Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton’s Deceptive Defense
National Review Online - The Corner ^ | August 9, 2012 | Robert Rector

Posted on 08/10/2012 2:01:39 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

President Obama has announced his intention to issue waivers that would exempt states from federal welfare-to-work requirements, overturning the foundation of the successful welfare-reform law of 1996. And now former president Bill Clinton, who signed that celebrated measure into law, has rushed to Obama’s defense by confusing his own record.

In proclaiming the authority of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to unilaterally waive federal work standards, Obama clearly is violating the law. After a campaign ad for Mitt Romney attacked Obama for gutting the core work requirements of welfare reform, Clinton issued a statement attempting to defend the legality of Obama’s move.

Clinton’s statement declared that, as president, he “granted waivers from the old law to 44 states to implement welfare to work strategies before the welfare reform passed.”

So Clinton seeks to use waivers he granted in the early 1990s to justify Obama’s effort to use waivers to overturn the 1996 law.

Clinton does not actually lie. He rightly says that the waivers he granted applied to the old law and program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), not to the new law and program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). Although AFDC had permitted HHS to waive provisions relating to work, the TANF reform did not permit such waivers.

Clinton was in the White House for four and a half years after the passage of welfare reform, but he never once suggested he had authority to waive the work standards in the new TANF program — although he had vetoed an earlier version of the bill. It was obvious that no such waiver authority existed.

More important, the old AFDC statute contained numerous provisions blocking states from operating “workfare” programs. The waivers Clinton had granted were to enable states to bypass those anti-work obstacles. The 1996 reform, for the first time, required states to establish workfare programs.

A brief history of welfare reform is useful in understanding this issue. President Reagan sought to establish national work requirements within the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program through legislation such as the Greater Opportunities through Work (GROW) Act. Liberals in Congress blocked this effort.

As a fallback strategy, the Reagan White House promoted waivers in AFDC that would enable states to develop experimental workfare programs. The administrations of George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton continued this strategy. Nonetheless, as the Reagan White House had anticipated, most such waivers were ineffective.

In the early 1990s, however, Wisconsin and Oregon developed strong, conservative workfare programs that dramatically decreased AFDC caseloads while increasing work. These two state programs would serve as models for welfare reformers.

When the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, they returned to the original goal of establishing national work requirements. The legislative objective was to replace welfare with workfare.

The law passed in 1996 did indeed establish such requirements, using the lessons learned from the Wisconsin and Oregon programs. The law did not permit waivers of the federal work requirements since such waivers would have undermined the core purpose of the legislation: to require able-bodied adults to work in exchange for their benefits.

Again, over the next four and a half years President Clinton never attempted to issue waivers of the work requirements. His restrained conduct in this regard is in stark contrast to President Obama’s conduct.

The left wing of the Democratic party adamantly opposed federal work requirements in 1996. It sought to repeal these requirements entirely during the TANF reauthorization debate in 2002. Now, since the Democrats have been unable to abolish workfare legislatively, the Obama administration has overthrown the work provisions through bureaucratic action. It has staged a coup d’état in welfare.

Americans, however, are extremely fond of the concept of requiring able-bodied welfare recipients to work for their taxpayer-funded benefits. Hence the Obama administration’s desperate attempts to blur the difference between Obama’s waivers and Clinton’s.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: jobs; socialism; welfare; work

1 posted on 08/10/2012 2:01:53 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

It’s hard to buy votes with welfare checks when work is required.. even if it’s a lousy 20 hours a month.


2 posted on 08/10/2012 2:29:55 AM PDT by pnut22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Thanks for this posting. Rector’s articles are invaluable for revealing the administration’s defiance of the law and their contempt for the public they are trying to deceive with their shell game.


