Are Work Requirements Good or Bad?

by Corey Burres | Jun 1, 2023

Are Work Requirements Good or Bad?

Key Points

The arguments around work requirements ignore the purpose of how our safety net services should work.
The public, in general, agree with the argument for work requirements because they see the system as a temporary solution.
We must reform the system so that we move people into opportunity and thriving.

As the federal government debates the debt ceiling and attempts to bring spending under control, one recurring topic is work requirements for adults on government benefits and safety net services. The argument is that implementing work requirements will encourage more people to leave welfare programs, which in turn would decrease spending on one of the biggest expenses in the federal budget.

However, the debate about work requirements should not, in my opinion, be connected to fiscal accountability. Instead, it should be linked to the central purpose of these services and the people needing them.

A look at work requirements

To understand these challenges we need to look at the differing opinions on work requirements. On one side you hear the argument that not requiring work for benefits like SNAP and Medicaid is a disincentive to work for those on benefits. In other words, people are staying on benefits longer than necessary because there is no benefit to getting off, and in many cases, it is more costly to get off.

On the other side, the argument requiring work is simply a way to save money which ultimately hurts the poor. The argument is people in need of food support and healthcare will not be able to work and thus will be forced off of services without work.

Both of these arguments ignore the full experience of those on safety net services. Therefore, I want to challenge us to set aside political talking points and have a real discussion on the issue. These arguments are fraught with finger-pointing and people assigning motivations to each other. The discussion around work requirements is important because it challenges us to ask, “What is the purpose of our welfare system?”

With The Alliance for Opportunity, we are crafting policies that will create a clear path to get off safety net services and into opportunity in Georgia.

Work requirements aren’t a bad idea

At the Georgia Center for Opportunity, we generally agree with the idea of work requirements, but not for the reasons political pundits throw around. We are not trying to “weed out bad actors” or trying to reduce government expenditures. Those outcomes may come to pass but they cannot and should not be the intent of such measures.

While there is a politicized debate currently raging, the idea of requiring work to continue to receive benefits is not new. FDR’s New Deal, the framework for our current safety net system, pushed for a system that helped those unable to work like children or disabled individuals. The expansion of such a system to cover the unemployed came later in the process and was designed to be a stopgap between employment.

As the system expanded even further, it became apparent the support should include systems to get people back into work—this led to job training and education programs.

That is where we are today and ultimately how we should be looking at the safety net system for those able to work. The system must be designed to ask, “How can we help you get back on your feet and be self-sustainable?” Not because you are only valuable if you work, but because you are a valuable member of society. This view of membership is probably why work requirements are very popular among the US population. We value and understand the importance of work.

The research on the value of work is expansive. It leads to positive outcomes for families, improved personal mental health, and deeper community value. It is what we should want for people. It is what we should build our services to provide people, not a paycheck but an opportunity.

The arguments against work requirements

The issue becomes more complex when you recognize the valid arguments against work requirements. One of these is that work requirements don’t increase work rates—they simply cut people off of needed services.

The argument is that these requirements add another stress level to people just trying to survive. This creates yet another hurdle for those already struggling to navigate a complex process. The result is people find a different means to survive or they simply give up. Obviously, no one wants to add to people’s burdens.

Rather than arguing against work requirements, these challenges highlight the flaws in our current system. The system is poorly designed and does not lead to the outcomes we want for people.

Work requirements are a good policy in a bad system

Policymakers are notoriously inept when it comes to policy reforms. Half-measures have resulted in a system that is not focused on outcomes. If the system were structured to reduce complexity and alleviate stress for those seeking job support, then a work requirement could be the positive encouragement it should be.

This is one reason we are working with other state think tanks on a One Door Model that would transform our safety net services and create a clear, supportive, and accessible path to work.

These types of policies are critical to ensure that we are helping those in need. They are also critical to ensure that we deliver dignity and hope as an outcome.

Schedule An Interview

About The Author

Corey Burres

VP of Communication and Marketing

Corey Burres is the director the award-winning education documentary Flunked. He served as a consultant with many state think tanks around the country to help them utilize marketing and story telling to improve public policy. He is active in the foster care community and working to help build a better community around him.

Businesses fleeing cities over crime is a warning sign we can’t ignore

by Corey Burres | May 22, 2023

Businesses fleeing cities over crime is a warning sign we can’t ignore

Key Points

Crime is causing businesses to flee communities already experiencing a lack of opportunity.
As businesses flee high-crime areas, there is a negative impact on the price and availability of goods in underserved communities
Communities will see healthcare and community health impacts from this loss of retailers.

We keep hearing about it: Businesses and retailers fleeing downtown areas—or entire city communities—due to violence, theft, and crime. It happened in Portland, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, but it should be a warning to other cities around the country.

The exodus of companies due to crime creates a downward spiral for communities already experiencing a lack of opportunity.

