WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?
Rosa Brooks (in the L. A. Times) has pointed out that congress' failure to protect children goes way beyond children employed within its halls. "From 2000 to 2005, the number of American children living in poverty went up by 1.3 million, and the liklihood that any given child is poor increased by 9%." That's progress? So much for "welfare reform." Weren't kids the whole point of welfare?
This is going on while liberals like Bill Clinton are bragging about clearing the welfare rolls. But how has that reform impacted these women's children? After all, 67.7% of the recipients of welfare were kids! Are the kids doing better in school now? Are fewer dropping out, or more? How is it reform if the main recipients are worse off?
It's true that welfare rolls have been reduced by more than 50%. But less than half of the women off of welfare have full time employment. And at minimum wage ($5.15) a full time worker remains well below the poverty line. In 2005 seven out of ten poor children had at least one working parent -- and the number of Americans living in what the government defines as "extreme poverty" went up by 3.5 million from 2000 to 2005.
Brooks again: "The statistics are dry, but what they mean, in real life, is babies who die because their mothers lacked prenatal care, children who suffer from preventable diseases, children who have no homes and instead move from shelter to shelter, and children whose lives are blighted by uncertainty, instability, and fear."
When moms are working two and sometimes three jobs to keep the lights and heat on, who is minding the kids? Who suprevises their homework and makes sure it's
done? Is mom too tired and stressed when she finally gets home? Are the kids falling behind in school work, and finally falling out of school altogether? What happens then? They can't work, often times, because they are competing with their moms for entry level jobs. Teen unemployment runs 50% - 60% in New York City, and most big cities. Do those unemployed, unsupervised kids wind up in trouble? In prison? Pregnant? Is there a connection between welfare reduction and prison expansion? We have over 2 million people in prison now. Are we penny wise and pound foolish?
Granted, the old welfare system was a mess, and needed overhauling. I'm very familiar with it. I was a caseworker for NYC welfare (in the South Bronx) in the sixties. I watched single moms struggle valiantly to keep their homes and kids clean, and the kids doing well in school. I had admiration for those women, and would give most of them high marks for the jobs they did as homemakers and mothers. The system had problems that needed fixing. My concern is that we've thrown out the babies with the bath!
What do you think? jgoodwin004@centurytel.net
Rosa Brooks (in the L. A. Times) has pointed out that congress' failure to protect children goes way beyond children employed within its halls. "From 2000 to 2005, the number of American children living in poverty went up by 1.3 million, and the liklihood that any given child is poor increased by 9%." That's progress? So much for "welfare reform." Weren't kids the whole point of welfare?
This is going on while liberals like Bill Clinton are bragging about clearing the welfare rolls. But how has that reform impacted these women's children? After all, 67.7% of the recipients of welfare were kids! Are the kids doing better in school now? Are fewer dropping out, or more? How is it reform if the main recipients are worse off?
It's true that welfare rolls have been reduced by more than 50%. But less than half of the women off of welfare have full time employment. And at minimum wage ($5.15) a full time worker remains well below the poverty line. In 2005 seven out of ten poor children had at least one working parent -- and the number of Americans living in what the government defines as "extreme poverty" went up by 3.5 million from 2000 to 2005.
Brooks again: "The statistics are dry, but what they mean, in real life, is babies who die because their mothers lacked prenatal care, children who suffer from preventable diseases, children who have no homes and instead move from shelter to shelter, and children whose lives are blighted by uncertainty, instability, and fear."
When moms are working two and sometimes three jobs to keep the lights and heat on, who is minding the kids? Who suprevises their homework and makes sure it's
done? Is mom too tired and stressed when she finally gets home? Are the kids falling behind in school work, and finally falling out of school altogether? What happens then? They can't work, often times, because they are competing with their moms for entry level jobs. Teen unemployment runs 50% - 60% in New York City, and most big cities. Do those unemployed, unsupervised kids wind up in trouble? In prison? Pregnant? Is there a connection between welfare reduction and prison expansion? We have over 2 million people in prison now. Are we penny wise and pound foolish?
Granted, the old welfare system was a mess, and needed overhauling. I'm very familiar with it. I was a caseworker for NYC welfare (in the South Bronx) in the sixties. I watched single moms struggle valiantly to keep their homes and kids clean, and the kids doing well in school. I had admiration for those women, and would give most of them high marks for the jobs they did as homemakers and mothers. The system had problems that needed fixing. My concern is that we've thrown out the babies with the bath!
What do you think? jgoodwin004@centurytel.net
posted by John Goodwin at
11:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home