|
Grace Ross on Welfare & Poverty |
A: NO, we should restrict welfare benefits to 5 years when we succeed in restricting poverty to five years in any person's life. Welfare is overwhelmingly an escape route for most women from domestic violence, often the only one for women with children. Time limits and other welfare stigma have become a huge deterrent to women escaping, has lead to the vast overcrowding of our battered women's shelters - leading to women being unable to being placed even when their lives had already almost been taken from them and the greatly extended shelter stays because welfare which used to be women's primary financial support to leave shelter has become almost unattainable. Welfare payments most be lifted above poverty serving to bump up the minimum wage and other working family needs - and move us in line with international economic human rights standards.
A: YES, this was a disgracefully low allocation to being with. Money should be provided for long-term housing solutions - such as rental subsidies, rebuilding of housing to loosen the housing market in general (especially environmentally-friendly renovations), and increased funding for affordable home-ownership options.
A: Yes, but this needs to be a first step in a commitment to incremental re-funding of the state housing subsidy program--over time returning it to comparable funding levels to when it was the "Section 707" program. In addition to increased funding, the state should immediately advertise and fill all of the vouchers presently authorized but unused.