The 1996 welfare reform helped move people from dependency to work. We need to do that again.
…America’s safety net is badly broken. It often punishes families who make progress toward financial stability. Parents who work more hours or increase their salaries can lose more in benefits than they gain in income. In Illinois, a family earning an additional $1,000, at a certain threshold, loses more than $25,000 in net resources. Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found that a hypothetical single parent in the District of Columbia gains nothing financially as earnings rise from $11,000 to $65,000. When these “benefit cliffs” punish parents for earning more or getting married, they weaken the foundations of self-sufficiency and help transmit poverty from one generation to the next.
Despite federal welfare spending reaching $1.6 trillion annually—1 of every 5 dollars in the $7.4 trillion federal budget—the dozens of disconnected programs remain a web. Families must navigate these complex programs with conflicting eligibility and reporting requirements for food, cash, health, child care and energy assistance. The result is a wasteful, siloed system that penalizes families for taking steps toward independence.
UBI doesn’t solve any of this and creates another benefit cliff. Rather than reforming the safety net that discourages work and marriage, UBI would make unconditional assistance a permanent feature.
UBI would also be enormously expensive. … Providing every adult $10,000 annually would cost roughly $2.5 trillion a year.
Work is more than income—it’s a source of meaning, and it is central to family well-being. When parents don’t work and families are dependent on the safety net, they face higher rates of intergenerational poverty, worse physical and mental health, and shorter life expectancies. When parents gain employment, their well-being improves and their children see better health, behavioral and education outcomes.