Paul Ryan just lit a spark in the poverty debate.
A new, randomized study finds that a welfare-to-work program increased mortality.
Drug tests would be a massive waste of resources and would stigmatize the poor.
For stingy countries, public works programs tend to be more effective than just handing out cash. The operative word, of course, is "tend".
The official poverty rate is a relic, but the Census Bureau is starting to correct that. Their better metric paints a bleaker picture.
Obama isn't gutting welfare reform. But a new GOP-backed bill would.
An independent report concludes that courts will probably rule that Sebelius is acting legally if she approves waivers along the lines proposed.
The official measure of poverty for 2011 is out. But more and more experts are dismissing that measure.
We at Wonkblog thought it'd be worthwhile to highlight new videos and check how accurate the candidates and third party groups are being about the policies being debated.
While Mitt Romney mocks the idea of just sending checks to fight poverty, the idea has an impressive intellectual pedigree, including among conservatives.
In sum, Ron Haskins says, "The Republican alarm on welfare reform might be a little exaggerated." Coming from one of the architects of the reform, that should cast some doubt on Romney's attacks.
In 2005, a group of 29 Republican governors sent Senate Majority Leader Bill First a letter arguing for state welfare waivers more expansive than those being issued by the Obama administration.
To hear conservatives tell it, the Obama administration is using its executive power to effectively repeal the Clinton administration's signature welfare reform law. One man's gutting is another man's tweaking, but one thing that's for sure is that the Obama administration is not removing the bill's work requirements at all. He's changing them to allow states more flexibility.