In August of 1996 President Clinton signed a bill that abolished the federal guarantee of assistance to the poor. Welfare was officially changed. Some of the provisions were harsher than they had been in the past, and each individual state had much more control over its welfare status than before. Before the bill was passed, there were many lobbyists who said that welfare did not need to be changed. They said there were too many people who depended on welfare because they were hurt or unable to get a job. Eventually, though, it was widely accepted that the welfare system used at that time had too many major problems to leave it as it was, and the new welfare bill was passed, making harder for people to get and stay on welfare and giving states more control over welfare decisions. The people who before were lobbying for no welfare change are now saying that the new changes are too harsh and need to be either changed in a new bill or changed by the states (Ratnesar 2). There is no question that the old welfare system used in the United states needed to be reformed, but now that it has undergone a major overhaul, the federal and state governments need to uphold its new rules and regulations.

Those who want the welfare bill changed have few major concerns. For the most part, they are concerned that the children of welfare recipients will not get the support that they need to live (Quotes 1). In many cases, though, this is untrue because in many states single parents, who are often the ones on welfare, receiving welfare do not get the full payment of child support from their child’s other parent if it is being paid. Since they are receiving welfare, the money first goes to the state from where much of it is given to the federal government. The state then gives the rest to the family on welfare. Under the new welfare laws, the state takes very little money from child support. In the end, it more or less evens up whether the family is getting almost full child support and little or no welfare or getting full welfare and little child support (Dunne 3).

One of the main reasons welfare needed to be reformed was that it was wasting so much government money. The United States was just adding to its national debt by spending an average of $1.4 trillion a year on welfare and other such programs. Under the new welfare bill, some states have started to take initiative and institute plans where many of these programs will be operated by privately owned companies, saving the government tons of money. Private companies have always been involved in helping welfare programs, providing everything from desks to electronic-payment systems. Now, in some states, businesses will be the only ones running the welfare programs. Since the federal government no longer sets detailed administrative rules as to how welfare programs are to be run, each state has the option of providing money for private companies to run welfare programs if they wish (Welfare, Inc. 1). Having privately owned companies run welfare programs instead of the state or federal governments will save the nation roughly $1 trillion per year. This will help decrease the national debt and free up money for other important programs such as AIDS research.

Welfare is based on the fact that some people in this country for one reason or another are unable to get jobs. One of the problems, though, is that many of the parents on welfare do not even try to get jobs. All they do is try to live off the welfare that they are getting. The purpose of giving people welfare in the first place is so they can work to get off it. Under the old system of welfare, though, many parents would sit around, having more children so they could get a larger welfare check. Never once would they try to go out and get a job. Under the new welfare bill, states are allowed to decide how to regulate these kinds of situations. Some states are considering letting welfare recipients stay on for a shorter amount of time, and they must also prove along the way they do have a job or are at least trying to find one (Kunerth 2).

It has been proven that there is not as much need for welfare now as there was at one time. This is another reason why it is good that the welfare system has been overhauled. The huge need for government assistance is not there as it once was. In Tennessee, during a six month period, nearly 19,000 people dropped off the state welfare list. This was due to a program that provided coordinated child care, education, training, housing, and other help that families may need to get off welfare in 18 months. Because of the new welfare bill, this program was possible. Under old welfare laws, there were strict regulations for what the welfare money given to states could be used. Programs such as this one were not something the money could be spent on (Davis 2). Other states are also taking suit and offering welfare recipients ways to get off welfare. In Florida, several programs have been implemented to provide job placement skills for those on welfare (Wakefield 1). Most experts agree that there are numerous jobs available with which one can support a family and that little help is needed to find one. Sometimes training is needed, but in many states such programs are offered (Kunerth 2).

The old system of welfare that the United States used before President Clinton signed the welfare-reform bill had many obvious problems. For welfare to work efficiently, the federal government could not properly regulate certain problems because they were different in every area. Now that the new bill has been signed, this problem is solved. The states have more power to take care of the main problems in that particular state. The main consensus throughout the state governments, though, is that it will be harder to get and stay on welfare. This may cause a hardship for some, but for the most part it will solve many problems with those who are taking the government money without ever thinking that they should try to get a job. They need to remember the famous words of President John F. Kennedy who said, "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."