3 posted on 08/10/2012 2:50:59 AM PDT by buridan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

NOBODY CARES FOLKS,Obama says Romney is Lying so the New York Times, MSNBC,ABC,CNN,CBS,NBC and FOX say Romney is Lying,top it off with Obamas Rating rising,and the facts become Meaningless. Obama Lies and Bill Clinton Swears to it and he is the Most Popular Politician Alive,what else do you need,after all Romney Kills everyones wives,wants Dirty Air,poisoned food,dirty oil and coal and is going to starve everyone who is on welfare to death and take away all that FREE health Care! Sorry I meant cancel everyones Health INSURANCE,there is Nothing to say you are going to get CARE,especially since you wont be able to get a Doctor,but I know that is a Minor Point,leave it to me to Quibble


4 posted on 08/10/2012 3:00:39 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

NOBODY CARES FOLKS,Obama says Romney is Lying so the New York Times, MSNBC,ABC,CNN,CBS,NBC and FOX say Romney is Lying,top it off with Obamas Rating rising,and the facts become Meaningless. Obama Lies and Bill Clinton Swears to it and he is the Most Popular Politician Alive,what else do you need,after all Romney Kills everyones wives,wants Dirty Air,poisoned food,dirty oil and coal and is going to starve everyone who is on welfare to death and take away all that FREE health Care! Sorry I meant cancel everyones Health INSURANCE,there is Nothing to say you are going to get CARE,especially since you wont be able to get a Doctor,but I know that is a Minor Point,leave it to me to Quibble


5 posted on 08/10/2012 3:00:50 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

NOBODY CARES FOLKS,Obama says Romney is Lying so the New York Times, MSNBC,ABC,CNN,CBS,NBC and FOX say Romney is Lying,top it off with Obamas Rating rising,and the facts become Meaningless. Obama Lies and Bill Clinton Swears to it and he is the Most Popular Politician Alive,what else do you need,after all Romney Kills everyones wives,wants Dirty Air,poisoned food,dirty oil and coal and is going to starve everyone who is on welfare to death and take away all that FREE health Care! Sorry I meant cancel everyones Health INSURANCE,there is Nothing to say you are going to get CARE,especially since you wont be able to get a Doctor,but I know that is a Minor Point,leave it to me to Quibble


6 posted on 08/10/2012 3:02:01 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
We know how much Bill Clinton really wants to help Obama....


7 posted on 08/10/2012 3:48:04 AM PDT by Iron Munro ("Jiggle the Handle for Barry!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

I would like for these Clintons to go away for good.


8 posted on 08/10/2012 4:05:00 AM PDT by DooDahhhh (ma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DooDahhhh

The criminal enterprise must be protected at all cost! They may not like each other but they work toward a common goal and share the spoils.


9 posted on 08/10/2012 4:14:12 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (bb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun
The criminal enterprise must be protected at all cost! They may not like each other but they work toward a common goal and share the spoils.

............"The first truth about leftist missionaries, about believing progressives, is that they are liars. But they are not liars in the ordinary way, which is to say by choice. They are liars by necessity—often without even realizing that they are. Because they also lie to themselves. It is the political lie that gives their cause its life.

Why, for example, if you were one of them, would you tell the truth? If you were serious about your role in humanity's vanguard, if you had the knowledge (which others did not), that you were certain would lead them to a better world, why would you tell them a truth that they could not "understand" and that would hold them back?

If others could understand your truth, you would not think of yourself as a "vanguard." You would no longer inhabit the morally charmed world of an elite, whose members alone can see the light and whose mission is to lead the unenlightened towards it. If everybody could see the promised horizon and knew the path to reach it, the future would already have happened and there would be no need for the vanguard of the saints.

That is both the ethical core and psychological heart of what it means to be a part of the left. That is where the gratification comes from. To see yourself as a social redeemer. To feel anointed. In other words: To be progressive is itself the most satisfying narcissism.

That is why it is of little concern to them that their socialist schemes have run aground, burying millions of human beings in their wake. That is why they don't care that their panaceas have caused more human suffering than all the injustices they have ever challenged. That is why they never learn from their "mistakes." That is why the continuance of Them is more important than any truth.

If you were active in the so-called "peace" movement or in the radical wing of the civil rights causes, why would you tell the truth? Why would you tell people that no, you weren't really a "peace activist," except in the sense that you were against America's war. Why would you draw attention to the fact that while you called yourselves "peace activists," you didn't oppose the Communists' war, and were gratified when America's enemies won?

