General Discussion

jwirr

(39,215 posts)

29. The effects of that "reform" are not tripe. They were very real. I was a single mother with three

Sat May 16, 2015, 12:39 PM

May 2015

children. One was severely disabled and required 24/7 total care. The new law was written in such a way that I and my children could only get help for so many years. It was totally idiotic.

I was (and did for 45 years) taking care of that child for pennies a day. The alternative would have been a government facility that would have been very expensive and paid for by taxpayers - by you.

I was very fortunate to live in a progressive state. The social workers who were our case managers immediately went through the rolls and looked for alternatives. Some they referred to SSDI so that they could not be cut off. Those living far away from work without transportation applied for exemptions, etc. I also applied for an exemption and got it. At least my state had the sense to realize that the blanket laws in the reform were unworkable and ignored the truly vulnerable.

I am guessing that the red states did not make any changes in the "reform" laws.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton Wants to Help Families at the Bottom; Will She Change Her Mind on Welfare Reform? [View all] cali May 2015 OP

Please list the exact changes you want to see. nt DURHAM D May 2015 #1

Why? I'm discussing damaging legislation that HRC supported, and cali May 2015 #2

Not a gotcha game - just a question addressed to you. DURHAM D May 2015 #6

The effects of that "reform" are not tripe. They were very real. I was a single mother with three jwirr May 2015 #29

In no way did I suggest that welfare reform was tripe. nt DURHAM D May 2015 #39

That is what I heard you saying in post #6. jwirr May 2015 #47

Nope. nt DURHAM D May 2015 #53

Since Cali's OP is about welfare reform Oilwellian May 2015 #56

See post #6 and yes you did. Exilednight May 2015 #60

So clearly you would like the law changed... Cali_Democrat May 2015 #8

refer to the post downthread. that poster expressed quite well cali May 2015 #12

Another day.. another BS Clinton attack Evergreen Emerald May 2015 #3

valid discussion of issues and candidates. cali May 2015 #5

Stop Evergreen Emerald May 2015 #23

Blind obedience is not a progressive quality. Scuba May 2015 #57

Right back atcha Evergreen Emerald May 2015 #61

Training those for jobs who are down on their luck is helping. Thinkingabout May 2015 #4

yeah, I see you addressed the facts in the article. NOT. cali May 2015 #9

You are talking about welfare reform. Two years of job training and assistance Thinkingabout May 2015 #13

Jaysus. it's hopeless. bye bye. You just don't have enough cali May 2015 #17

Maybe you should research before accusing someone of not having Thinkingabout May 2015 #26

Apparently you don't have enough knowledge of Hillary's legislative record KittyWampus May 2015 #27

The post spoke about BC in 1996, this is what I was posting in response. Thinkingabout May 2015 #38

We had access to job training before the "reform". What the "reform" did not address was those jwirr May 2015 #35

Welfare reform will not work for everyone especially the disabled. Thinkingabout May 2015 #40

I got my education BEFORE the reform. And the problem with it was that it did not address those jwirr May 2015 #49

I am sorry for your difficulties. I know and understand not everyone is Thinkingabout May 2015 #54

I totally agree with you on this. Training programs are very valuable. My own education was not jwirr May 2015 #55

I'd like to see daredtowork May 2015 #7

Thank you. That is exactly what should happen now. jwirr May 2015 #37

/\_/\_This right here_/\_/\ Scuba May 2015 #59

I imagine she'll do as she has in the past, tweet something that sounds like she cares... NYC_SKP May 2015 #10

Here is an example BainsBane May 2015 #11

I knew you'd leap at that. I almost left it off because of that. cali May 2015 #15

I think she will change her position BainsBane May 2015 #28

Oh, she'll change her stated position all right. Empty rhetoric is her forte. Scuba May 2015 #58

That's incredibly sexist language DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #18

That's why it's used BainsBane May 2015 #34

When Goldman tells her what to think, hifiguy May 2015 #14

Hillary Clinton opposed welfare reform DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #16

so she defended it and praised it in 2008 because of... cali May 2015 #19

Sexist bullshit. Her HUSBAND passed legislation. I don't like Hillary but this shows how KittyWampus May 2015 #20

Sorry, no. fail. Sexism? what crap. cali May 2015 #22

Totally sexist. SHE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. She has a record as Senator- KittyWampus May 2015 #25

FLAT OUT FALSE cali May 2015 #44

Mea Culpa. She supported the same position as Barack Obama DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #21

Wonder what he meant by that? jwirr May 2015 #42

Maybe because it perpetuates negative stereotypes of certain groups being dependent and lazy ... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #46

Okay that sounds reasonable. Thanks. jwirr May 2015 #50

You can find her positions on welfare reform KMOD May 2015 #24

Yes, Hillary has been a long time advocate for children, she has also advocated for women and their Thinkingabout May 2015 #33

How many people you know part of an administration are going to voice an opposite view point in still_one May 2015 #30

Good post Thinkingabout May 2015 #36

Eleanor went against Franklin's policy all the tine upaloopa May 2015 #43

Point is not many still_one May 2015 #45

It would have been hard for HRC to resign as First Lady./NT DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #48

The media would have loved it still_one May 2015 #52

Maybe she can fly them to Malaysia to work TBF May 2015 #31

K&R..... daleanime May 2015 #32

Hillary is not Bill Clinton nt upaloopa May 2015 #41

Has she bought a newer and more efficient waffle iron? Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #51