States setting time limits like this, and imposing other discriminatory hurdles for families to jump, was not allowed 20 years ago – but then President Bill Clinton gutted the welfare system. On Aug. 22, 1996, President Clinton signed federal welfare reform into law. This was not much of a surprise. When Clinton was running for the Democratic nomination, one of his platform planks on welfare was “two years and off.”

The main blow President Clinton dealt to the welfare system for poor families, or AFDC as it was known then, was to get rid of the entitlement status. The entitlement was based on income – if a family with children’s income fell below a certain level, that family was entitled to financial assistance, by federal law. Clinton’s welfare reform got rid of the entitlement, leaving help for poor families at the ‘discrimination’ of each state. He also put in a maximum time limit of 60 months (five years) over a life time that a family could get welfare, leaving it again, to the states discrimination if they wanted to have a shorter time limit, as Missouri recently chose to do.

We do not use the word ‘discrimination’ randomly. Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and countless other politicians blatantly and sneeringly use welfare as a codeword for Blacks, Latinos and other oppressed nationalities – boasting about cutting welfare is a wink to the ugly racist nature of U.S. politics. There are endless proposals to make welfare more humiliating – many of them could be called silly, if it weren’t for the racism implied in each one.

The U.S. has a brutal history in regard to oppressed nationalities and national minorities – African Americans, Chicanos and Latinos, Native Americans and Asian Americans. Systematic state violence, theft and repression have resulted in generations that had no chance to build up wealth that families can use to buffer the hard times. The criminal injustice system rips families apart, which furthers the economic abuse heaped on our communities.

Welfare was put into place in the U.S. because the working class fought for it. Before welfare, people literally starved to death. Welfare also provides a floor below which wages cannot fall. The system we live under now is set up so there will always be people who cannot get jobs. The left and progressive forces who led the fight for welfare in the 1930s were well aware of how the system was set up to always keep a pool of workers with nothing – a reserve army of the unemployed. That is why they fought for welfare and other entitlement programs, like Social Security.

Who needs to take up the fight now? Low income people have to. If we are not on welfare, we are the ones who are expected to take care of our families and the children when there is no welfare for them. Many of us are a paycheck away from needing help. Many of us, even though we have nothing, can’t get any help at all. This has to change. And we have to lead the battle.

We absolutely cannot rely on agencies that claim to “serve the poor” to fight for our families. It is not in their interest to see dollars go directly to the families in need. It is in these agencies’ interest to get dollars for themselves and whatever whacky program they think will “fix us.” But the quickest address poverty is to get money into the hands of poor families.

A persistent fight back can have results. This July, many families in the state of Minnesota will get a $110 per month increase in the cash welfare grant, thanks to the battle waged by Welfare Rights Committee. This is only a fraction of what low-income families in the Welfare Rights Committee (WRC) fought for, but it represents a turn of the tide. Two years ago, the WRC demanded that the grants be doubled, across the board for every family. The politicians only gave the $110 increase, delayed until this July. However, in the 2015 legislative session, many legislators and the governor openly supported giving more. Not a doubling of the grants, as the WRC is still demanding, but a substantial across the board increase.

People are homeless and suffering. This is not a time to ask for help. This is a time to demand our class gets what it deserves.

Linden Gawboy is a member of the Twin Cites-based Welfare Rights Committee

#MinneapolisMN #PoorPeoplesMovements #welfare #MinnesotaWelfareRightsCommittee #BillClinton

Loretta Van Pelt states, “It is an outrage that in 29 years the grants have not been raised. It is an outrage that 70,000 children in this state live in extreme poverty. They owe the low income people in this state more than empty promises. 29 years is too long to wait, the time is now!” In 2015 the Welfare Rights Committee will push for bills to increase the welfare grants, end the 5-year limit on welfare and to give aid to all in need.

#StPaulMN #PoorPeoplesMovements #welfare #WelfareRightsCommitteeWRC #Minnesota

St Paul, MN – On April 30, members of the Welfare Rights Committee (WRC) gathered outside the House Chambers of the Minnesota state capitol to protest Governor Mark Dayton’s State of the State address. “It’s been 28 years without a grant increase and Governor Dayton refuses to help children and their families,” said the WRC’s Darnella Wade.

For the State of the State address, the whole legislature, Supreme Court, Secretary of State, Attorney General and former U.S. Vice-president Mondale attend. They all had to pass by the Welfare Rights Committee members holding signs of Governor Dayton’s face that read, “Shame on Dayton for ignoring 70,000 kids in extreme poverty.” They chanted, “70,000 kids! 70,000 kids!” and “The rich got bailed out, we got sold out!”

