On the recordJuly 18, 1996
No. There is mandate. But I would suspect, knowing the Governors I have talked to on this issue, if they are going to come to the point where they are going to end cash assistance, they are not going to take food stamp benefits away. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office, when they scored our bill, in fact, provided for an increase in food stamp expenditures because of the reduction in the AFDC payment. Therefore, you have less income in the family and, therefore, they are eligible for more food stamps. So food stamps have actually a counterbalancing influence on the reduction of cash. That is provided for in our bill. But I think the point is here what you are doing is continuing the entitlement which is continued in this bill, No. 1. No. 2, what you are doing is allowing families to legitimately make an economic decision which they make today, which is not to work, to stay on welfare, and to be able to survive doing so. What we want to do, except for those cases that are hardship, except for those cases where people are really trying in high-unemployment areas, have problems one way or another with their family and holding down a job--we are not talking about people who are disabled. People who are disabled are not even in the program. We are taking about able-bodied people who are capable of working. We are saying to 20 percent of those people, we are going to allow you to stay after 5 years because we know there might be situations where it is tough.
Source
govinfo.gov




