SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
With New Law, Life Just Got 'A Lot Harder' for Poor in Kansas
New policies which set strict limits on benefits create 'aura of abuse,' says economic expert
Apr 16, 2015
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback on Thursday signed a controversial welfare bill into law that places strict limits on welfare benefits, how long recipients may get them, and how they are--and are not--allowed to spend them.
Brownback, a Republican, said during the signing that placing limits on the benefits, known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), would encourage recipients to become more self-reliant, but critics of the law maintain that it is punitive and degrading.
The law enshrines policies that set a 36-month lifetime limit on benefits; require able-bodied adults to work a minimum of 20 hours a week or go through a training program in order to qualify for the benefits; and prohibit recipients from spending TANF money at movie theaters, swimming pools, spas, massage parlors, and cruise ships.
Kansas' list of "don'ts" for welfare recipients has attracted criticism "because it feels mean-spirited," Kansas Action for Children president Shannon Cotsoradis told the Associated Press on Thursday. "It really seems to make a statement about how we feel about the poor."
"By signing this bill into law, Gov. Brownback has added to the burden that the poorest Kansans already carry. ... It's always been hard to be poor in Kansas. Now, it's going to be a lot harder," Cotsoradis told the Kansas City Star.
State Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley added, "Child poverty and homelessness in Kansas are at record levels ... And, now, the governor has signed a punitive and highly judgmental piece of legislation that imposes illogical reforms that make it harder for Kansans in need to break the cycle and climb out of poverty."
"This is just one more example of how Sam Brownback is out of touch with the real world and has our state on the wrong path," Hensley continued.
If a recipient is found to be committing welfare fraud, the law will also ban that person and any other adults in their household from receiving TANF for life--a provision which critics say endangers recipients who are unaware that their partners or family members are committing fraud. Anyone convicted of two drug felonies will also lose their benefits for life.
The law will also limit ATM withdrawals of cash assistance to $25 a day, with a $1 fee per transaction.
"When the law goes into effect, the biggest problem for poorer Kansas families won't be where they're not allowed to spend their money, but how much of the money they've been granted never winds up being theirs," writes Leah Libresco at FiveThirtyEight of the ATM fee.
And as Emily Badger writes for the Washington Post, the logic behind stiff welfare requirements is "problematic in at least three, really big ways."
"The first is economic: There's virtually no evidence that the poor actually spend their money this way," Badger explains. "By definition, a much higher share of their income--often more than half of it--is eaten up by basic housing costs than is true for the better-off, leaving them less money for luxuries anyway."
"The second issue with these laws is a moral one: We rarely make similar demands of other recipients of government aid," Badger continues. "That leads us to the third problem, which is a political one. Many, many Americans who do receive these other kinds of government benefits--farm subsidies, student loans, mortgage tax breaks--don't recognize that, like the poor, they get something from government, too."
Elizabeth Schott, senior fellow with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told the AP that enacting the policies creates "an aura of abuse."
Badger concludes: "[R]esearch has shown that a remarkable number of people who don't think they get anything from government in fact benefit from one of these programs.... one result of this reality is that we have even less tolerance for programs that help the poor: We begrudge them their housing vouchers, for instance, even though government spends about four times as much subsidizing housing for upper-income homeowners."
The new law is "simply a reflection of a basic double-standard."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback on Thursday signed a controversial welfare bill into law that places strict limits on welfare benefits, how long recipients may get them, and how they are--and are not--allowed to spend them.
Brownback, a Republican, said during the signing that placing limits on the benefits, known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), would encourage recipients to become more self-reliant, but critics of the law maintain that it is punitive and degrading.
The law enshrines policies that set a 36-month lifetime limit on benefits; require able-bodied adults to work a minimum of 20 hours a week or go through a training program in order to qualify for the benefits; and prohibit recipients from spending TANF money at movie theaters, swimming pools, spas, massage parlors, and cruise ships.
Kansas' list of "don'ts" for welfare recipients has attracted criticism "because it feels mean-spirited," Kansas Action for Children president Shannon Cotsoradis told the Associated Press on Thursday. "It really seems to make a statement about how we feel about the poor."
"By signing this bill into law, Gov. Brownback has added to the burden that the poorest Kansans already carry. ... It's always been hard to be poor in Kansas. Now, it's going to be a lot harder," Cotsoradis told the Kansas City Star.
State Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley added, "Child poverty and homelessness in Kansas are at record levels ... And, now, the governor has signed a punitive and highly judgmental piece of legislation that imposes illogical reforms that make it harder for Kansans in need to break the cycle and climb out of poverty."
"This is just one more example of how Sam Brownback is out of touch with the real world and has our state on the wrong path," Hensley continued.
