Editorial: Children harmed by lack of aid

Wednesday, May 14, 2003 | 9:31 a.m.

May 14, 2003

The passage of national welfare-reform legislation in 1996 overhauled how the jobless receive government assistance. One of the biggest changes was that a limit was placed on how long people could receive welfare assistance, the thinking being that people would be less likely to search for a job if there was no end to how long they could receive benefits. A new program emerged, then, called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Under TANF, federal block grants and state funds combine to provide temporary financial aid to low-income families with children.

But today's story in the Sun's seven-part series, "Children Left Behind," shows that Nevada is stingier than most other states in the level of aid it provides to needy families. For instance, Nevada ranks 42nd in combined state and federal spending on cash assistance for TANF recipients. The lack of funding can result in children going hungry and becoming homeless with their parents. Under the program administered by Nevada, a single mother with two children can receive no more than $348 a month -- an amount that hasn't changed since 1992. "The basic problem with the $348 is housing," Jon Sasser, statewide advocacy coordinator for Washoe Legal Services, told Sun reporter Steve Kanigher. "If you are one of the lucky 30 percent of low-income residents who receive subsidized housing, you can deal with this money. But if you are one of the other 70 percent, it means homelessness or families living together in overcrowded conditions or the mom living in a relationship out of econom! ic necessity."

Gov. Kenny Guinn is proposing to spend an additional $44 million on TANF, but that is only to keep up with the growing caseloads. If the Legislature cuts what Guinn has proposed, state welfare administrator Nancy Ford said the administration will end up either capping enrollments for TANF, cutting some of the programs offered or reducing benefits. In a state as wealthy as ours, there is no excuse for cutting these benefits that only would end up harming children. Instead, the Legislature should increase the maximum monthly payment to account for inflation. Another problem that's been pointed out is that the federal government's formula for providing its share of funding for TANF doesn't factor in adequately the phenomenal growth we've had in Nevada, a situation that deprives us of deserved funding. Congress should adjust the formula so that, in a fast-grow ing state such as ours, children are taken care of when their parents are jobless.

Our welfare system definitely was in need of reform in the mid-1990s, but we shouldn't become so cold-hearted in the administration of welfare benefits that we turn our backs on children.