LIMITED ACCESS AND HIGHER PRICES

When businesses flee a community they take convenience, jobs, and access to goods. The result is a market crisis where demand stays steady while limited access increases the price of goods and incomes stagnate or decrease.

The inability to access goods at reasonable prices is a direct response to the loss of competition. No longer are you able to buy essentials at market value but instead you pay premium prices as supply is constrained. This is no different than what we experienced nationally over the past few years as supply constraints pushed the price of gas, milk, and other essentials higher.

This limitation of access to transportation, clothing, and food will have consequences in other areas of community health and opportunity.

THE IMPACT ON HEALTHY FOOD OPTIONS

Take the limited access to food issue. We know that lack of healthy food options in underserved communities is an ongoing problem. Cheaper food options, which are “shelf-stable,” tend to be less healthy. This creates a downward trend of poorer health outcomes like obesity resulting in a rise in healthcare costs.

Communities with a lack of affordable healthy food options get stuck in a cycle where they are less healthy, less likely to work, and more dependent on temporary, less-reliable healthcare. When we see stores closing or moving out of a community due to violence, we see smaller businesses that cannot afford to absorb the costs of throwing out healthier foods. The result is that these businesses tend to stock less perishable and more unhealthy items on their shelves.

This means that these communities become more dependent on systems and services to survive long term. Our safety-net programs are designed to be temporary systems that catch people (or even communities) at the point of tragedy to help them get back on their feet. But when opportunity flees, these individuals are left hopeless, looking for what’s next. They become trapped in their circumstance.

“…communities become more dependent on systems and services to survive long term.”

CRIME IS THE TRUE THIEF

Crime and the unwillingness to address crime robs communities of value. It makes these communities into societal pariahs.

Not only are these communities unable to access adequate goods, they are unable to find local jobs and services. When companies flee an area, they take hundreds of entry to mid-level jobs. In a community that is reliant on these types of job opportunities, it once again means they have no path out of their current situation.

In his study of ethics, Immanuel Kant asserted that “if you steal from him, you steal from yourself.” It’s a philosophical acknowledgment that crime steals from the entire community. It takes livelihood, property, and security away from everyone in the community including the perpetrator because it destabilizes.

While it’s hard for some to have sympathy for a mega-corporation needing to close a store, it is a warning sign to the health of that community. Vibrant communities, which we often speak of here at the Georgia Center for Opportunity, are ones that attract opportunities. They are communities so lively that everyone, even mega-corporations, wants to be a part of them. As we begin to see these companies leave a community it catches headlines, but the real-world impact is much more than a temporary blip in our newsfeed.

We must address crime in communities to keep opportunity open to all.

Contact Us

FAMILY | EDUCATION | WORK

333 Research Court, Suite 210, Peachtree Corners, GA 30092. | Phone: 770-242-0001

Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

© Georgia Center for Opportunity

National Police Week: Community Benefits of a Strong Police Force

by Rebecca Primis | May 18, 2023

2023 police week, national police week, police, police week, men in blue

National Police Week: Community Benefits of a Strong Police Force

Key Points

Each May, National Police Week honors America’s law enforcement members, especially those who have fallen in the line of duty.
Lower crime and violence is a proven community benefit of having more police.
Investing in local police forces is a practical way to reduce violence in areas like Atlanta and Columbus.

Every May, a week is designated as National Police Week to honor America’s law enforcement members, especially those officers who sacrificed their lives while serving their communities. Along with remembering these local heroes, Police Week is an opportunity to reflect on the role law enforcement has in building vibrant communities where everyone can achieve their potential.

The Community Benefit of More Police: Less Crime.

In 2020, 21% of U.S. residents had contact with the police, with most interactions relating to traffic stops or accidents, reporting of crimes, or seeking help with non-crime emergencies. Behind all of these interactions is a larger societal benefit of well-staffed, well-managed police forces: less violence.

Josh Crawford, GCO’s Director of Criminal Justice, notes: “Police are the element of the criminal justice system most visible to the public and the arm with which citizens are most likely to interact.”

That presence is key to discouraging crime and boosting people’s confidence in the safety of their communities. Over the past couple of decades, research has affirmed what many intuitively know—that having more police helps lower crime and violence.

2002: Criminologists from the University of Alabama at Birmingham found that “a 10 percent increase in police levels lowered crime rates by 1.4 percent over time.”
2004: Economist Steven D. Levitt examined data from 122 cities around the U.S. from 1975 to 1995 and found that increased police numbers brought down violent crime by 12 percent and property crime by eight percent.
2015: A Brennan Center for Justice report found that “increases in the number of police officers had a modest, downward effect on crime in the 1990s, likely between 0 and 10 percent.”
2018: A 2018 study looked at police and crime data from 1960 through 2010 and concluded that every $1 spent on policing generates about $1.63 in social benefits, mostly through reductions in homicides.

