President Obama rewriting welfare reform law

Obama’s latest power grab: Rewriting welfare reform law [1996 Clinton admin policy]

Whatever side you take on this, I find it interesting that it is not being discussed much from the mainstream media. Z.

From article:
'One has to give the president credit. Normally when he attempts to seize power that is beyond the scope of the executive branch, he does it late on Friday with an eye toward diminished media coverage.

His latest grab came on Thursday, albeit with little fanfare.'

http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...are-reform-law

Official policy directive:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/.../im201203.html

President Obama must have found his little dictator wings when he realized that Congress won't stand up to him. Bomb Libya by executive order and ignore the War Powers Act; check. Fail to enforce and then change immigration law by executive order; check. Fail to enforce and override welfare laws passed by Congress and signed into law by Clinton; check. To me, this is more the fault of Congress than Obama. It is like when a wayward child doesn't get parented; the fault is the parents permissiveness. We remember with disdain, for instance the German parliament which handed over it's power with the Enabling Act. Our Congress is so limp, this goes back through Bush's administration, that an enabling act is not even required to allow a sitting president to legislate through executive orders and "Justice" Department interpretations of UN resolutions.

I can't say that Romney would be any better but having overstepped his authority on more than one occasion with a wussy Congress, at least we have the option of voting this guy out in November. Otherwise, we will almost certainly see more of our laws and regulations coming via executive orders, administrative decisions, and interpretations of UN resolutions.

compare and contrast. Where, exactly, is the directive running counter to the act? please be specific. In fact, where is there ANY basis for the lead paragraph in this memorandum? It is promoting experimental programs, as allowed in the act. how, exactly, is it a power grab? Please, be specific.

once again, the memorandum [[it is a memorandum, it is NOT a directive, it is NOT requiring ANYTHING):

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/.../im201203.html

the Act:

https://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Ho...tle11/1115.htm

President Clinton and Congress required a work provision in their legislation. All legislation power is vested in Congress. This administrative/executive order legislation allows the waiving of that requirement. There may be some good reasons for Obama and his minions to want to make experimental changes in a law but the proper way of doing so is to ask Congress to amend the law rather than reverse it without the input of Congress.

"While the TANF work participation requirements are contained in section 407, section 402[[a)[[1)[[A)[[iii) requires that the state plan “[e]nsure that parents and caretakers receiving assistance under the program engage in work activities in accordance with section 407.” Thus, HHS has authority to waive compliance with this 402 requirement and authorize a state to test approaches and methods other than those set forth in section 407, including definitions of work activities and engagement, specified limitations, verification procedures, and the calculation of participation rates. As described below, however, HHS will only consider approving waivers relating to the work participation requirements that make changes intended to lead to more effective means of meeting the work goals of TANF."

So basically, he's just allowing states to decide whether or not they want to waive the work requirement.

Obama has finally done something right for a change. There shouldn't be a work requirement to qualify for welfare [[nor should there be time limits as a matter of fact) in the midst of the worst recession in modern history.

That said, there should be a limit on this waiver, so if/when the economy recovers we can reinstate the work requirements.

BTW, ABC has reported on it, in a fair and balanced fashion unlike the OP's source.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...e-flexibility/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

So basically, he's just allowing states to decide whether or not they want to waive the work requirement.

---

That is correct.

this is essentially just Obama haters making shit up, as usual

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

So basically, he's just allowing states to decide whether or not they want to waive the work requirement.

---

Whether or not this is a good idea, where did Obama get the authority to amend the law?

Good the other media is covering this! Recall per my original post I found it interesting that is wasn't "being discussed much from the mainstream media.".

The right wing need not own this coverage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

...BTW, ABC has reported on it, in a fair and balanced fashion unlike the OP's source.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...e-flexibility/

---

Haters 'all'...:rolleyes:... Yep, that sums things up pretty well! Nice and tidy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

this is essentially just Obama haters making shit up, as usual

---