If a recipient is found to be committing welfare fraud, the law will also ban that person and any other adults in their household from receiving TANF for life--a provision which critics say endangers recipients who are unaware that their partners or family members are committing fraud. Anyone convicted of two drug felonies will also lose their benefits for life.
The law will also limit ATM withdrawals of cash assistance to $25 a day, with a $1 fee per transaction.
"When the law goes into effect, the biggest problem for poorer Kansas families won't be where they're not allowed to spend their money, but how much of the money they've been granted never winds up being theirs," writes Leah Libresco at FiveThirtyEight of the ATM fee.
And as Emily Badger writes for the Washington Post, the logic behind stiff welfare requirements is "problematic in at least three, really big ways."
"The first is economic: There's virtually no evidence that the poor actually spend their money this way," Badger explains. "By definition, a much higher share of their income--often more than half of it--is eaten up by basic housing costs than is true for the better-off, leaving them less money for luxuries anyway."
"The second issue with these laws is a moral one: We rarely make similar demands of other recipients of government aid," Badger continues. "That leads us to the third problem, which is a political one. Many, many Americans who do receive these other kinds of government benefits--farm subsidies, student loans, mortgage tax breaks--don't recognize that, like the poor, they get something from government, too."
Elizabeth Schott, senior fellow with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told the AP that enacting the policies creates "an aura of abuse."
Badger concludes: "[R]esearch has shown that a remarkable number of people who don't think they get anything from government in fact benefit from one of these programs.... one result of this reality is that we have even less tolerance for programs that help the poor: We begrudge them their housing vouchers, for instance, even though government spends about four times as much subsidizing housing for upper-income homeowners."
The new law is "simply a reflection of a basic double-standard."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback on Thursday signed a controversial welfare bill into law that places strict limits on welfare benefits, how long recipients may get them, and how they are--and are not--allowed to spend them.
Brownback, a Republican, said during the signing that placing limits on the benefits, known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), would encourage recipients to become more self-reliant, but critics of the law maintain that it is punitive and degrading.
The law enshrines policies that set a 36-month lifetime limit on benefits; require able-bodied adults to work a minimum of 20 hours a week or go through a training program in order to qualify for the benefits; and prohibit recipients from spending TANF money at movie theaters, swimming pools, spas, massage parlors, and cruise ships.
Kansas' list of "don'ts" for welfare recipients has attracted criticism "because it feels mean-spirited," Kansas Action for Children president Shannon Cotsoradis told the Associated Press on Thursday. "It really seems to make a statement about how we feel about the poor."
"By signing this bill into law, Gov. Brownback has added to the burden that the poorest Kansans already carry. ... It's always been hard to be poor in Kansas. Now, it's going to be a lot harder," Cotsoradis told the Kansas City Star.
State Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley added, "Child poverty and homelessness in Kansas are at record levels ... And, now, the governor has signed a punitive and highly judgmental piece of legislation that imposes illogical reforms that make it harder for Kansans in need to break the cycle and climb out of poverty."
"This is just one more example of how Sam Brownback is out of touch with the real world and has our state on the wrong path," Hensley continued.
If a recipient is found to be committing welfare fraud, the law will also ban that person and any other adults in their household from receiving TANF for life--a provision which critics say endangers recipients who are unaware that their partners or family members are committing fraud. Anyone convicted of two drug felonies will also lose their benefits for life.
The law will also limit ATM withdrawals of cash assistance to $25 a day, with a $1 fee per transaction.
"When the law goes into effect, the biggest problem for poorer Kansas families won't be where they're not allowed to spend their money, but how much of the money they've been granted never winds up being theirs," writes Leah Libresco at FiveThirtyEight of the ATM fee.
And as Emily Badger writes for the Washington Post, the logic behind stiff welfare requirements is "problematic in at least three, really big ways."
"The first is economic: There's virtually no evidence that the poor actually spend their money this way," Badger explains. "By definition, a much higher share of their income--often more than half of it--is eaten up by basic housing costs than is true for the better-off, leaving them less money for luxuries anyway."
"The second issue with these laws is a moral one: We rarely make similar demands of other recipients of government aid," Badger continues. "That leads us to the third problem, which is a political one. Many, many Americans who do receive these other kinds of government benefits--farm subsidies, student loans, mortgage tax breaks--don't recognize that, like the poor, they get something from government, too."
Elizabeth Schott, senior fellow with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told the AP that enacting the policies creates "an aura of abuse."
Badger concludes: "[R]esearch has shown that a remarkable number of people who don't think they get anything from government in fact benefit from one of these programs.... one result of this reality is that we have even less tolerance for programs that help the poor: We begrudge them their housing vouchers, for instance, even though government spends about four times as much subsidizing housing for upper-income homeowners."
The new law is "simply a reflection of a basic double-standard."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.