WRC members also displayed 28 tombstones to represent 28 years without a grant increase for MFIP (the state of Minnesota’s welfare program for poor children and their parents). The tombstones had slogans such as, “R.I.P. 28 years without an increase,” and “Rest in poverty.”

According to the Welfare Rights Committee’s statement: “Over the past decade, hundreds of millions of federal dollars targeted for Minnesota’s welfare have been raided by Minnesota politicians to supplant state spending and pay down the state’s deficits. Because of this theft, only 27% of the federal TANF dollars actually go to the Minnesota families receiving welfare. Meanwhile, MN welfare grants have not seen an increase for 28 years, while the cost of living has more than doubled.

“This year the state had a surplus. The governor and legislators had a chance to raise the welfare grants to help get 70,000 kids out of extreme poverty, but they refused. Instead they gave tax breaks, mostly to corporations and the well-to-do.”

The last to make a ceremonial entrance was Governor Dayton. WRC had a member stationed at the elevator, so he had to walk through the capitol and into the house chamber to the chants of “Dayton, Dayton! Shame on you!”

As the governor started his address, he got loud “boos” from WRC members. Their statement notes, “The governor tried to give a rosy picture of the state, but WRC was there to show that the ‘real state of the state’ is horrible for the poor and working families.”

#StPaulMN #PoorPeoplesMovements #welfare #lowincomeFamilies #GovernorDayton #MinnesotaWelfareRightsCommittee

St. Paul, MN – A bill to double the welfare grants moved closer to passage, March 4, when members of the Senate Health, Human Services, and Housing policy committee passed Senate File 165. The bill doubles the cash grants for people receiving public assistance through the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP).

Welfare cash grants have not gone up since 1986 – 27 years ago. Since 1986 the cost of living has more than doubled.

Angel Buechner of the Welfare Rights Committee told Senate Committee members, “In 1986, a family of two – a parent and a child – received $437 dollars per month in cash to live on. Today in 2013, an MFIP family of two still receives $437. This adds up to $5244 dollars a year. If calculated per day, this means two people receive $14.57 a day. Remember, this is the total amount of money to pay for rent, utility bills, phone, children’s school costs, transportation costs, clothes, hygiene, household supplies, laundry costs, additional food costs when food stamps run out, and for gas, insurance and car repairs if lucky enough to have a car – everything for the entire family.”

The money to increase the grants is available. Since 1997, after the federal welfare reform act, Minnesota has received at least $264 million per year in the federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant. However, since 1997, millions have been diverted from TANF for other things. For example, in 2012, only 27% of the yearly federal TANF funds went to cash grants for Minnesota families in poverty. If the TANF money was used for TANF families, there would be enough money to nearly double the grants.

Urging support for the legislation, Linden Gawboy of the Welfare Rights Committee testified, “Especially in these tough economic times, welfare is a working person’s issue. When Unemployment Insurance runs out, parents are shocked to find out that they still don’t qualify for MFIP, because they are ‘not poor enough.’ In most cases, it is the unemployment insurance for poor families and those of us who have no choice but to work seasonal jobs and temporary jobs. When we don’t have enough work quarters to qualify for unemployment, welfare is the last stop to receive any type of help.”

Bernie Hess, of the United Food and Commercial Workers 789; Alexandra Fitzsimmons of the Children’s Defense Fund; Kris Jacobs of Jobs NOW; Sue Watlov Phillips of Integrated Community Solutions, and WRC members Ebony Harris and Lena Buggs also testified in support of doubling the welfare grants.

Since July, the Welfare Rights Committee has been organizing for a bill to increase welfare grants in Minnesota. Hundreds of people have sent multiple postcards to the governor and legislators calling for increasing the grants. Dozens of organizations have signed on to support the cause. Several MN legislators declare that they will participate in the ‘$437 Challenge’ – attempting to live on what an MFIP family has to live on – for at least a week.

For more information, and to sign on to the campaign to increase the welfare grants, go to WelfareRightsMN.com.

#StPaulMN #welfare #MinnesotaWelfareRightsCommittee #MinnesotaFamilyInvestmentProgram

In recent years, state legislatures have debated laws that would mandate drug testing for people on public assistance, that restrict where folks receiving welfare can spend money, and in the case of one proposed in Minnesota, would make outlaws out of poor people with cash.

This right-wing measure is one of many laws introduced across the U.S. in recent years that aim to blame poverty on the poor, and to pit the employed against the unemployed.

