Orrin Hatch: “If you look at the way it is written, it certainly does. Frankly, that is one of the reasons--only one of the reasons--I…”

“If you look at the way it is written, it certainly does. Frankly, that is one of the reasons--only one of the reasons--I think the amendment is inadvisable, even though I have to acknowledge I appreciate what the distinguished Senator is trying to do. But we just plain--I think the big argument is, this is another entitlement that continues to go on and on and escalate on and on, and to which there is no lid, there is no cap. It is a never-ending type thing that just puts us into even more of a budgetary difficulty than we have been in before. All of us want to help people who do not have the training. We know the way to get people off welfare is to get them trained; give them job training, give them the education, the vocational education and other things that will help them to become self-supporting, self-sufficient citizens. But we want to get away from the entitlement approach, which just allows people to make ingenious arguments that they should have something that really the State has not provided or does not think it is advisable to provide. I do believe, if you read this carefully, it is subject to litigation. But be that as it may, the fourth reason I would give as to why we really should not support this amendment is that this is similar to the Daschle bill, in that it says there is a time limit, but there are so many exemptions that there is not really a time limit. The major exemption is this. It creates a loophole.”