United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Re: Work, Opportunity, and Responsibility for Kids (WORK) Act of 2002
Dear Senator:
On behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its approximately 300,000 members, we strongly urge you to support several key provisions of the Work, Opportunity, and Responsibility for Kids (WORK) Act of 2002 that improve access to training, education, rehabilitative services, higher paying jobs, and immigrant benefits. The ACLU believes that reauthorizing legislation must implement adequate safeguards to guarantee basic constitutional principles of equal protection, freedom of speech and religion, privacy rights, and due process in the administration of TANF programs. The ACLU urges you to support two important amendments that will be offered today during the Finance Committee mark-up of the WORK Act. The first is an amendment that will be offered by Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) to give States the option of restoring Children's Health Insurance and Medicaid benefits to immigrants. The second is an amendment that will be offered by Senator Max Baucus to mitigate the harms of the federal abstinence-only education program contained in Section 510 of the Social Security Act. The ACLU also urges you to support several provisions of the WORK Act that take significant steps to alleviate poverty while respecting civil liberties.
I. The Graham Amendment Would Give States the Option To Provide Needed Benefits To Immigrants.
One of the fundamental purposes of TANF is to provide assistance to needy families and children. 42 U.S.C. § 601(a). Yet, in application, TANF provides assistance to some needy families while arbitrarily denying benefits to others who are equally in need of assistance. Current law excludes certain immigrant populations from eligibility for benefits. The TANF program discriminates against immigrants in three ways. First, it excludes altogether "unqualified" immigrants, which include many immigrants legally permitted to remain the United States without permanent residence. Second, for legal permanent residents, it imposes five and ten year bars on eligibility for many federal programs. Third, even after those bars expire, new "sponsor deeming" rules continue to render most immigrants ineligible for assistance.
The WORK Act improves the 1996 welfare reform law by giving states the option of restoring benefits and easing "deeming" requirements for TANF, but does nothing to lift restrictions on the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Medicaid. We urge you to support an amendment that will be offered by Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) to give states the option of restoring SCHIP and Medicaid benefits to immigrants as well.
II. The Baucus Amendment Would Mitigate the Harms of the Federal Abstinence Only Education Program.
Section 510 of the Social Security Act permits federal funds to be used for programs that have as their "exclusive purpose," teaching the benefits of abstinence. See 42 U.S.C. § 710. While the ACLU believes that discussion of abstinence is an important component of any educational program about human sexuality, we oppose programs that focus exclusively on abstinence and censor other valuable information that can help young people to make responsible and safe decisions about sexual activity and reproduction. Moreover, in addition to their restrictions on free speech, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs endanger the health of young people, create a hostile environment for lesbian and gay youth, and dangerously entangle the government with religion.
There is no compelling data that demonstrate that abstinence-only programs funded under Section 510 are effective in helping to delay sexual initiation or in reducing risk-taking behaviors among young people. In fact, the overwhelming weight of evidence suggests that programs that include messages about both abstinence and contraception are most effective in delaying the onset of sex among young people, reducing the number of sexual partners they have, and in making them better users of contraception when they do become sexually active. Evidence also suggests that the availability of federal abstinence-only dollars is steering schools away from teaching comprehensive sexuality education altogether, even in their non-restricted (i.e. non-federally funded) programs. According to one study, as of 1999, one-third of the nation's high schools were promoting abstinence-only education, while excluding information about contraception and safer sex. See Adam Sonfield and Rachael Benson Gold, States' Implementation of the Section 510 Abstinence Education Program, FY 1999, 33(4) Family Planning Perspectives 166 (2001).
Senator Baucus's amendment would offer states the flexibility to fund programs with Section 510 money that comport with their own definition of abstinence-only education. While many programs that comport with Section 510's restrictive definition would likely continue to be funded, this amendment would also permit the funding of abstinence-based programs that also educate teens about methods to reduce unintended pregnancy and other health risks.
Unfortunately, the Baucus amendment does not address all of our concerns because some states will likely continue to fund restrictive abstinence-only programs to the detriment of adolescents' health and right. But giving states flexibility in these circumstances to fund more comprehensive programs is a step in the right direction.
III. The WORK Act Takes Steps to Address Barriers to Employment
The ACLU believes that TANF reauthorizing legislation must address the core issues that prevent people from becoming self-sufficient. Many adult recipients have circumstances or conditions that impede their ability to find and maintain employment.