#RaleighNC #PoorPeoplesMovements #welfare #StopTheWarOnThePoor #RepublicanAgenda #PaulStam #lottery

Minneapolis, MN – Members of the Welfare Rights Committee and others gathered here, Jan. 6, to make signs and banners for the major Jan. 8 protest that will demand, “Raise the welfare grants; no more cuts; tax the rich.”

The protest will start at 11:30 a.m. on the front steps of the Minnesota State Capitol and will coincide with the opening day of the legislative session.

The public assistance grants have not gone up for 26 years, and if Minnesota’s welfare program (MFIP) had been indexed for inflation the grants would be more than double what they are now.

#MinneapolisMN #TaxTheRich #welfare #MinnesotaWelfareRightsCoalition

San Francisco, CA – While millions of retired Americans are struggling to make ends meet and millions more working people who have been laid off don’t know how or if they can ever afford to retire, laid-off corporate executives are living in another world. Take General Electric Vice-Chairman John Krenicki, who is 50 years old and retiring at the end of 2012 because of GE’s restructuring plans. GE will be paying him $89,000 a month for the next ten years (about a million dollars a year, or $10 million total), after which he can receive GE’s executive pension. In addition, Krenicki is getting stock options and stock valued at almost $15 million, and a bonus of almost $3 million, for a total golden parachute worth almost $28 million. In exchange, Krenicki promised GE that he wouldn’t work for a competitor for three years.

While the right wing demonizes mothers and children who are struggling to make ends meet on $150 per month per person (the average benefit for Temporary Aid to Needy Family or TANF, widely known as welfare), corporate executives are literally being paid millions not to work.

But of course Krenicki is not even the worst offender. Take a look at Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Romney has released one year of tax returns which show that he has $100 million in an IRA (Individual Retirement Account). Now, how he was able to amass $100 million when the yearly limit is $5000 and Romney is 65 years old, we don’t know. We do know that three-quarters of working age adults don’t have an IRA at all and that the typical person with an IRA has only $25,000 in the account, or 1/40 of 1% of what Mitt Romney has.

In addition to his IRA, Romney has another $100 million (or more) in personal wealth and perhaps another $100 million in trust for his children. While his own retirement is more than secure (we would call it lavish), Romney is proposing to cut Social Security, either by limiting inflation protection, by raising the retirement age even more (it is already going up from age 65 to 67), or by replacing Social Security with individual investment accounts. Romney opposes raising the cap on Social Security taxes, which right now doesn’t tax any wages or salary above $110,100, and all investment income is not taxed either!

If you have had enough of the likes of John Krenicki and Mitt Romney getting more while the rest of us get less, join the protest at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida August 27-30. For more information, go to marchonthernc.com.

#SanFranciscoCA #WallStreet #welfare #Capitalism #corporateProfits #RNC2012

San Francisco, CA – While millions of retired Americans are struggling to make ends meet and millions more working people who have been laid off don’t know how or if they can ever afford to retire, laid-off corporate executives are living in another world. Take General Electric Vice-Chairman John Krenicki, who is 50 years old and retiring at the end of 2012 because of GE’s restructuring plans. GE will be paying him $89,000 a month for the next ten years (about a million dollars a year, or $10 million total), after which he can receive GE’s executive pension. In addition, Krenicki is getting stock options and stock valued at almost $15 million, and a bonus of almost $3 million, for a total golden parachute worth almost $28 million. In exchange, Krenicki promised GE that he wouldn’t work for a competitor for three years.

While the right wing demonizes mothers and children who are struggling to make ends meet on $150 per month per person (the average benefit for Temporary Aid to Needy Family or TANF, widely known as welfare), corporate executives are literally being paid millions not to work.

But of course Krenicki is not even the worst offender. Take a look at Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Romney has released one year of tax returns which show that he has $100 million in an IRA (Individual Retirement Account). Now, how he was able to amass $100 million when the yearly limit is $5000 and Romney is 65 years old, we don’t know. We do know that three-quarters of working age adults don’t have an IRA at all and that the typical person with an IRA has only $25,000 in the account, or 1/40 of 1% of what Mitt Romney has.

In addition to his IRA, Romney has another $100 million (or more) in personal wealth and perhaps another $100 million in trust for his children. While his own retirement is more than secure (we would call it lavish), Romney is proposing to cut Social Security, either by limiting inflation protection, by raising the retirement age even more (it is already going up from age 65 to 67), or by replacing Social Security with individual investment accounts. Romney opposes raising the cap on Social Security taxes, which right now doesn’t tax any wages or salary above $110,100, and all investment income is not taxed either!

