Mike Levin: “I want to, though this is the debate on the rule, emphasize the difference here. It is too bad no effort was made in…”

“I want to, though this is the debate on the rule, emphasize the difference here. It is too bad no effort was made in subcommittee or full committee this time around to try to forge a bridge over these differences. What are the differences? It is not the value of work. It is not the linkage of welfare to work. No. The difference is whether the emphasis in the Republican bill will be as, to people who are remaining on welfare, they work, or getting people off of welfare into work. And the difference is whether people working should remain in poverty or whether it should be an emphasis on people working out of poverty. And this is a major difference; and it is seen, for example, in the way the Republicans give credit to the States against the required participation rate because of caseload reduction instead of people moving into employment. It also is shown in terms of the reduction in flexibility for the States to use vocational ed and other techniques, other approaches, so that people move out of poverty into true independence. And here is the reason the challenge matters so much. We do not have the exact data, but a huge proportion of people who have moved off of welfare into work remain in poverty. The average for people who have moved off of welfare into work is $2,500 a quarter or $10,000 a year. It is also shown in the lack of child care money in the Republican bill, also in the lack of adequate health care. So these are important differences.…”