What People Think
 |
 |
44% For, 56% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 1277, The Welfare Reform Restoration Act of 2009 (4 comments ↓ | 3 wiki edits)
H.R. 1277 would repeal the emergency fund for the TANF program.
()
[55 views]
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Tammy Crawford
April 4, 2009, 4:10am (report abuse)I feel that this bill should be passed if it allows single mothers, such as myself, an oppurtunity to go to college, and still be able to afford to support my family. I love my children very much, but they are alot of work, and it is near impossible to work full time, raise 3 kids, and go to college, I need help.
Helen Hafen (aka Helen Gallardo of Nevadans Acting For Welfare Reform-
June 23, 2009, 2:25am (report abuse)To Tammy Crawford, I don't think you understand the full meaning of this bill. You see in 1996 we had a serious welfare reform. It cut time limitations of received benefits, it imposed mandatory work requirements, it changed income limits for qualifications.
Amoung many other things.
This bill is an effort to stop what the H.R. 1: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is trying to do to fix the block grant amendments of 1996.
It targets specifically to not allow the states or indian terroritories the additional monies they need for increased case loads, increased poverty levels, and inflation to help the block grants to function without destroying welfare altogether. It also targets needy families and specifically individuals with special needs which are disabled and putting them more at a disadvantage.
Tammy, this bill is not going to help you and others, its going to hurt you.
This bill should be striken.
Instead ask for more money and more changes.
Helen C. Hafen
June 23, 2009, 4:16pm (report abuse)There was a social security tax increase in 1983 of about 4 percent, or in investment terms up to $1,200 a year to help pay for the baby boomer's retirement.
But the government tapped into those funds without public permission and used it for other purposes leaving IOU's behind which probably can never be repaid because no investment projects were used from that money to help repay its use. In 2013 workers will be allowed to use up to 4 percent of their Social Security taxable earnings up to a $1,400 annual limit to fund their personal retirement accounts.
This will correct the tax increase of 1983 for the future but does not put back into the social security fund the missing money. In addition an amendment to the social security act must be made prohibiting the government from diverting future funds and make provisions to replace the missing money.
Another 4% up to $1,200 should be added as a welfare fund along with a new additional 4% tax increase.
Helen Hafen
November 21, 2009, 12:23pm (report abuse)I want to add to my earlier comment of what time limitations TANF made when it amended the original social security act of 1935. TANF changed AFDC from the time limitations a needy family could stay of welfare from the youngest child reaching the age of 18 to a total lifetime the needy family could receive benefits to only 5 years, whereas that even that low amount of time limitation even has cut up time of 2 years, 2 years, and one year. This was a trick the governors' conference made without instate vote made to eliminate welfare to reduce the rolls, not by successful welfare reform but by termination of benefits using a huge change in time limitations without successful welfare reform which meant becoming self sufficient of the system.