190
Maxwell Meadows
felt that tougher measures to collect child support from absentee fathers were warranted (Garin, Molyneaux and DiVall 2003, 566). Republicans expressed their views in the Contract with America’s number four proposal, the Family Reinforcement Act, to “reinforce the central role of families in American society” (“Contract” 2003, 588). HHS Secretary Shalala’s comment that young Americans “must realize that having a child is an immense responsibility – not an easy route to independence,” was meant to impart the seriousness of the Democratic Party in sustaining families (Shalala 2003, 584). Republicans were also successful in bringing Democrats to the table on capping growth in the welfare system (“Preview” 2003, 593). TANF, AFDC’s successor, was no longer an entitlement program, but rather a block-grant program after final passage (PRWORA 1996, 645). The GOP had initially proposed strict caps on funds to AFDC, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), public housing, and work programs, as well as the consolidation of ten nutrition programs and their institution as a block grant to states (“Preview” 2003, 593). President Clinton strongly opposed Republican cuts to nutrition programs, as well as cuts to programs for legal immigrants, although a five-year residency requirement was included in the final bill (Clinton 2003, 660; “Preview” 2003, 593). The most significant consensus on welfare reform centered on the necessity for work requirements, programs to incentivize work, and to train recipients for employment (Haskins and Sawhill 2009, 167). More Americans felt it was necessary to improve welfare’s ability to move people into jobs than to reduce long-term dependence or fraud (Albelda and Tilly 2003, 566). At the signing ceremony for the PRWORA in August of 1996, President Clinton made this clear: “Today we are taking an historic chance to make welfare what it was meant to be: a second chance, not a way of life” (Clinton 2003, 659). Work had been a central theme of Clinton’s Work and Responsibility Act, which proposed an expansion of the JOBS program from the 1988 Family Support Act (FSA), and an effort to make benefits a “paycheck, not a welfare check,” (Shalala 2003, 580). Republicans similarly stressed the importance of work in the 1994 Contract with America’s proposed Job Creation and Wage Enhancement Act (“Contract” 2003, 588). Compromise did not occur on every aspect of welfare reform, and much legislative movement was required to accomplish what agreements were reached. President Clinton stated at the signing of the PRWORA: “Congress sent me two previous bills that I strongly believe failed to protect our children and did too little to move people from welfare to work. I vetoed both of them. This bill had broad bipartisan support and is much, much better on both counts” (Clinton 2003, 659). Republicans desired more state (and less federal) control over the program, expanded family incentives, more strict time limits