Multiple Welfare Exits and Recidivism: Understanding Culture of Poverty, Local Labor Market /Area Characteristics, Job Quality and Welfare Reform

Statement of the Research problem Many states began to reduce welfare caseloads and employment increased because of current welfare-to-work programs based on a new policy, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) which emphasized quick job entries, penalties for non-compliance with work mandates and time limits on benefits. This strategy forced one to take any job, even low paying and/or part time jobs in order to be eligible for welfare. In reality, jobs held by welfare leavers were restricted to low-paying, part-time jobs without fringe benefits. Despite a considerable increase in work effort, people taking these jobs had difficulty increasing their earnings or graduating to other high-paying, benefited positions. Therefore, the reduction of welfare caseloads by taking any possible jobs is not always combined with the improvement of family well-being and the reduction of welfare recidivism. Also, the most important determinant for welfare exit is not just job placement, but maintenance of employment in settings that offer increased job quality (specifically: working hours, wages and fringe benefits), ultimately resulting in more steady employment. Looking specifically at job quality at the time of welfare exits and exploring the impact of job quality on welfare recidivism will contribute to a better understanding of the underlying premise of current welfare reform, which assumes that getting a job will eventually move a person to a higher paying job and a permanent welfare exit. This type of study would measure the true success of these policies as applied in the real world. Another issue related with welfare exits is that the effects of current welfare reforms on the reduction of welfare caseloads has focused on the matter of welfare policy versus economic conditions (Bartik & Eberts, 1999; Th