Georgia’s Communities Have a Police Shortage Problem

Georgia is one of many states grappling with a shortage of police officers. Areas like Atlanta and Columbus in particular have struggled to recruit and retain enough officers, and communities are feeling the strain as violence rises and wait times increase for emergency responses.

According to the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), police shortages have had three major drivers:

Law enforcement agencies can’t hire enough officers. An April 2023 survey of police agencies found that “police agencies are losing officers faster than they can hire new ones.” The talent pool is also shrinking. Agencies have reported a noticeable decrease in the number of applicants for open positions.
Officers are leaving before retirement age. Based on exit interview data available from police agencies, the top reason officers resign is to take another job in law enforcement. The second highest reason is to switch their career path altogether.
More officers are approaching retirement. According to PERF’s survey data, approximately a quarter of U.S. police officers have reached retirement age or will be eligible to retire within the next three to five years.

Investing in Local Police Is Necessary for Growing Vibrant, Low-Crime Communities

According to Crawford, defunding or otherwise redirecting money away from local police is not the answer.

“Proponents of ‘defund the police’ are quick to point to the fact that the money taken from police agencies would be reallocated to a myriad of social programs and direct investment in underserved communities,” said Crawford. “Worthy as these individual programs and investments may be, there is no social program that can replicate the essential functions of policing.”

In 1995 and again in 2009, federal grants from the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) helped state and local law enforcement agencies address officer recruitment and retention challenges. The track record of this funding was strong: Police hires increased, and crime went down. Various research on COPS funding suggests another grant round could help police agencies address today’s staffing shortages — as long as the funding is tied to increasing full-time, sworn officers within the specific departments receiving the grants.

Whether it’s at the federal level or efforts closer to home, we should direct resources to what we know serves our neighborhoods best. Communities benefit when they have more officers with more hours of better training, not fewer officers with less training.

Georgia parents deserve full transparency from state school systems

by David Bass | May 16, 2023

College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) metrics, Georgia opt out, reporting, learning loss, grading system for schools, Georgia news, ga news

Georgia parents deserve full transparency from state school systems

Key Points

Georgia received a waiver from reporting its College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) metrics, including the A-F grading system for schools.
The CCRPI metrics assess student performance, including comprehension of class content and preparedness for college and the workforce.
GADOE announced its intention to request a permanent waiver from CCRPI grading, raising concerns about transparency and public input.

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many state school systems across the country were waived from receiving a grade from the US Department of Education (DOE) under The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

The unprecedented circumstances brought on by the pandemic created unforeseen educational challenges. Naturally, children who spent time in lockdown, away from school, and relegated to unfamiliar online classes could be expected to fall behind educationally. Like many other states, Georgia received a waiver from reporting its College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) metrics, specifically the A-F grading system for schools that gauge their performance.

But now the state of Georgia has asked to be permanently excused from reporting the A-F grading CCRPI evaluations. The state allowed less than a week for public comment on the proposal, opting not to announce the request via press release. In the past, similar issues have allowed a 30-day window for public comment, at the very least.

With students back in school and educational institutions back to their regular operations, why make this request now? And why the lack of transparency in the process? The exemption from the A-F reporting requirement takes away the public’s ability to easily assess how schools are performing. It’s a knock against real transparency that serves no one but the educational bureaucracy.

The bottom line is that wise school choice depends on parents’ ability to access information about school performance. Without that information, they’re risking their children’s educational opportunities—and maybe even their future.

“The bottom line is that wise school choice depends on parents’ ability to access information about school performance.”

About the CCRPI and temporary COVID waivers

In 2012, the CCRPI was launched. Its purpose was to encourage more transparency in terms of school performance. Parents and the public needed to know more about how their local school systems were performing, and the CCRPI not only provides this information—it also allows parents to compare their child’s current school with others in the area.

In terms of measuring performance, the CCRPI assigns a letter grade of A-F to each school. The scoring system reveals how well students are performing in each school, including how well they comprehend their class content and whether they’re keeping up with their grade level. This score also reveals how well-prepared older students are for college and the workforce.

CCRPI scoring was waived beginning in March of 2020, and schools weren’t required to report data as usual. This waiver continued throughout 2021. However, in 2022, as the nation largely resumed business as usual, the Georgia Department of Education (GADOE) was awarded additional waivers.

Seeking a permanent exemption

GADOE published an announcement on its website on January 25, 2023, informing the public that it intended to ask the DOE for a permanent waiver from CCRPI grading. Although the state collects and aggregates all the required metrics, GADOE now seeks to stop submitting the data completely.

As the ESEA requires each state to create its own school accountability system and report its findings to the DOE, it seems questionable that Georgia would completely extract itself from transparency not only at the state level, but at the federal level, too.

