View Single Post
Old 08-10-2012, 04:01 PM   #9
gZAhTyWY

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
434
Senior Member
Default
well as far as I am concerned...they should keep that law intact the way it was when Clinton signed it into law.
The question is, why would you want to relax work requirements for welfare recipients? Well its no surprise because
Barack Obama in 1996 as a state senator was opposed to the work requirements. Even after President Bill Clinton agreed to sign the welfare reform bill,
half the Democrats in the House, 101 members, voted no.




Sarcasm, not a strong point.


If you don't believe these administrative changes are a more effective way to make sure welfare-to-work actually puts more people back to work, just listen to Governor Mitt Romney.

Not Presidential candidate Mitt Romney who now says he opposes it, but Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusettes (hey these two guys should meet and talk sometime) who in 2005 was the second signature of this letter from Republican governors asking for exactly this kind of flexibility in welfare-to-work rules.

Second signature, check it out.
http://democrats.waysandmeans.house....ney_Letter.pdf

When is Mitt going to learn to stop attacking Obama positions Romney himself very publically backed just a few years ago? This is kind of turning into a pattern.
gZAhTyWY is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity