This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

There Are No Easy Solutions To Complex Problems

Welfare reform is a very contentious issue. Democrats often vote against Republican sponsored bills or amendments. Why? There are several reasons.

Often times the Republican sponsored amendments are not germane to the bill they are attaching the amendment to so they get voted down or ruled 'out of order.' Other times, even if it is germane, the idea has either not been vetted in committee, or it has but it failed in committee because it was an idea loaded with unintended consequences. Let's consider the following common proposals to welfare reform.

Require a job search requirement to get welfare benefits: 

There are too many problems for anyone person to work on every problem. Nevertheless, this is an issue that I am personally working on. I am researching and talking with different groups on how a job search requirement can be done in a meaningful and effective way.

Find out what's happening in Attleborowith free, real-time updates from Patch.

People who need to go on emergency cash assistance or are suddenly homeless and out of a job are in a real crisis. Their first concern is feeding their family and/or a finding a dry, safe and warm place to sleep that night. I have personally worked with a number of constituents who are in crisis and the first thing we need to do is stabilize them. This is tough. Only when we have a family stabilized does it make sense to start to rebuild their life. It is absurd to say that someone needs to be searching for a job at 4:50 PM or they won't get shelter to stay in that night provided by the Commonwealth, which they previously paid into. 

I want there to be a job search requirement but I want it to be meaningful and not be a hindrance to people in a real crisis. Most of my homelessness calls come in after 4PM.

Find out what's happening in Attleborowith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Require a permanent residence to get welfare benefits: 

This one is very simple and very personal to me. One constituent I was working with who I have known for a good number of years was homeless in the summer of 2013. If he has no permanent residence, how can he get the support that is offered? Consider people who 'couch surf'; people who go from one location to another. If they need job placement assistance or cash assistance and they don't have a permanent residence, how are they going to get assistance if there is a residency requirement? It seems like it is a common sense idea but in practice it often just doesn't work.

Require drug testing for people on welfare:

It seems like a 'no brainer'. But let's scratch the surface. If someone tests positive for drugs and we take aware their welfare support, do we also take support away from their children? What about if they test positive for marijuana? Do we take away over such a commonly used drug that society is increasingly permissive of? How about someone with a drug addiction that is in treatment but has relapsed? We know that drug addiction isn't something that is easily cured by deterrence; it is addiction. Does it matter if it is prescription drug addiction or illegal drug addiction? We know what happens when we pull the lifeline out from people who are addicted to drugs; we increase the chances they will end up in prison, which is very costly.

The title of a bill or the intention of a bill is not enough. We have to look at the unintended consequences. We have to look to see if we are going to do more harm than good. We have to see if we are going to exclude people from getting benefits that they previously paid into when they were working, or that we provide people with disabilities precisely because are a compassionate society who takes care of those truly in need. When tinkering with these important programs it is imperative to remember that a lot of harm can be done when using a broad approach. We need to use a scalpel not a broadsword. 

If there were a button to push that would eliminate waste, fraud and abuse without unintended consequences, every legislator, Democrat and Republican, would push that button.

Paul Heroux from Attleboro is the State Representative for the Second Bristol District. He can be reached at 508-639-9511 or paul.heroux@mahouse.gov.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?