Here is my problem with the Republican proposal. We both have the requirement that States put 50 percent of the welfare recipients into work by the year 2000. We are the same on that essential provision. But the difference is that your proposal does not provide the States with the funding to do that. Here is my concern. It is that if they do not have the funding to do that, they are not going to be able to meet that target. Your response to that, as I understand it, is that we are going to eliminate the redtape we now have imposed upon the States. Now, my question is, what type of redtape are we going to be eliminating that would give the States the extra funding that they need in order to put 50 percent of the recipients to work? What type of redtape elimination is going to add up to those type of dollars in order to meet the 50 percent requirement that we both agree is an appropriate target?
John B. Breaux: “Here is my problem with the Republican proposal. We both have the requirement that States put 50 percent of the welfare…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about funding in a Republican welfare reform proposal.
Share
More from John B. Breaux
this is a jobs bill. That is the title of the bill. Presumably a jobs bill is intended to create jobs and hopefully is created to create jobs in America. That is the legislation that is before us. It is absolutely essential that this…
I rise to inform our Senate colleagues of the very unfortunate, untimely, and unexpected death of a person last evening who was truly a part of the family of the Senate. Although he was never elected to this body, he served this body with…
Mr. President, and anyone who may be listening to this ``debate''-- which is really not a debate yet but probably will be a debate when we vote on Thursday when the time is allocated for Members to speak to present their positions on the…
The fundraising and the traveling, things she's done for the party, I mean, she's a real rock star on the fundraising circuit.