Link to original article. (http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/romney-releases-second-welfare-attack-ad?ref=fpb)

"Mitt Romney released an ad last week that falsely claimed President Obama had gutted the work requirement in welfare. On Monday, the Romney campaign and the RNC released their second ad on the issue, claiming again that Obama gutted the 1996 welfare law by “quietly end[ing] work requirements for welfare.”

Called “Long History,” the narrator in the ad says Obama has a history of opposing “work for welfare,” and plays a clip of then state-Senator Barack Obama saying, “I Was Not A Huge Supporter Of The Federal Plan That Was Signed In 1996.” The ad ends with Romney promising to return the work requirement to welfare."

from the guy that wrote the legislation ;


Heritage’s Robert Rector defends assertion that Obama gutted welfare reform (http://www.therightscoop.com/heritages-robert-rector-defends-assertion-that-obama-gutted-welfare-reform/)


Rush played a few clips today from a discussion on PBS News Hour last night where Heritage’s Robert Rector, who wrote most of the work requirement provisions in the current welfare reform law, defended his assertion that Obama gutted the welfare reform law and debated it with Peter Edelman, a law professor who opposed the welfare reform law with such vigor that in 1996 he resigned in protest from the Clinton administration. It’s a very enlightening debate and I’ve provided both the full PBS News Hour interview as well as Rush’s full segment on it. You can listen to one or the other, or both.

But in short, Rector is a man with facts and figures and explains exactly why and how Obama gutted the welfare reform bill and how he intends to implement his own measures. I do want to highlight a portion of the PBS News Hour that I think is important:

JUDY WOODRUFF: In other words, giving — as I understand, it’s giving states more flexibility to figure out ways to get people to work.

ROBERT RECTOR: It’s allowing states to be exempted from the participation rates entirely. They say that they will waive or do away with all of Section 407. That’s the entire work requirement in the bill. Every aspect, every clause, every phrase is now invalid. It no longer is binding. It’s gone.

PETER EDELMAN: That’s not true.

ROBERT RECTOR: It’s absolutely true.

And they’re going to replace it with something that they will design unilaterally, with no input from Congress, and that will be something that will be far more lenient than the existing law. The left wing of the Democratic Party has opposed this law from the beginning.

Half the Democratic Party voted against it in ’96. They attempted to repeal it in 2002. They were unable. They have now used a bureaucratic tactic to wipe it out.

1998 Video supports Romney claim that Obama ‘quietly gutted’ welfare reform (http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/08/07/1998-video-supports-romney-claim-that-obama-quietly-gutted-welfare-reform/)


The White House has come out swinging at a Romney campaign ad that states that the Obama administration has “quietly gutted” welfare reform. The reference is to a July 12 memo from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) granting states waivers against enforcing certain provisions of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

As explained in a news release by the Senate Finance Committee, the effect of the HHS directive was to restore 2005 definitions of “federal work activity” that had been broadened to include bed rest, personal care activities, massage, motivational reading, smoking cessation, and participating in parent teacher meetings. “With unemployment remaining stuck over 8 percent,” the Finance Committee notes, “most Americans would not consider bed rest, smoking cessation classes and journaling as ‘work.’”

Which is precisely the point the Romney campaign was making in its ad, which concluded with the line “Mitt Romney will restore the work requirement because it works.”

Cellarboy is on a roll these days with his pro-Romney posts.

I wonder what caused such a sudden 180-degree change in his political ideology?

Cellarboy is on a roll these days with his pro-Romney posts.

I wonder what caused such a sudden 180-degree change in his political ideology?

Maybe posting useless drivel is considered 'work' under the new rules?? :coffee:

Maybe posting useless drivel is considered 'work' under the new rules?? :coffee:

:snort: