On the recordSeptember 12, 1995
I think we had a good debate on the maintenance of effort provision. I think it boils down to simply this. If you want a welfare reform bill to come out of the Senate that is going to be an impetus for change, it is going to say to the States to go out there and be innovative and be able to reduce the welfare caseload, reduce the amount of State expenditures, and have the flexibility you need to do those without artificially holding States to the high level of maintenance of effort. I think the Dole 75 percent provision that is in there right now does that. It prohibits a race to the bottom. It gives States flexibility. It says be innovative. It saves money. And I think that is really what we want to accomplish. It is a prevention of the worst-case scenario which is no welfare spending from the States, and at the same time provides that amount of flexibility that is needed to go forward and do some dramatic changes in the welfare system. I think we have struck a very responsible compromise. I think this amendment goes too far. This basically says we are going to continue to spend money. The Senator from Louisiana often says we are going to save money at the Federal level. Why should not the Federal Government save money? We may be saving money on the Federal level but we are spending a lot more taxpayers' money at the State level. The taxpayer overall under this amendment will lose even though the Federal Government is going to save a little money.
Source
govinfo.gov




