Panelists Attack New Welfare Legislation

Panelists ranging from a former welfare recipient to a state representative condemned the new welfare laws at a panel discussion yesterday sponsored by the Radcliffe Public Policy Institute (RPPI).

Representative Alice K. Wolf (D-Cambridge) said the current legislation is simply "pushing the problem off to the side."

The six panelists at the Cronkhite Graduate Center were responding to a study released by RPPI, "Welfare in Transition," that examines the potential effects of new state welfare laws on mothers and families on welfare.

On Dec 1, between 10,000 and 14,000 families stand to lose benefits, one of the earliest deadlines in the nation. Participants in the forum were quick to blame those in power for their expediency.

They pointed out the human costs of welfare reform to an audience of about 120, consisting mostly of middle-aged women.

Lisa Dodson, the study's co-principal investigator and a fellow at the RPPI, said that while reducing welfare rolls may be "politically attractive," simply cutting people off public assistance is "not a solution to poverty."

The study argued that women on welfare wanted to work, but the time-con-suming activities of raising a family did not permit them to work low-wage jobs with inflexible hours.

"Raising a child is a full time job," Dodson said.

Researchers of the study said they learned that many mothers felt they were not ready for the deadline.

Issues the study said lawmakers ignored were education, healthcare and childcare.

Panelist and Cambridge Mayor Francis H. Duehay '55 agreed with this finding. Simply getting people off welfare rolls is not enough, Duehay said, the government needs to put more importance on helping people make a successful transition from welfare to work.

"Getting employed is the first step," said panelist Yarice Hidalgo of the Boston Evening Academy, a program devoted to adult education.

There must also be a "support network" encompassing education, childcare and transportation for reforms to be successful, Hidalgo said.

Former welfare recipient Sandra Smith said welfare mothers are accustomed to a day-to-day existence.

"[Welfare mothers] do no know how to plan for the future," Smith said.

Dr. Joan Wallace--Benjamin, panelist and President of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts agreed, saying, "To think we can place women into gainful employment without a high school diploma is foolhardy."

Over half of the children involved in the survey had serious health conditions like asthma, emotional disorders, attention deficit disorder, and developmental delays, raising the issue of healthcare for these children after the deadline has passed.

The study also found that welfare recipient mothers were concerned that they would have to accept low quality childcare when they enter the work force.

Audience reaction to the presentation was positive. Lois J. Bronnenkant praised it as an "opportunity to bring these issues to the attention of people who don't know" and as a way to "stimulate discussion" on the issue of welfare reform.

Tricia M. Michels '00, one of the few students in attendance, said the event brought home to her the "immediacy of the issue" in light of the deadline. Michels summed up the general consensus of those present saying, "I hope this is only the beginning."

Some concrete proposals forwarded by the discussion yesterday were increased partnerships among local governments, social organizations, employers educational institutions to help mothers in their transition from welfare to work.