Washington State's Anti-Sanction Law
The following is a copy of House Bill 1089, passed by the Washington State legislature in March 1997. It's the new replacement of RCW (revised code of Washington)74.12.420, which was repealed after the passage of federal welfare reform. It's intention is to protect long term welfare recipients from the harm of economic sanctions.
RCW 74. 12.420 which states: Sec. 26. RCW 74.12.420 and 1994 c 299 s 9 are each amended to read as follows: The legislature recognizes that long-term recipients of (({- aid to families with dependent children -})) {+ temporary assistance for needy families +} may require a period of several years to attain economic self-sufficiency. To provide incentives for long-term recipients to leave public assistance and accept paid employment, the legislature finds that less punitive and onerous sanctions than those required by the federal government are appropriate. The legislature finds that a ten percent reduction in grants for long-term recipients that may be replaced through earned income is a more positive approach than sanctions required by the federal government for long-term recipients who fail to comply with requirements of the job opportunities and basic skills program. A long-term recipient shall not be subject to two simultaneous sanctions for failure to comply with the participation requirements of the job opportunities and basic skills program and for exceeding the length of stay provisions of this section. (1) After forty-eight monthly benefit payments in a sixty-month period, and after each additional twelve monthly benefit payments, the (({- aid to families with dependent children -})) {+ temporary assistance for needy families +} monthly benefit payment shall be reduced by ten percent of the payment standard, except that after forty-eight monthly payments in a sixty-month period, full monthly benefit payments may be made if: (a) The person is incapacitated or is needed in the home to care for a member of the household who is incapacitated; (b) The person is needed in the home to care for a child who is under three years of age; (c) There are no adults in the assistance unit; (d) The person is cooperating in the development and implementation of an employability plan while receiving (({- aid to families with dependent children -})) {+ temporary assistance for needy families +} and no present full-time, part-time, or unpaid work experience job is offered; or (e) During a month in which a grant reduction would be imposed under this section, the person is participating in an unpaid work experience program. (2) For purposes of determining the amount of the food stamp benefit for recipients subject to benefit reductions provided for in subsection (1) of this section, countable income from the (({- aid to families with dependent children -})) {+ temporary assistance for needy families +} program shall be set at the payment standard. (3) For purposes of determining monthly benefit payments for two- parent (({- aid to families with dependent children -})) {+ temporary assistance for needy families +} households, the length of stay criterion will be applied to the parent with the longer history of public assistance receipt.
For those of you who don't have patience for legal writing, this law states that clients who have been on welfare for a long time and who refuse to participate in the "Workfirst" (or whatever your state calls it) should not be sanctioned more than 10% of their monthly grant. This law also speaks of sympathy towards long term clients and of the understanding of the hardships involved in leaving welfare for such people.
Certain judges here in Washington state refuse to consider this law, even when it's cited in their courtroom under oath. Such people favor harmful sanctions against poor families and their children instead. If you want to know who they are, then Read On...