Most alarming was the lack of transparency involved in the process. There was no press release published to announce the potential change. As previously mentioned, what’s even worse is that GADOE allowed for fewer than five business days for members of the public to submit their feedback, rather than the standard 30 days.

Reducing transparency hurts Georgia families

While GADOE attempts to evade school grading, numbers don’t lie. Georgia’s most recent CCRPI scores from 2019 indicate that over 780 schools in Georgia received Ds and Fs. That’s about one-third of the state’s students. GADOE might argue that the proof of school performance lies in the state’s graduation rates, but graduation rates can be manipulated and aren’t a reliable indicator of how well a school performs academically.

Schools that receive Ds and Fs from CCRPI are, by default, not serving their students well. No matter how high their graduation numbers may be, the real proof is in how well (or poorly) they score according to CCRPI academic standards.

There is no compelling case that can be made as to why Georgia’s exemption from CCRPI reporting is an improvement, or how it helps families in our state.

GADOE appears to be skirting the standard process for notifying the public and seeking appropriate input. It’s up to Georgia voters to make their voices heard and demand continued school transparency from its elected officials.

Inflation is becoming worse for Americans on a fixed income

by Erik Randolph | May 10, 2023

Inflation is becoming worse for Americans on a fixed income

Today, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that in April the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose by 0.4%, not seasonally adjusted. Year over year, the CPI has gone up 4.9% in the last 12 months.

The Georgia Center for Opportunity’s (GCO) take: “Not only has the federal government abandoned restoring purchasing power, they do not appear even capable of bringing inflation down to the Federal Reserve’s inflation rate target of 2%,” said Erik Randolph, GCO’s director of research. “Devaluing the dollar means that Americans must have comparable wage inflation just to keep with prices. That’s worse for Americans living on fixed incomes, the working class, and the poor.”

Free the Future Campaign Making an Impact in Columbus

by Kimberly Sawatka | May 4, 2023

second chances, Georgia news, better work Columbus, free the future

Free the Future Campaign Making an Impact in Columbus

Key Points

Free the Future is an initiative of the Mayor of Columbus Georgia’s Commission on Reentry, in partnership with the Urban League of the Chattahoochee Valley.
The Georgia Center for Opportunit y’s BETTER WORK Columbus program director, Kristin Barker, is leading this effort, serving as the chair of the Reentry Commission.
The campaign aims to address existing biases and create a sustainable impact on the health and well-being of the community and its residents.

Breaking the cycle of recidivism is a critical issue in many communities across the United States. The Mayor’s Commission on Reentry in Columbus, Georgia is taking a multi-pronged approach to address this problem, with a mission to prevent recidivism by strengthening cooperation and collaboration among law enforcement agencies, corrections and supervision entities, resource agencies, social service and non-profit organizations, community members, and other private and public stakeholders.

The Georgia Center for Opportunit y’s BETTER WORK Columbus program director, Kristin Barker, is leading this effort, serving as the chair of the Reentry Commission. “We have developed subcommittees to focus on priority areas that will provide the greatest impact for the reentry population in our community,” Kristin explains. “These areas are employment, housing and connectivity of resources.”

One project that recently launched through the employment subcommittee is the FREE THE FUTURE campaign. The initiative is aimed at educating private employers on the value of Second Chance hiring. Many people who exit incarceration after serving their time are eager to start afresh, but they face significant challenges in finding suitable housing and jobs that pay a livable wage. Often, they have outstanding fines and fees that they are unable to pay without a steady income. The inability to find good employment quickly leads to a cycle of recidivism, which is hard to break.

The mission of BETTER WORK is to support the underserved in our communities and promote their long-term success. The FREE THE FUTURE campaign in Columbus is a key part of this effort, designed to challenge false narratives that hold people back from making positive life changes. The campaign aims to address existing biases and create a sustainable impact on the health and well-being of the community and its residents.

The FREE THE FUTURE campaign is easily accessible through Facebook, Instagram, and its website. Monthly meetings of the Mayor’s Commission on Reentry are open to the public, and many community organizations attend these meetings to become more educated and engaged with reentry in Muscogee County.

FREE THE FUTURE campaign is aimed at educating private employers on the value of Second Chance hiring.

Key partners in this initiative include BETTER WORK Columbus, Urban League of the River Valley, United Way of the Chattahoochee Valley – Home for Good, SafeHouse Ministries, Southern Center for Human Rights, Muscogee County Sheriff’s Department, Georgia Department of Corrections, Department of Community Supervision, and NewLife-Second Chance Outreach.

To learn more about this campaign, click here, or access the information via Facebook and Instagram. Monthly meetings of the Mayor’s Commission on Reentry are open to the public, and many community organizations attend these meetings to become more educated and engaged with reentry in Muscogee County.