Welfare Problem Moved, Not Solved
Politicians in Olympia are bickering seriously at last about welfare reform legislation. But whatever they do, there are some things they can’t do. Some of the most important reforms will occur closer to home.
It is not enough to blithely say, or legislate, that welfare recipients ought to get jobs. Some, such as elderly grandparents whose children have run off leaving grandchildren to raise, are not physically able both to hold a job and be a parent. It’s with good reason that reformers plan to exempt 20 percent of the caseload from the five-year lifetime cap on welfare grants.
Other parents, while able to hold a job, don’t. The reasons are numerous. One that has not received enough attention is geography.
In some parts of the state - mainly around Puget Sound - the economy is booming and jobs are plentiful. But that’s not true everywhere.
In smaller rural towns, jobs are few, period. In areas that are both rural and economically depressed, jobs are few and welfare recipients are numerous. This is true especially in the counties of northeastern and coastal Washington, where the mining and lumbering economies have collapsed. There has been a lot of talk about the transition to a tourism economy, and the state has made some stabs at worker retraining. But the transition is a long way from complete. Unemployment rates still are high.
So, what will happen in the real-world settings of Pend Oreille County (19.6 percent unemployment, 474 welfare households) as welfare reform commands recipients to find jobs? Can mining or logging resume? Sorry, the Sierra Club would disapprove. Can small-town cafes, motels and retail stores create scores of family-wage jobs with benefits? Yeah, right.
The best solution would be a local solution, allowing use of the family ties and old friendships that help a struggling household make it. This means local chambers of commerce have one more reason to work on the creation of a positive business climate and the recruiting of new employers. But that is easier said than done.
Welfare reform is not entirely about welfare; it’s about economics. It’s about the struggle to find and create jobs that pay decent wages. It’s about the fact that many of us would rather shop for bargains made in Third World sweatshops and sold in big chain warehouse stores than patronize local businesses and buy American merchandise.
The alternative to the creation of more local jobs is not attractive: relocation. Today, Kentucky and West Virginia are offering relocation allowances to move the poor from Appalachia to jobs in the cities. Notions like that aren’t even on the table in Washington state.
At least the state does have its thriving Puget Sound economy. At least it’s expanding the capacity of its community colleges, which provide remedial and vocational training. Recipients who move in search of economic hope do have a crack at schooling - if they can afford it. They might even find some subsidized child care and health care to help them cross the bridge to self-sufficiency.
The truth is, though, that no one knows how this is going to work. We’re abandoning a system that worked poorly and we’re hoping something better will materialize. If it does, the solutions will appear as communities, one at a time, strive intentionally to create better jobs.
, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board