The Case for a National Welfare Standard

Paul E. Peterson and Mark C. Rom PRESIDENT REAGAN has called for comprehensive reform of the nation's welfare system. "After hundreds of billions of dollars in poverty programs, the plight of the poor grows more painful. But the waste in dollars and cents pales before the most tragic loss ? the sinful waste of human spirit and potential," he said in his 1986 State of the Union address. Reagan is not alone in calling for welfare reform; Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the American Public Welfare Association, and a variety of other groups and public officials have questioned the adequacy of existing welfare policy.1 Reformers agree that welfare policies need to foster a stronger sense of mutual respon sibility between welfare recipients and the government, establish more effective education and work programs, and find new ways of sustaining strong families. But their proposals differ sharply on the allocation of responsibilities between federal and state governments. The Reagan administration's analysis of welfare problems concludes that "our centralized welfare system contribute^] significantly to the persistence of poverty in America." Because the administration believes that no one ? least of all the federal government ? knows the solutions to the nation's complicated poverty problem, it recommends "a program of widespread, long-term experi ments in welfare policy through state-sponsored and community-based demon stration projects. Congress should seek . . . legislation that would waive federal welfare rules in order to allow states and communities to experiment."2 If the Reagan administration believes more decentralization is necessary, other reformers are not convinced. While agreeing that states need some flexibility, the National Governor's Association and the American Public Welfare Association