In tracking New York City’s welfare rolls, one cannot help but notice the sharp increase in recipients over the past five months—a divergence from the decline of the past few years. In April 2004, the total number of children and adults living on government assistance was 438,062. This is 2 percent higher than November 2003, and 5 percent higher than February of that same year when welfare rolls hit a record low of 418,770.
Still, a little over 400,000 is nowhere near the 1.1 million recipients at the beginning of 1995, comprising nearly one in seven city residents. Nevertheless, why has the welfare roll grown precisely at the moment when city authorities tell us that the city—albeit slowly—is climbing out of the recession?
There are differing points of view on this. Some experts say that the types of jobs resulting from the economic upturn are those that require experience or proper qualifications. Others blame Mayor Bloomberg, who, they believe, has the eased rules governing welfare eligibility. They believe that he has not required welfare beneficiaries, who attend educational classes or technical job training courses, to work off their assistance. The mayor’s critics point to the fact that he has strayed from the stern policies of his predecessor. It is well-known that former Mayor Giuliani demanded that the Human Resources Administration (HRA) force all welfare recipients to work in some way in order to receive assistance.
Truthfully, Bloomberg’s softened approach deserves more respect than Giuliani’s brute rule which did not distinguish between a chronic parasite and a 20-year-old college student who is trying to finish school as quickly as possible and begin working. Every situation demands common sense and Rudy often failed to use it.
In any case, the recent welfare statistics could spell bad news for Bloomberg, as his electoral base is more than skeptical about the issue of welfare. The fact that the mayor has already held a meeting on the issue speaks to the gravity of the situation.
A thorough examination of this, however, shows that Bloomberg has in fact maintained the direction of his predecessor. Since January 2002, when he came into power, the number of welfare recipients dropped by 5 percent. City Hall leaders say that more than half of those not working the mandated requirements are not alcoholics or drug addicts, but people suffering from serious or chronic illnesses who are unable to participate in the Workfare Program. In the words of Patricia Smith, the first deputy commissioner of the NYC HRA, her agency does not seek to eliminate people from welfare rolls or deny them benefits at any cost. She believes that, “We must not govern with emotions but rather with common sense.”
We agree that this humane approach is better than the “decrees” which the former mayor swore to uphold to “deal with this [welfare] once and for all.” In social matters that affect people’s lives, prosecutorial thinking is not always best.