Many states have failed to make TANF programs available and accessible to individuals with special needs, including those who speak little English and those with mental or physical disabilities. Reauthorizing legislation should ensure that states provide interpreters and educational and application materials in languages other than English, and that states accurately assess the disability status of applicants and recipients and take any disability into account in imposing program requirements. Before attempting to find job placements for TANF applicants, states should conduct an initial assessment of each individual in order to determine what support services may be necessary to address any employment barriers, such as disability, mental illness, or substance abuse, that may exist. A failure to conduct such assessments and to take special needs into account can lead to inappropriate sanctions reducing or eliminating a family's benefit and thrusting the family into a dire situation.
The WORK Act requires states to screen and assess skills, prior work experience, work readiness, and barriers to employment. The states are also required to document needed work support for each recipient. While requiring states to perform an initial assessment of employment performance barriers is a marked improvement, we believe that it is even more important that states be required to take affirmative steps to address these barriers.
Even more encouraging is the recognition of the causal relationship between education and training and poverty reduction within the WORK Act. The Act takes significant steps to improve education and training by allowing welfare recipients to utilize vocational education for up to 24 months, and by removing teen parents completing high school from the 30 percent cap on the portion of a state's caseload that may participate in vocational education. Increased access to education and job training will afford recipients a greater opportunity to attain employment that pays a livable wage thereby lifting families out of poverty and keeping them off of public assistance permanently. Also included in the WORK Act is a provision that allows greater access to rehabilitative services including adult basic education and limited English proficiency. This will increase the performance and productivity of recipients in many jobs. The WORK Act also offers a competitive grant program to create or expand programs to improve access to dependable transportation that will enable recipients to get to work, to school, or to training. An additional poverty reduction provision included in the Act gives states credit for those recipients who leave and take higher-paying jobs defined as 33% of the average wage in the state.
IV. The WORK Act Must Ensure That Due Process Protections Are Provided.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) demanded personal responsibility from TANF applicants and recipients as a key to accessing benefits. As administrators of the TANF program, states have a corresponding public obligation to treat applicants and recipients fairly. Since the enactment of PRWORA, too often the broad discretion granted to the states and the emphasis on caseload reduction above all else have eclipsed commitments to fairness. This results in arbitrary and inconsistent treatment of applicants and recipients, widespread misinformation about the availability of benefits and about program requirements and an absence of meaningful procedural safeguards permitting individuals to seek review of administrative decisions. Such due process failures have a serious impact on low-income parents as they simultaneously attempt to negotiate program requirements, fulfill work obligations, and raise their children. Arbitrary treatment, misinformation, and an absence of meaningful appeal and review procedures can push such families out of the social safety net and into dire need. The WORK Act must address the procedural due process failings of the current TANF program.
Currently, PRWORA requires states to submit plans that "set forth objective criteria for the delivery of benefits and the determination of eligibility and for fair and equitable treatment, including an explanation of how the state will provide opportunities for recipients who have been adversely affected to be heard in a state administrative or appeal process." 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(1)(B)(iii). However, standing alone, this requirement has been insufficient to ensure procedural fairness for TANF applicants and recipients. Across the country, examples of arbitrary and unfair treatment abound.
Many states have taken the option of punishing adult TANF recipients' failure to comply with program and work requirements through termination of all cash assistance to the recipient's entire family, including assistance allotted to children. Punishing individuals for the actions of others outside of their control violates core due process principles, and the violation is even more egregious when the individuals being punished are children. The WORK Act must address these very important issues.
In conclusion, the ACLU believes reauthorizing legislation should improve the TANF program to make a significant difference in the lives of low-income families as they work toward self-sufficiency. Since poverty reduction is a goal of TANF, it is imperative not only that the substance of the legislation reflect this purpose, but also that the approach to welfare be grounded in a realistic understanding of the barriers and challenges many communities face. While there is room for improvement, we believe that several provisions of the WORK Act are a step in the right direction. We urge you to support the amendments and the provisions outlined above and work toward addressing due process weaknesses of the current TANF system. We look forward to working with you as the legislative process continues.
Sincerely,
Laura W. Murphy, Director
Washington National Office
LaShawn Y. Warren, Legislative Counsel
Washington National Office