Jeff Merkley on Welfare & Poverty Democratic Jr Senator (OR)

Protect entitlements from GOP budget cuts

Democrats jumped on the comments, with calls to protect health-care coverage and social safety-net programs while Republicans trim spending on those programs in order to make up for budget deficits of $1 trillion from last year's GOP tax cuts. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) tweeted that "Social Security and Medicare are on the line" in November's midterms.

Kudlow downplayed the effect of tax cuts on budget deficits and instead pointed to a longer-term spending problem. "People are quick to blame deficits on tax cuts," he said. "Well, I don't buy that."

Supports workfare and 2-year welfare limits

Merkley supports the following principles regarding welfare:
• Maintain the 2-year limit on welfare benefits.
• Maintain the requirement that able-bodied recipients work in order to receive benefits.
• Increase employment and job training programs for welfare recipients.
• Provide child care for welfare recipients who work.
• Allow welfare recipients to remain eligible for benefits while saving money for education, starting a business, or buying a home.

Voted YES on instituting National Service as a new social invention.

Adds to National and Community Service Act of 1990 (NCSA) purposes:
1. providing year-round opportunities in service-learning;
2. involving program participants in emergency and disaster preparedness, relief, and recovery;
3. increasing service opportunities for retiring professionals;
4. encouraging service by individuals age 55 or older and continued service by national service alumni;
5. focusing national service on the areas of national need.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Sen. BARBARA MIKULSKI (D, MD): [In developing national service over many years] we were not in the business of creating another new social program. What we were in the business of was creating a new social invention. What do I mean by that? In our country, we are known for our technological inventions. But also often overlooked, and sometimes undervalued, is our social inventions.

We created national service to let young people find opportunity to be of service and also to make an important contribution. But not all was rosy. In 2003, when I was the ranking member on the appropriations subcommittee funding national service, they created a debacle. One of their most colossal errors was that they enrolled over 20,000 volunteers and could not afford to pay for it. That is how sloppy they were in their accounting. I called them the "Enron of nonprofits."

And they worked on it. But all that is history. We are going to expand AmeriCorps activity into specialized corps. One, an education corps; another, a health futures corps; another, a veterans corps; and another called opportunity corps. These are not outside of AmeriCorps. They will be subsets because we find this is where compelling human need is and at the same time offers great opportunity for volunteers to do it.

Opponent's argument to vote No:No senators spoke against the amendment.