Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 8 years ago

most temporary assistance is meant for children? really?

The average number of persons in TANF families was 2.4, including an average of 1.8 recipient children. One in two recipient families had only one child. Less than eight percent of families had more than three children. The average number of children in closed-case families was 1.8. Nearly one in two closed-case families had one child, and only seven percent had more than three children.

Almost half of TANF families had no adult recipients. About 49 percent of TANF families had only one adult recipient, and 5 percent included two or more adult recipients. In 23 States, the District of Columbia and two Territories, there were no two-parent family cases aided with Federal TANF funds or State MOE funds. Some of these States served two-parent families with State funds that were not claimed toward the MOE requirement (i.e., in solely State-funded programs).

7 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Very interesting. Thanks for the reminder that everyone on assistance is NOT a welfare bum by any stretch of the imagination. Our poor includes vets, the elderly, children and the disabled. We have now nearly 50 million people living in poverty. 16 million of them are children. A nation that can't take care of its children has big problems.

    ##

  • 8 years ago

    The 60 month time limits for TANF (cash assistance) is all smoke and mirrors - not real.

    First of all almost half of all TANF cases have NO adult head of household, so NO time limits for them.

    If the mother is mentally disabled, gets SSI, she is not on the grant - not a "TANF household member".

    If the mother is a drug addict, she may have turned the children over to a grandparent or aunt, so that adult is not on the TANF grant.

    ~

    Next, the 60 month TANF counter is not running if the TANF head of household is considered temporarily disabled - like a difficult pregnancy. This is very common. Women who work and become pregnant continue to work. Women who are on welfare and become pregnant get a doctor statement saying they can't work.

    Post partum 12 week work exemption is automatic, no doctor statement. needed.

    So for every pregnancy, 8 months pregnancy no counter, and 3 months post partum no counter, so 11 months of TANF, does not count toward the 60 month limit.

    ~ ~

    If you are overweight, or have other health issues, yuou may try to get SSI - for people who never worked. If your family doctor says you are disabled, and you pursue SSI, you are not work capable, no TANF counter running. It is not uncommon for 'disable' TANF parents to pursue SSI for 5 years, before finally giving up. so the five year limit got another five years added on.

    ~ ~ ~

    So now you are probably thinking 'Gee, all these people must be on TANF (cash assistance), getting the free ride.'

    WRONG!

    There are so many other welfare programs, they don't need TANF.

    A lot of them DO NOT WANT to inconvenience the absent parent(s) by filing for child support.

    On my caseload of 400 I have dozens that would be eligible for TANF, that don't even apply.

    Food stamps, WIC, energy assistance, housing assistance they are doing just fine without TANF.

    ~ ~ ~

    Today’s antipoverty safety net is dramatically different from the one in place two decades ago when welfare reform was enacted. Rather than a safety net primarily dependent on cash assistance programs, as is the common perception, the current system is highly reliant on social service programs funded by government and delivered through community-based nonprofits. Annual public and private expenditures for social service programs today exceed total federal outlays for cash assistance programs like welfare, food stamps, and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).|

    http://ed.stanford.edu/events/out-reach-place-pove...

    Cash Welfare Caseload. In December 2010, the number of families receiving TANF cash welfare was 1.9 million families, consisting of 4.7 million recipients, of which 3.5 million were children. The cash welfare caseload is very heterogeneous. The type of family historically thought of as the “typical” cash welfare family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2008. Additionally, 15% of cash welfare families had an employed adult, while almost half of all families had no adult recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.

    http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32...

    ~~~~~

    ~

    Myth: Most welfare recipients are on benefits a short time.

    Let me make that clearer.

    At any one time 80% of any given caseload is chronic, repeat for one or more lifetimes.

    80% of the money being spent at any one moment in time, is for the chronic, constantly needy, needy by choice, more than circumstances.

    The other 20% comes and goes on a regular basis, in one door, out the other, never to be seen again.

    At any moment in time, only 20% of the total, but over a long stretch (say five years), most of the ones helped were short timers, came and went, just like the myth says, most of the recipients on a short time,. . . . . . . but they only use 20% of the total funds available.

    80% of the financial help available, goes to those ‘few bad apples.’

    That does not sound like a good taxpayer investment to me.

    It seems to me the lion share of the money should be spent on the temporarily poor, the poor by circumstances, more than choice.

    http://www.urban.org/publications/900288.html

    Source(s): welfare worker
  • 8 years ago

    In other words, 66% of recipients were children. That sounds pretty high.

    So, the answer is: Yes, really, according to your first sentence.

  • 8 years ago

    It appears that Rush Limbaugh answered his own question. Obviously, "yes".

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Then you should come to our doctor's office sometime and see all the women on public assistance who are having their fifth, seventh, or eighth baby on Medicaid.

  • Bonzo
    Lv 5
    8 years ago

    No, the elderly, disabled,etc.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    It should be.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.