What you were really against was not war at all, but American "imperialism" and American capitalism. What you truly hated was America's democracy, which you knew to be a "sham" because it was controlled by money in the end. That's why you wanted to "Bring the Troops Home," as your slogan said. Because if America's troops came home, America would lose and the Communists would win. And the progressive future would be one step closer.

But you never had the honesty—then or now—to admit that. You told the lie then to maintain your influence and increase your power to do good (as only the Chosen can). And you keep on telling the lie for the same reason.

Why would you admit that, despite your tactical support for civil rights, you weren't really committed to civil rights as Americans understand rights? What you really wanted was to overthrow the very Constitution that guaranteed those rights, based as it is on private property and the individual—both of which you despise.

It is because America is a democracy and the people endorse it, that the left's anti-American, but "progressive" agendas can only be achieved by deceiving the people. This is the cross the left has to bear: The better world is only achievable by lying to the very people they propose to redeem.

..............But Bill Clinton is not like those who worship him, corrupting himself and others for a higher cause. Unlike them, he betrays principles because he has none. He will even betray his country, but without the slightest need to betray it for something else—for an idea, a party, or a cause.* He is a narcissist who sacrifices principle for power because his vision is so filled with himself that he cannot tell the difference.

But the idealists who serve him—the Stephanopoulos's, the Ickes's, the feminists, the progressives and Hillary Clinton—can tell the difference. Their cynicism flows from the very perception they have of right and wrong. They do it for higher ends. They do it for the progressive faith. They do it because they see themselves as having the power to redeem the world from evil. It is that terrifyingly exalted ambition that fuels their spiritual arrogance and justifies their sordid and, if necessary, criminal means.

And that is why they hate conservatives. They hate you because you are killers of their dream. Because you are defenders of a Constitution that thwarts their cause. They hate you because your "reactionary" commitment to individual rights, to a single standard and to a neutral and limited state obstructs their progressive designs. They hate you because you are believers in property and its rights as the cornerstones of prosperity and human freedom; because you do not see the market economy as a mere instrument for acquiring personal wealth and political war chests, to be overcome in the end by bureaucratic schemes.

Conservatives who think progressives are misinformed idealists will forever be blind-sided by the malice of the left—by the cynicism of those who pride themselves on principle, by the viciousness of those who champion sensitivity, by the intolerance of those who call themselves liberal, and by the ruthless disregard for the well-being of the downtrodden by those who preen themselves as social saints.

Conservatives are caught by surprise because they see progressives as merely misguided, when in fact they are fundamentally misdirected. They are the messianists of a religious faith. But it is a false faith and a self-serving religion. Since the redeemed future that justifies their existence and rationalizes their hypocrisy can never be realized, what really motivates progressives is a modern idolatry: their limitless passion for the continuance of Them." ---- Hillary Clinton and the Third Way David Horowitz, June 22, 2000

10 posted on 08/10/2012 4:25:37 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Hey bj of the bentone clan... “I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN... MIZZ LEWINSKY... NOT ONE SINGLE TIME”

Seems you have a problem with the truth billy-jeff.

romney would never do it... but LLS would... on a major ad buy too!

LLS


11 posted on 08/10/2012 4:29:10 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Don't Tread On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer

Your are right—you are right again—and again.


12 posted on 08/10/2012 5:17:23 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer

You are right—you are right again—and again.


13 posted on 08/10/2012 5:17:35 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The first version of welfare reform allowed the States to set their own criteria for what constituted “work”. The Democratic States fudged and did not enforce the work requirement. Republicans became quite unhappy.

So the law was rewritten by the Republicans; quite fierce negotiaions occurred between the Republicans and Clinton’s people, and the Republicans agreed only when the laguage was absolutely air tight - “work” meant “work”, nothing else - not training, not rehabilitation, not community service, it meant WORK!

Now Obama’s lawyers claim they have the right to accept any experimental welfare program submitted by the States which relaxes the work requirement.


14 posted on 08/10/2012 5:18:46 PM PDT by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

Honor among thieves.


15 posted on 08/10/2012 5:39:19 PM PDT by Aquamarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Bump.


16 posted on 08/10/2012 6:13:00 PM PDT by Track9 (Ego undermines moral courage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson