The Working-Class Welfare Trap: How Policy Penalizes Marriage | NATIONAL REVIEW

The Working-Class Welfare Trap: How Policy Penalizes Marriage | NATIONAL REVIEW

The Working-Class Welfare Trap: How Policy Penalizes Marriage | NATIONAL REVIEW

Our tax and welfare policies often penalize marriage, trapping too many people in poverty.

…Not surprisingly, these penalties seem to play a role in fueling working-class Americans’ retreat from marriage that we have seen play out over the past three decades. In recent years, for instance, a majority of children born to working-class parents have been born outside of marriage, whereas the vast majority of upper–middle-class parents continue to have children in marriage…

 

 

Read the full article posted on the National Review

 

Welfare Cliffs and Gaps: The role health insurance plays in upward mobility

Welfare Cliffs and Gaps: The role health insurance plays in upward mobility

Welfare Cliffs and Gaps:

The role health insurance plays in upward mobility

By Shana Burres

Cody and Estelle are a young married couple living in a suburban neighborhood. Cody has a full-time job and Estelle is a nanny so she can have their daughter with her at work. They make just enough money to pay the rent on their small home and pay their bills, but there is rarely anything left over each month. They are not middle class but they are above the poverty line, and they are facing a potential financial crisis because of health care costs.  

Cody’s work offers an insurance plan but does not subsidize the cost and the monthly premium for a family is more than their rent. Because of the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), they qualify for a government-subsidized plan. The coverage is poor and the deductibles are high. They are one emergency room trip or unexpected surgery away from a dire financial situation.

Cody is working on building a part-time freelance business so they can have some savings and buy a more reliable car. But he is hesitant to promote it because too much of an increase in income will push them over the ACA’s income threshold and they will lose their health care subsidy. They still wouldn’t be able to afford the employer-sponsored plan and would lose coverage entirely. 

They are facing the welfare cliff, forced to choose between self-improvement and maintaining necessary services. If they increase their income, they are at risk of falling into the welfare gap—too much income for services, not enough income to cover the costs.

The implications of the loss of health care coverage reach into their and their daughter’s future. Health insurance, and the associated continuity of care, correlated directly with academic success in the short term and life success in the long term.  At a  basic level, health care means that students are better able to engage in their academics and miss fewer days of school.

In slightly more complex terms, lacking health insurance, along with other factors related to instability, is part of the social determinants of health. These social determinants are a cluster of lived experiences that include food instability, homelessness, and poverty. They are direct predictors of poor health and, as noted, poor health contributes to poorer academic and social outcomes. While programs or funding can often address homelessness and poverty, food instability is a reflection of the resources a family has available to purchase food. For a family like Cody and Estella’s, this may be seen as the choice between groceries and paying for an urgent care visit and a prescription for their daughter. 

For them and the vast majority of people in the United State, health insurance is the barrier to care. People who live at or below the poverty line have access to medical coverage through Medicaid. And families who live far above the poverty line can access health insurance through work or afford to pay for the premiums through the health exchange. However, the evidence shows that children who are near, but not under, the poverty line have the lowest rates of health insurance. These children and their families live in the welfare gap, a reality for many living in Georgia. This means that Georgia’s families need solutions for ongoing health care to support their long-term success.

The most effective solutions are those that acknowledge the immediate needs of families and address the need for policy change. Currently, many programs are aimed at the individual or involve community-based interventions that partner health care with social service delivery systems. And these programs can be useful and effective as solutions to the immediate needs of families living in the welfare gap. Unfortunately, these health management programs do not address the upstream institutional, systemic, and public policy drivers of the distribution disparities. 

Georgia’s families deserve upstream solutions that address the welfare gap and support their efforts to be participants in their health care and long-term outcomes. Three interconnected approaches offer equitable and proven access:

Untether healthcare from employers

According to the US Census Bureau, approximately 55% of people have access to health insurance coverage through their employer. This tethering of health insurance to employment leads to disruptions of coverage due to job loss or change. Therefore, untethering healthcare from its connection to employment would allow people to pursue jobs, education, or entrepreneurship free from the limitation of health insurance access or cost. 

Make shopping for health insurance easier

As cost is the most significant factor influencing people’s access to health insurance, the second approach is to make shopping for health insurance the same as shopping for any other type of insurance. Individuals could compare coverage, cost, and other options across multiple providers, which would empower them to choose the product best suited to their particular needs. Currently, most people have little to no choice in which insurance product they receive from their employer and the cost is more closely related to the company’s ability to negotiate a favorable contract than it is to the types of benefits the employees need. 

Offer government subsidies that do not create welfare cliffs

Of course, employers often also subsidize a portion of their company health insurance plan, and subsidies are one of the ways insurance is made more affordable for their employees.  The third approach, government subsidies, would ensure these benefits are equitable and accessible to the whole population and not reliant on an employer. While government-funded health insurance already exists and subsidies are available through the ACA marketplace, the current method does not address  welfare cliffs or close the welfare gap. Therefore, the policy should be updated to a means-tested  eligibility system that eliminates marriage penalties and the breakpoints that contribute to the welfare cliff. 

For our couple, Cody and Estelle, this new approach to health insurance would allow them to gain sufficient coverage for their whole family without spending a disproportionate amount of their income on health care costs. It would allow Cody to build his freelance business and improve their quality of life without fear of losing health insurance while their income grows. 

Every person in Georgia deserves to live a healthy and fulfilling life. Access to healthcare is a necessary component of their success. These three approaches will remove barriers to access, equalize costs, and ensure support is available to those who need it. 

Shana Burres is an educator, foster parent, and speaker. She holds a Master’s degree in education and, as the former executive director of DASH Kids, is a fierce advocate for equitable outcomes for children of all backgrounds and experiences. Shana currently is an adjunct professor, learning development consultant, and her local Mockingbird HUB home for foster families and their youth.

DISINCENTIVES FOR WORK AND MARRIAGE IN GEORGIA’S WELFARE SYSTEM

Based on the most recent 2015 data, this report provides an in-depth look at the welfare cliffs across the state of Georgia. A computer model was created to demonstrate how welfare programs, alone or in combination with other programs, create multiple welfare cliffs for recipients that punish work. In addition to covering a dozen programs – more than any previous model – the tool used to produce the following report allows users to see how the welfare cliff affects individuals and families with very specific characteristics, including the age and sex of the parent, number of children, age of children, income, and other variables. Welfare reform conversations often lack a complete understanding of just how means-tested programs actually inflict harm on some of the neediest within our state’s communities.

The Best Administrative Structure for Welfare

The Best Administrative Structure for Welfare

The Best Administrative Structure for Welfare

By Erik Randolph

When someone needs financial help or workforce training from the government, where do they go?

If we just allowed people to navigate federal programs on their own, the average person would be completely overwhelmed.

 

mother and daughter in poverty
According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, there are more than 80 federal assistance programs for low-income persons and 43 federal employment and job-training programs at the federal level, with little overlap. Just listing the programs would exceed the word limit for a typical blog. 

Fortunately, states have some control over the process for some of the larger programs, like food stamps and Medicaid, that serve millions of Americans.

Georgia’s Gateway Strategy

Compared to many states, Georgia is ahead. The state government has spent years and $262 million to streamline its eligibility systems of means-tested programs into an integrated system known as the Georgia Gateway.

Here there is just one “door” to enter to qualify for some of the big federal means-tested programs entrusted to the states to administer.

The awarding-winning Gateway allows individuals to apply for ten programs across four state agencies, including  food stamps; food packages from the Women, Infants, and Children Program; Medicaid; subsidized childcare; and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

The Department of Human Services runs the eligibility system at an annual operating cost of about $62 million, but the department does not administer all the programs themselves. For example, the Department of Community Health administers the Medicaid program, and the Department of Early Care and Learning administers the subsidized childcare program. 

Integrated eligibility systems are far more convenient for the customers, requiring them to enter only one door, instead of up to five separate doors in the case of Georgia. It also streamlines the application process for the customer. 

On the administrative side, all the hard work is done behind the scenes. The automated systems can share information between programs. Moreover, the technology sets up the state to accomplish future streamlining, consolidation, and reform.

Despite all these advantages of the Gateway, there is still room for improvement. Take Utah’s system, for example. 

Utah’s Integrated System

Although Georgia is ahead of many states, Utah may be the furthest ahead. 

As explained in a recent American Enterprise Institute report, Utah streamlined 23 workforce programs across six state agencies into a Department of Workforce Services.

In addition to helping customers with employment, Utah treats basic welfare programs as support services. These include food stamps, subsidized childcare, financial assistance, and medical programs. Customers also can file claims for unemployment insurance and apply for disability services

The Utah system is clean and easy for the customer. Its “no wrong door” policy allows easy access to help in finding employment and receiving support services. It also sends a clear message that Utah prioritizes work as a solution.

Behind the scenes, Utah works with various federal agencies to make the system work. It is not an easy task. It requires creative solutions and continual effort on part of the state to take on the many hassles that come with dealing with the federal government, including the burdensome task of securing “waiver” approvals to federal law from the federal agencies.

However, the goal is worthwhile. It creates an easier experience for the customers,  at  overall less administrative cost.

Much More Work Needs to Be Done

Utah is showing the way, but much more work needs to be done. 

There are still welfare benefits that the federal government does not allow states to administer. These program benefits are additional doors that people must enter, requiring additional effort to apply for those benefits and hoops to jump through to get assistance. 

In other words, while Georgia has integrated eligibility systems, and Utah has gone even further with its integration, there are federal government programs outside the control of the states. These include the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Supplemental Security Income, and public housing.

Furthermore, as we have written about, the rules themselves still need fixing to eliminate welfare cliffs and marriage penalties. 

Nevertheless, progress is being made, and the work continues on. 

Do you have experience with the Georgia Gateway and other assistance programs?  Or perhaps experience in another state? Share your experiences in the comments below.

Erik Randolph is Director of Research at the Georgia Center for Opportunity. This blog reflects his opinion and not necessarily that of the Georgia Center for Opportunity.

List of Programs per the Government Accountability Office, Reports GAO-15-516 and GAO-19-200.

  • 21st Century Community Learning Centers
  • Additional Child Tax Credit
  • Adoption Assistance
  • Adult Education Grants to States (Adult Education and Family Literacy Act)
  • Affordable Care Act Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program
  • American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services
  • Career and Technical Education – Basic Grants to States
  • Chafee Foster Care Independence Program
  • Child and Adult Care Food Program (lower-income components)
  • Child Care and Development Fund
  • Child Support Enforcement
  • Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grants
  • Commodity Supplemental Food Program
  • Community Based Job Training Grants
  • Community Development Block Grants
  • Community Service Employment for Older Americans
  • Community Services Block Grant
  • Compensated Work Therapy
  • Consolidated Health Centers
  • Disabled Veterans’ Outreach Program
  • Earned Income Tax Credit
  • Education for the Disadvantaged- Grants to Local Educational Agencies (Title I, Part A)
  • Emergency Food and Shelter Program
  • Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training Cooperative Agreements (Brownfield Job Training Cooperative Agreements in 2011report)
  • Exclusion of Cash Public Assistance Benefits
  • Family Planning
  • Federal Pell Grants
  • Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants
  • Federal TRIO Programs
  • Federal Work-Study
  • Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
  • Foster Care
  • Foster Grandparent Program
  • Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Program
  • Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs
  • Grants to States for Workplace and Community Transition Training for Incarcerated Individuals
  • H-1B Job Training Grants
  • Head Start
  • Higher Education: Aid for Institutional Development programs and Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions programs
  • HOME Investment Partnerships Program
  • Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program (Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Project in 2011 report)
  • Homeless Assistance Grants
  • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
  • Improving Teacher Quality State Grants
  • Indian and Native American Program (Native American Employment and Training in 2011 report)
  • Indian Education – Bureau of Indian Education
 

