Obama and Romney wrangle over welfare policy

By Eric Johnson
August 13, 2012

The Obama administration’s July change to a 1996 bipartisan welfare-to-work law has devolved into a mudslinging contest on the campaign trail.

In a 30-second television advertisement released on Monday, Mitt Romney’s campaign asserted that President Obama “has a long history of opposing work for welfare.” Romney initially launched the welfare attack in Obama’s home state of Illinois last week in a coordinated stump speech and television ad accusing the president of loosening work requirements built into the law, which proponents say moved millions off of welfare.

The plan, put forth by the Health and Human Services Department, allows states to seek waivers from the work requirements baked into the law. The states need to prove the success of their models by moving at least 20 percent more people off of welfare to work or they lose their waivers.

The Obama campaign responded last week with a 30-second television spot – “Blatant” – denying Romney’s claim that the waivers end the welfare law’s work requirements. That ad was set to air in seven hotly contested states, the campaign said, including Iowa, where Obama kicked-off a three-day bus tour on Monday, and was timed to run in states where Romney and Ryan are campaigning — Florida and Iowa, respectively.

Deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter, in a conference call with reporters, harshly condemned the Romney campaign’s attack, the latest in a campaign season marked by out-of-context attack lines.

“It is pretty clear that the ad that the Romney-Ryan campaign is running right now, that they are spending millions of dollars to put on the air, that Mitt Romney personally signed off on, is a complete and utter lie,” Cutter said after reading quotes from then-fellow state lawmakers praising Obama’s bi-partisan nature and his commitment to welfare reform. “So if they want to bring the campaigns out of the mud, I think they need to look to home first. They are the ones spending money on something that is just simply not true.”

Photo credit: YouTube/Obama for America

6 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Romney is copying Bush and Carl Rove– telling huge lies which grab headlines. Unfortunately, most voters do not bother to get the facts. Questions? Look it up at factcheck.org

Posted by ysoemitegal | Report as abusive

Cutter is just flat out lying again, but what else is new with her, her cronies, Obama, and 90% of the media.

Like amnesty for illegals, why do you think BO is using executive order again to amend the Welfare Reform without going through Congress? Answer: because he knew it would never pass because he is giving states the flexibility to redefine “work.” Read below:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/ 2012/08/08/obama-guts-welfare-reform-cnn -wields-liberal-talking-points-say-other wis

Posted by RossPerot | Report as abusive

Obama has increased food stamp recipients by the millions – his welfare policy is clear – he wants you on it! Romney however, would like you and the 14 million people who are still unemployed 4 years later to have jobs – now which option would you like? Extended welfare programs that include you and your family – or jobs? I think everyone would like to have a secure job with a secure income and a secure future. Obama’s policy looses!

Posted by justinolcb | Report as abusive

justinolcb

1) Romney does not and has not presented a specific plan to create jobs. In fact, he cannot even lie straight. He first said he created 1,000 jobs when he headed Bain. Then, he said that he created 100,000 jobs when he headed Bain. Now, he has backed away from a specific number.

2) Four years later, as you pointed out. The country is growing economically, from the Great Recession. Job growth is steady, but can be much better. Through his action, Obama saved auto worker’s job instead of putting them out of work and having them go on food stamp. Remember, Romney said let Detroit go under which would have resulted in auto workers going on food stamps. So do you still stand by your statement Obama wants Americans on food stamps.

3) Romney lied, but what else is new. Romney, as Gov. of MA, requested for a waiver, like 5 other Republican Govs., under the same Welfare to Work program. Obama’s administration is granting the waivers for those states that help increase working opportunities. Next time get your facts straight. Don’t be troll like the other fools who are willing to follow and lie like Mitt.

Posted by PortlandME | Report as abusive

Why is Mitt Romney so scared to answer tough questions on welfare, his taxes, his foreign bank accounts, etc.?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O-WithWi T0

Could it be, that he has a lot to hide from?

Posted by mjp1958 | Report as abusive

Federalization of private business is socialism, if not communism – even Anglia Merkel told Mr Obama not to federalize the worlds largest auto makers which by the way Chrysler only paid 1/3 of the taxpayer’s money back because the value of the stock had devalued – GM has attempted to pay back the government and they are not allowed to. To date they have only paid 1/4 of their bail out and at best they will only pay back 1/2 of the funds Mr Obama gave them. Now ask yourself the question you asked me, was it really worth it? Do you realize millions of middle class people lost their life savings and pension investments because of the way they were federalized? Hugo Chavez said he and Fidel Castro seemed “right” compared to Obama’s leftist move federalizing the auto makers. Track records speak louder than campaign promises and Mr Obama’s track record is obvious.

Posted by justinolcb | Report as abusive