Welfare Needs Drastic Reform

Welfare reform is a public policy issue that affects every level of government, the recipients and the taxpayers.

Although most decisions are being made on the state and federal level, the Board of Supervisors was recently given the power to make a specific determination for the County of Orange. As decisions are made regarding how to implement the federal reform plan, many various points of view have played into the debate. I for one have stood firmly on the principle that drastic reform is needed, and it is needed now.

On May 6, the Board of Supervisors addressed an issue that put my principle into action. Unfortunately, most of my colleagues did not share my viewpoint, and we lost a chance to make some progress on true welfare reform.

On that Tuesday, the board faced a clear-cut decision: whether or not to accept, for two specific cities, a federal waiver of new regulations that make able-bodied people age 18 to 50 with no dependents ineligible for food stamps. Because their unemployment rates are higher than other cities in the county, Stanton and Santa Ana qualified to receive the waiver, if approved by the county.

I voted against accepting the waiver for two reasons. First, if we are to implement true and effective welfare reform, the changes must be made decisively and immediately. By deferring and watering down the reform measures, the government sends an unmistakable message that delay and dilution are the order of the day. That kind of attitude will not motivate people to move themselves off the government dole.

Second, I am not convinced that just because a food stamp recipient resides in Stanton or Santa Ana he should be given special treatment. There is nothing stopping an able-bodied person from traveling to an adjacent city and finding employment there.

Furthermore, by implementing the exemption to just two cities, a magnet effect will likely draw people to those areas just to take advantage of the preferential eligibility.

I want to emphasize that the people affected are not those who are truly distressed and who deserve our assistance, the elderly poor or children in poverty, for example. This is about eliminating a social welfare benefit for people who are able to work and who live in the county with the lowest unemployment rate in the entire state of California.

JAMES W. SILVA

Supervisor, 2nd District