City's Poor Don't Need More Belt-Tightening

by Marc Cohan, Litigation Director, Welfare Law Center

This article appeared in the October 12, 2001 edition of Newsday.

THE OUTPOURING of assistance following the World Trade Center disaster demonstrated clearly the compassion of New Yorkers and all Americans. Unfortunately, compassion alone will not be enough to protect New York's poor from the aftermath of the disaster. More than 2.5 million New York State residents live below the national poverty line ($14,000 for a family of three), with the vast majority of those people living within New York City and Long Island.

A prolonged period of national and local belt-tightening to pay for the clean-up, the rebuilding and the war is likely to divert resources from the poor. At the same time, economists forecast a loss of tens of thousands of jobs in an already dismal market for entry-level workers. The question is whether New York City is prepared to meet the needs of its poorest residents. Recent history suggests it's not.

State and city efforts over the last eight years have focused primarily on reducing welfare rolls, not on reducing poverty or investing in education or training that prepares people for jobs. In April, 2001, more than 39,000 eligible New York City families were dropped from the rolls or had benefits reduced for infractions such as being late for an appointment. Only a small fraction was able to get employment. Much of New York City's emphasis has been on workfare, despite the fact that less than 6 percent of workfare participants have been able to get jobs from workfare.

More than half of the welfare recipients in New York State don't have a high school diploma and 45 percent of welfare recipients in New York City have the lowest level of literacy. Yet, because of the Human Resources Administration's policy of denying education and training, less than 4 percent of New York City welfare recipients are enrolled in such programs.

Public assistance leaves families deep in poverty. The cash grant for a family of three is only $577 per month and has not been raised in more than 10 years. While many families also receive food stamps, assistance levels are still way below that needed to move a family out of crushing poverty. Consequently, New York City's poverty rate of 22 percent is nearly twice the total U.S. rate.

The city wasted the opportunity to help families out of poverty during the recent and unprecedented economic boom. Instead, it has operated an often lawless welfare system focused on deterring families from applying for or receiving crucial help such as cash assistance, food stamps and Medicaid.

Over and over, we and other advocates for the poor have had to take the city to court - and we win because the city's acts against people in need are egregious and ultimately indefensible. Federal judges have ordered systemic reform in more than a half-dozen high-profile class-action suits.

The city's failure to ensure that welfare recipients leave the rolls for living wage jobs has had a high cost. Soup kitchens, food pantries and homeless facilities were already stretched beyond the breaking point before Sept. 11. New York State and the city must devote resources to moving welfare recipients not just off the rolls, but out of poverty so that their income and energy can help contribute to a broad recovery.

We can improve welfare in New York City. First, replace workfare with a public-jobs program that pays the prevailing wage and provides necessary benefits such as health insurance. These jobs are far more likely to help New York City rebuild and to maintain much needed services. It worked in the 1930s, and it would work now.

Second, provide education and training to help welfare recipients move off the rolls and out of poverty. Those who can should be enrolled in vocational training specifically targeted to the 10 industries that comprised 89 percent of New York's job growth. Comparable education and training must be made available for the working poor in entry-level jobs to insure that they are not forced onto the welfare rolls as the recession worsens and those jobs disappear.

Third, streamline the operation of state and city bureaucracies. At present, due to computer error and human mistakes, thousands of eligible families mistakenly lose food stamps, Medicaid and child care when they leave the welfare rolls. These non-cash income supports are crucial to the more than 624,000 city children living in poverty.

Fourth, stop the Draconian policy of depriving families of their basic subsistence benefits for the most minor infractions, which often results in homelessness, hunger and illness.

There is no doubt that a concentrated effort to eradicate the causes of poverty will be expensive and difficult. But the short-term cost of moving a family out of poverty is far exceeded by the long-term costs to society. While this nation aids the bailout of the airline industry and the relief of Wall Street, it must not shrink from its patriotic duty to help its poorest residents.

I fear that the coming period of belt-tightening will only continue misguided policies that fail so many of the neediest among us. As the city ponders deep budget cuts, it must embrace steps that lift families out of poverty once and for all.