Indiana's bureaucracy does a poor job of serving the state's
welfare recipients. The system relies on outdated, error-prone
processes that leave caseworkers little time to actually help their
clients. The system also massively inconveniences aid recipients by
forcing them to take time off work to apply for benefits in
person.
To better serve welfare recipients, Indiana has modernized the
eligibility process by contracting out the paperwork and allowing
welfare recipients to apply for benefits online and over the phone.
The modernization, which will transfer 1,500 jobs from the state
government to the private sector, has attracted intense union
opposition. Congress is now considering legislation that would
prevent states from contracting out any portion of the Food Stamp
Program. This restriction would benefit politically-connected
government unions at the expense of welfare recipients. Congress
should remove this provision from the legislation. If it does not,
President Bush should veto the bill.
Broken Welfare Bureaucracy
When Indiana residents apply to welfare programs such as
Medicaid, Food Stamps, or Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF),
they encounter a complex bureaucratic system. Caseworkers use paper
and manual processes to collect data on applicants and verify their
eligibility, spending more time on paperwork than on using their
experience and training to help clients.[1]
Indiana's application procedures further burden welfare
applicants. To apply for welfare or to re-verify eligibility,
recipients must meet their caseworker in person during work hours
(8:00 a.m.-4:30 p.m.).[2] Applicants must also visit multiple offices
on different days to apply for aid from different programs, often
having to present the same documents.[3]
The system suffers from high error rates. Caseworkers commit
errors in 12 percent of Food Stamp and 26 percent of TANF
applications-either denying benefits to an applicant who should
have received them, or giving handouts to residents who did not
qualify for them.[4] The bureaucracy has also failed to make
welfare recipients less dependent on government aid. Since the
passage of the landmark 1996 welfare reform bill, Indiana has had
the smallest reduction in welfare rolls of any state.[5] Most
welfare recipients are frustrated by the program. Two-thirds report
below-average service, while 48 percent say they have difficulty
contacting a caseworker.[6] The bureaucracy has failed Indiana's most
disadvantaged residents.
Modernizing to Improve Services
The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration has
undertaken a modernization project to fix these problems. The new
system will allow applicants to apply at any time of day, during
weekends, either over the phone or online. It will also allow
clients to apply for all aid programs at one office. Records will
be kept electronically, and the system will place greater emphasis
on moving clients to self-sufficiency.[7]
Indiana is contracting with IBM to design a more convenient
system that will reduce error rates. Since processing paperwork is
not a core government function, but one which IBM excels at, the
company can handle the modernization more efficiently than if the
state tried to do it on its own. The IBM contract will both improve
service for recipients and save Indiana taxpayers $500 million
dollars over the next ten years.[8]
Putting Special Interests First
The American Federation of State and County Municipal Employees
wants to stop the modernization effort, and not just because of an
ideological opposition to contracting out government services. The
contract will transfer 1,500 jobs from the state government to the
private sector. State caseworkers will be responsible for making
eligibility decisions, but private sector workers would handle data
collection and processing. This would mean fewer potential
dues-paying members should a future governor force state employees
to unionize.[9] In other words, welfare modernization helps
vulnerable and low-income residents, but potentially reduces union
membership.
Unfortunately, unions have far more political clout than welfare
recipients. Organized labor spent more than $100 million to help
elect the current Democratic Congress. In legislation to
reauthorize the Food Stamp Program, they have lobbied for the
inclusion of a provision that would bar private sector workers from
representing a state government in communications with a food stamp
applicant. Sec. 952 of H.R. 2401 states that "only State employees
… shall represent the State agency in any communications
with a prospective applicant, applicant, or recipient household."
Since Indiana administers Food Stamps, TANF, and Medicaid in
parallel, the provision would prevent Indiana from carrying out its
welfare modernization plan.
Conclusion
Indiana's welfare bureaucracy is expensive, outdated,
error-ridden, and inconvenient. Contracting out data processing
will allow social workers to focus on moving clients toward
self-sufficiency. Congress should not stop Indiana, or any other
state, from reaping the benefits of private contracting. If
Congress includes Sec. 952 in the final version of H.R. 2401,
President Bush should veto the measure.
James
Sherk is Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy for the
Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.
[9]Gov.
Daniels ended collective bargaining with state employees via an
executive order shortly after he took office. The three previous
Democratic Governors required many state employees to belong to a
public sector union and pay substantial union dues as a condition
of employment.