly to States and localities; and (3) the program target funds to those welfare recipients most at risk of exhausting their time-limited benefits. Despite its problems, the Welfare-to-Work program has stuck to these goals and should be declared a program worthy of extension.

Again, I deeply appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony and ask that my entire statement be entered for the record. I hope that Members will agree on the need to continue and revise the Welfare-to-Work program, so that welfare reform may be completed in a meaningful, sustainable way.