Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear
before you today to discuss our proposed technical amendments to the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). The Administration is
committed to an effective implementation of this historic welfare reform law and our mutual
effort to make technical corrections to this legislation is an important step in this process.
States and the Federal government alike are promptly implementing each of the major pieces of
the Act, including those under the jurisdiction of the Administration for Children and Families --
the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, child care programs for families
on welfare and other low-income working families, and the child support enforcement program.
We are encouraged by the early progress being made.
Section 113 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act directed
the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Commissioner of Social Security, in
consultation with other federal agencies, to submit legislative proposals for technical and
conforming amendments necessary to bring the statutory language into conformity with the
policies embodied in this new legislation. I am pleased to report that the Administration has met
that directive. On December 16, 1996, the Department of Health and Human Services joined
with tncies between the expressed legislative intent and statutory language, and
gaps in rules during the transitional period.
In several instances, the new law inadvertently uses incorrect or inconsistent terminology.
For example, the statute establishes mandatory work requirements, but uses different phrases
to describe them. We have suggested proposed language to resolve such inconsistencies.
In several instances, the new law inadvertently uses incorrect or inconsistent terminology.
For example, the statute establishes mandatory work requirements, but uses different phrases
to describe them. We have suggested proposed language to resolve such inconsistencies.
We have also proposed to conform or revise a number of dates utilized in the statute. For
example, the new law requires states to "look back" to prior AFDC eligibility standards to
determine eligibility for Medicaid and for Foster Care and Adoption Assistance. However, the
statute utilizes two different took-back dates, June 1, 1995 and July 16, 1996,.creating
administrative burdens for the states. We proposed an amendment to use the July 16, 1996
look-back date for both programs.
Several of our amendments are proposed to clarify congressional intent. For example, we
believe it was Congress' intent to make Indian tribes eligible for the federal loans available to the
States under TANF since the law specifies that Indian tribes are subject to the penalty for failure
to repay such loans. However, the section of the law which provides for the loans speaks only in
terms of loan-eligible States. As such, we included an amendment to clarify that the loans are
available to Indian tribes as well.
Finally, in a few instances, the transition from the previous law to the new law inadvertently left
gaps in the application or coverage of various laws. For example, reporting requirements under
the AFDC and JOBS programs are repealed effective July 1. 1997, and new reporting
requirements do not apply to a State until the later of July 1, 1997, or 6 months after a TANF
plan is submitted. This leaves a gap in reporting for States submitting TANF plans after January
1, 1997. To maintain continuity of State reporting, we propose requiring States submitting
TANF plans after January 1, 1997, to make reports, following either the old or new requirements,
during the transitional period.
We have been working closely with your staff to ensure that these proposals are incorporated into
bipartisan legislation with broad support. While our cooperative efforts have been extremely
useful in identifying additional technical amendments, we are concerned that several of our
proposed corrections have not been accepted. In addition, some of the draft amendments
developed by your staff may weaken the fiscal partnership envisioned in the PRWORA between
States and the Federal Government. We are particularly concerned about provisions that would
allow States to transfer funds to the Social Services Block Grant without proportionate transfers
to child care and provisions that may undercut the maintenance of effort requirements. I hope
you will reconsider these proposals before finalizing your legislation. The Administration may
have additional continents on other technical amendments once a formal proposal is
introduced by the Subcommittee.
We want to work with you and the States to include an additional change in this package to
ensure that each state's overall work effort meets the statute's work participation requirements.
Specifically, we want to make it clear that the calculation of whether a state has met the
applicable participation rate shall take into account the state's success in placing in work
activities participants both in TANF and in state maintenance of effort programs. This
clarification will protect the welfare law's tough work requirements. In addition, we will work
with the States and Congress to develop legislation, if necessary, to ensure that State flexibility in
maintenance of effort programs does not result in costs to the Federal government due to the
potential loss of child support collections.
As the President has said, the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act was the beginning -- not the end -- of welfare reform. He made it clear that
we all have a responsibility to cooperate to make this law work. I am pleased at the progress we
have made, and we are committed to continue working with you and others in Congress to make
welfare reform a success. Just as we worked together to make work and responsibility the basic
principles of the new law, we must continue this bipartisan effort to ensure that the statute clearly
and effectively accomplishes our goals.
I want to thank you again for inviting me to speak with you about this very important
legislation. I will be happy to answer any questions you have at this time.