If you have had enough of the likes of John Krenicki and Mitt Romney getting more while the rest of us get less, join the protest at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida August 27-30. For more information, go to marchonthernc.com.

#CapitalismAndEconomy #WallStreet #welfare #corporateProfits

Comunidades pobres y de clase trabajadora, ya azotadas por los cesos y reducciones dehoras de trabajo que resultan de la recesión económica, están a punto de sufrir aun mas como los gobiernos estatales y municipales empiezan a cortar los servicios de salud, escuelas y gobierno local, cosas necesarias para nuestras familias.

La recesión ha causado una caída grande en los ingresos de los estados. En Abril, las entradas de los gobiernos estatales mostraron una baja de 20% en comparación con el año anterior. Ademas, las pérdidas en la bolsa de valores ha obligado a algunos gobiernos locales y estales a contribuir mas a los fondos de jubilación de sus empleados. Esta baja en ingresos estatales ha causado que algunos estados han cortado programas y aumentado impuestos. Aquí en California, el deficit que se proyecta es de $25 mil millones, de un presupuesto total de $100 mil millones.

Los estados tambien se encuentran atrapados por la política federal de obligarles a cubrir mas de los costos de bienestar social, en términos de ayuda pública y cuidado de salud. Durante una recesión económica, la demanda para estas servicios aumenta (por ejemplo, el número de personas recibiendo ayuda pública ha aumentado por primera vez en varios años), pero los estados están recibiendo menos ingresos. Porque los estados tienen que balancear a sus presupuestos (cosa que el gobierno federal no necesita hacer) esto significa recortar programas precisamente cuando hay mas necesidad.

Algunos estados, como Missouri y Massachusetts, se han encontrado en una situación tan apretada como para haber necesitado que han demorado la entrega de dinero extra que pagaron los ciudadanos en impuestos. La legislatura de Oregon ha hecho recortes grandes en el presupuesto de las escuelas. El gobernador “Nuevo Demócrata” de California, Gray Davis, ha intentado balancear el presupuesto por medio de cortar servicios de salud para los pobres, cesar a los empleados estatales, pasando la responsibilidad de programas sociales a los condados, y usando dinero prestado, proveniente de los resultados de la demanda en contra de la industria de tabaco, y de distritos escolares.

Minnesota se ha encontrado en una situación presupuestuaria tan mala como para hacerlo recurrir a mecanismos de contabilidad tipo Enron, y con ataques a los servicios sociales. Esto significa que mas tarde este año va a haber una crisis aun mayor. Illinois planea atacar a los empleados públicos. La respuesta de los gobiernos estatales a las deficiencias presupuestuarias es sencilla. Los políticos intentan balancear sus presupuestos en los hombros de los pobres y los trabajadores. En este proceso los mas afectados son las minorías oprimidas.

La crisis de los presupuestos estatales tambien afecta a los municipios y los condados, quienes reciben gran parte de sus fondos del estado. Durante la última recesión, en 1991, California balanceó su presupuesto principalmente cortando los fondos a los condados, que hacían la mayor parte de los servicios sociales. Estas entidades ademas de muchas organizaciones no-lucrativas, se encuentran doblemente impactados, como sus ingresos se van bajando mientras que la necesidad para sus servicios se aumentan.

Por supuesto, si los políticos no fuesen títeres de las grandes corporaciones, sería posible balancear los presupuestos mentras que se mantenían, o hasta expandían, a los servicios sociales. Aqui en California, organizaciones de consumidores, de comunidades y sindicatos, juntos con algunos políticos locales, lucharon a favor de un aumento de impuestos en personas de alto ingreso. Pero la resistencia de la legislatura republicana y el gobernador demócrata paró a este esfuerzo. En vez de eso, el gobernador pretende aumentar los impuestos de cicarros y gasolina, mas imponer un pequeño aumento en los impuestos de ventas, lo que no afecta especialmente a los ricos que son los que pueden pagar mas.

La “guerra en contra del terrorismo” del presidente Bush y sus aumentos de las fuerzas armadas significan que el gobierno federal no da tantos recursos a los servicios de salud y escuelas. Esto aprieta mas a los presupuestos estatales y municipales, que pagan casi la totalidad de los costos de las escuelas. El gobierno federal tambien pudiera ayudar transferiendo mas dinero a los gobiernos estatales y locales. Lo mejor sería si el gobierno federal pudiera cancelar a los cortes de impuestos de los ricos que se implementaron el año pasado, o si rediciera al presupuesto militar. Pero aun sin pedir esto de parte de los político, el gobierno pudiera conseguir dinero prestado y transferir una parte a los gobiernos estatales y municipales, ya que no existe ningún requesito que el presupuesto federal sea balanceado.