  • Indian Education—Formula Grants to Local Educational Agencies
  • Indian Health Service
  • Indian Housing Block Grant
  • Indian Human Services (Division of Human Services)
  • Job Corps
  • Job Placement and Training Program (Indian Employment Assistance in 2011 report)
  • Job Training, Employment Skills Training, Apprenticeships, and Internships
  • Legal Services Corporation
  • Local Veterans’ Employment Representative Program
  • Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
  • Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
  • Maternal and Child Health Block Grant
  • Mathematics and Science Partnerships
  • d settings.
  • Medicaid
  • Medical Care for Low- Income Veterans Without Service-Connected Disability
  • Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Program
  • National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program
  • National Farmworker Jobs Program
  • National School Lunch Program (free and reduced- price components)
  • Native American Career and Technical Education Program (Career and Technical Education – Indian Set-Aside in 2011 report)
  • Native Employment Works (Tribal Work Grants in 2011)
  • Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Education Program
  • Nutrition Assistance Program for Puerto Rico
  • Nutrition Service for the Elderly
  • Older Americans Act Grants for Supportive Services and Senior Centers
  • Older Americans Act: National Family Caregiver Support Program
  • Projects with Industry
  • Public Housing
  • Reentry Employment Opportunities (Reintegration of Ex-Offenders in 2011 report)
  • Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Discretionary Grants (Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Targeted Assistance Discretionary Program from 2011 is now part of this program)
  • Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Targeted Assistance Grants
  • Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Voluntary Agencies Matching Grant Program
  • Refugee and Entrant Assistance State/Replacement Designee Administered Programs ((Refugee and Entrant Assistance – Social Services Program from 2011 is now part of this program)
  • Registered Apprenticeship
  • Rental Housing Bonds Interest Exclusion
  • Rural Education Achievement Program
  • Rural Rental Assistance Payments
  • Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program
  • School Breakfast Program (free and reduced-price components)
  •  Second Chance Act Technology-Based Career Training Program for Incarcerated Adults and Juveniles (Second Chance Act Reentry Initiative in 2011 report)
  • Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers
  • Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance
  • Senior Community Service Employment Program
  • Social Services and Targeted Assistance for Refugees
  • Social Services Block Grants
  • Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC)
  • State Children’s Health Insurance Program
  • State Supported Employment Services Program
  • State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program (Rehabilitation Services – Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States in 2011 report)
  • Summer Food Service Program
  • Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
  • Supplemental Security Income
  • Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities
  • Supportive Housing for the Elderly
  • Tech Prep Education State Grants
  • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
  • The Emergency Food Assistance Program
  • Title I Migrant Education Program
  • Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers
  • Transition Assistance Program
  • Transitional Cash and Medical Services to Refugees
  • Tribal Technical Colleges (United Tribes Technical College in 2011 report)
  • Tribally Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions
  • Veterans Pension and Survivors Pension
  • Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program
  • Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Veterans in 2011 report)
  • Voluntary Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit- Low-Income Subsidy
  • Wagner-Peyser Act Employment Service (Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded Activities in 2011 report)
  • Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities
  • Weatherization Assistance
  • Work Opportunity Tax Credit
  • Workforce Investment Act Adult Activitiesa
  • Workforce Investment Act Youth Activitiesb
  • WIOA National Dislocated Worker Grants (WIA National Emergency Grants in 2011)
  • WIOA Youth Program (WIA Youth Activities in 2011 report)
  • Women in Apprenticeship and Nontraditional Occupations
  • Youth Partnership Programs (Conservation Activities by Youth Service Organizations in 2011 report)
  • YouthBuild

DISINCENTIVES FOR WORK AND MARRIAGE IN GEORGIA’S WELFARE SYSTEM

Based on the most recent 2015 data, this report provides an in-depth look at the welfare cliffs across the state of Georgia. A computer model was created to demonstrate how welfare programs, alone or in combination with other programs, create multiple welfare cliffs for recipients that punish work. In addition to covering a dozen programs – more than any previous model – the tool used to produce the following report allows users to see how the welfare cliff affects individuals and families with very specific characteristics, including the age and sex of the parent, number of children, age of children, income, and other variables. Welfare reform conversations often lack a complete understanding of just how means-tested programs actually inflict harm on some of the neediest within our state’s communities.

Virtual learning isn’t working. Gov. Kemp, we need your help | THE CHAMPION

Virtual learning isn’t working. Gov. Kemp, we need your help | THE CHAMPION

Virtual learning isn’t working. Gov. Kemp, we need your help | THE CHAMPION

Gov. Brian Kemp is in a unique position to help families like mine during one of the most challenging times in our lives. My wife and I have two school-aged children, a son and a daughter. Both are being educated within the Decatur City Schools district. Our son, Wyatt, happens to have Down syndrome. He is in the fourth grade.

When the public school system shut down in March, we didn’t know what to expect. Unfortunately, the struggles of virtual learning with our son have exceeded what we thought was tolerable…

Read the full article here

 

Virtual learning isn’t working. Gov. Kemp, we need your help | THE CHAMPION

UGA receives $6.2 million grant to provide relationship, financial training | UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA

UGA receives $6.2 million grant to provide relationship, financial training | UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA

A team of University of Georgia faculty in the College of Family and Consumer Sciences aims to provide Georgia couples with healthy relationship skills and financial guidance with the help of a five-year, $6.2 million grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

 

Among the community-based partners is the Georgia Center for Opportunity in Gwinnett County, a nonpartisan organization that conducts public policy research and mobilizes community resources to address education, employment and family issues.

“A collaboration of this magnitude will put us in the position to transform lives and create a blueprint for families in the near future,” said Joyce Mayberry, vice president of family for the Georgia Center for Opportunity.

Read the full article here