Ahora mismo, muchos políticos están utlizando a la crisis del presupuesto para sacar ventajas para las elecciones de Noviembre. Aquí en California, el gobernador está amenazando de parar los cheques de ayuda pública y los fondos para servicios sociales si los republicanos no le aprueben su presupuesto. Piensa echar la culpa a los republicanos con tal de avanzar su campaña re-eleccionista. Los gobiernos municipales y de los condados se van a encarar con mas cortes presupuestuarios cuando se revisa al presupuesto al fin del verano. Los sindicatos y organizaciones comunales deben prepararse ahora mismo para resistir a los cortes de programas que nos acercan.

#EstadosUnidos #Analysis #BudgetCuts #BudgetCrisis #crisisOfCapitalism #welfare #healthCare #safetyNet #warOnTerror #militarySpending

Poor and working class communities, already hit hard by layoffs and shorter work hours from the recession, are about feel more pain as state and local governments cut health care, education, and other social services that our families need.

The recession has caused a large fall in state tax revenues. In April, taxes paid to state governments fell more than 20% from a year earlier. In addition, the falling stock market has forced some state and local governments to chip in more money to their employees' retirement funds. This drop in tax monies has led state governments to cut social programs and raise some taxes. Here in California, the projected budget deficit for the 2002-03 fiscal year is $25 billion, out of a total budget of $100 billion!

Currently, 43 states are experiencing budget shortfalls. The National Governors' Association estimates that state budget deficits will come in between $40 and $50 billion for fiscal year 2002. All this adds up to the deepest set of state budget crises in 20 years.

States are also in a bind because of the federal government policy of making them more responsible for the safety-net in terms of health care and welfare. During a recession, demand for these services increases (for example, there has been an increase in the welfare rolls for the first time in years), but states are faced with less tax revenues. Because states (unlike the federal government) must balance their budgets, it means cutting back on programs just when the need is greatest.

Some states, including Missouri and Massachusetts, have found their budget situation so bad that they have resorted to delaying payments for state tax refunds in order to conserve cash. The Oregon state legislature has made major cuts to their schools' budgets. California's “New Democrat” Governor Gray Davis is proposing to close the state budget gap by cutting health care for the poor, laying off state workers, shifting social service programs to county government and by borrowing monies from school districts and the tobacco lawsuit funds.

Minnesota has responded to its budget crisis by attacking social services and by Enron-type accounting practices – which means that a larger budget crisis will develop later this year. Illinois plans to attack public employees. The response of state governments to the budget shortfalls is simple. Politicians try to balance the budget on the backs of poor and working people. In this process, the hardest hit are the oppressed nationality communities.

The state budget crisis also threatens city and county governments, which receive much of their funding from the state. During the last recession in 1991, California balanced its budget mainly by cutting funds to counties, who are the providers of most social services. These local governments, as well as many non-profit social service agencies, are feeling a double whammy as their tax revenues and donations decline, even as demand for services increases.

Of course, if politicians were not in the pockets of big business, the budget deficits could be closed while continuing to fund, or even expand, needed social services. Here in California, consumer, community, and labor organizations, along with some local politicians, fought for an increase in taxes on high-income households. However, opposition from the democratic governor and republican legislators stopped this effort. Instead, the governor is supporting a small increase in sales taxes, as well as taxes on cigarettes and gasoline – both of which would not single those who can best afford to pay: the rich.

President Bush's “war on terrorism” and his big military build-up mean that the federal government budget skimps on spending for education and health care. This adds to the pressure on state and local budgets, which pay for almost all schooling. The feds could help by transferring funds to state and local governments. It would be best if the federal government cancelled last year's tax cut for the wealthy, cut back on the huge military build-up, or both. But even without asking this of politicians, the federal government could borrow more money and transfer the funds to state and local governments, since the federal government does not have a balanced budget requirement.

Right now, many politicians are trying to use the states' budget problems to position themselves for the upcoming elections in November. Here in California, the governor is threatening to stop welfare checks and funds for social services if republican legislators won't agree to his budget – hoping to blame them, and help his reelection campaign. City and county officials will also be faced with more cuts after state budgets are revised or passed this summer. Community organizations and labor unions need to get organized now to fight the program cuts that are coming down.

#UnitedStates #Analysis #BudgetCuts #BudgetCrisis #crisisOfCapitalism #welfare #healthCare #safetyNet #warOnTerror #militarySpending