Minimum wage hike could stall welfare reform, hurt poor
The real news in President Clinton's recent comments on welfare reform is what he did not say ("Welfare rolls reduced sharply," Aug.4).
Mr. Clinton claimed credit for the good news -- that 35 percent of welfare recipients are meeting work requirements. But he failed to mention the bad news -- that the federal government will soon require states to place at least 50 percent of welfare recipients in jobs.
And he didn't mention a huge new barrier for those seeking work, a looming increase in the federal minimum wage.
State governments, welfare recipient and employers are trying to make welfare reform work. By pushing an increase in the minimum wage, Mr. Clinton is undermining efforts to employ the least skilled.
Research from the University of Wisconsin shows that when the minimum wage goes up, welfare recipients stay on the dole up to 44 percent longer. Many cannot compete for higher-paying work.
More than 40 percent of those still on welfare are functionally illiterate, according to the federal government. They are not attractive job applicants at today's minimum wage, much less a higher one.
For those who care about welfare reform, now is the worst time for a minimum wage hike.
Most welfare benefits were localized under reforms signed by Mr. Clinton. By the same token, the time for a one-size fits-all minimum wage has passed.
If the president truly wants welfare reform to succeed, he should give states authority to set a minimum wage that is sensitive to their economic conditions.
Thomas K. Dilworth, Washington
The writer is research director of the Employment Policies Institute.
Welfare reform and the future of foster care
Secretary of the Maryland Department of Human Resources Lynda G. Fox is correct in saying, "The drop in (welfare) caseloads is absolutely astounding" ("Welfare rolls reduced sharply," Aug. 4).
My colleague Catherine Born has found additional good news: Of the thousands of children from families receiving welfare that she is tracking statewide, only 15 have entered foster care.
But, except for 20 percent of families categorized as hardship cases, all assistance runs out after 60 months. What will happen to children of families who have exhausted their financial assistance but remain without jobs or have jobs which keep them near the poverty level?
Will their children be candidates for foster care? No one knows.
We do know that two recent federal statutes, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) and the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA), could reduce the number of children entering foster care.
ASFA calls for beginning termination of parental rights if a child has been in foster care 15 out of 22 months and for planning for permanent placement after 12 months. MEPA prohibits using race as a placement criterion in foster care and adoption.
Enforcement of those laws could offer children a fighting chance for a permanent home.
Howard Altstein, Baltimore
The writer is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Social Work.
Justice Marshall's family angered by Bell's remarks
City Council President Lawrence A. Bell III's angry comments during the Board of Estimates meeting Aug. 4 regarding Thurgood Marshall were manipulative, unfounded and degrading to family members of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.
We strenuously object to Mr. Bell invoking the name of the late justice for his campaign. Mr. Bell should know he cannot ride into office on his alleged defense of the late justice.
Mr. Bell's tactic of twisting words to meet his own needs has thrown degradation on the justice's family. He needs to learn that the life and achievements of Thurogood Marshall are, first and foremost, a personal legacy to his family.
Mr. Bell also needs to know that we are supporting the candidacy of Martin O'Malley for mayor of Baltimore.
Edward Thurgood Marshall, Baltimore
The writer is a member of the family of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.
Race shouldn't guide city's mayoral choice
It seems to me white folks in Baltimore have been supporting black candidates for years. Not once have I heard of anyone being criticized for doing so.
Before Kurt L. Schmoke's election as mayor, black voters supported white candidates for mayor without getting flak.
Things did turn ugly in 1995, when the race card was played in that election. But 1999 was supposed to be different, or so we hoped.
How sad to see black supporters of a white candidate treated as traitors. How sad to see race used as a means of judging any candidate.
There are many issues on which to judge those running for mayor. Race is not one of them.
Burt Bachrach, Baltimore
Schaefer's tax collection doesn't even pay its way
I couldn't believe what I was reading.
The state's two-month effort to crack down on people who make purchases out ofstate without paying sales tax has collected $4,100 ("Sales tax push yields $4,100," Aug. 6).
Wow, give us a tax cut.
And former governor and now state Comptroller William Donald Schaefer says, "I'm satisfied."
If my math is correct, at this rate it will take almost three years for the taxes collected to pay just one year's salary of the new chief enforcement officer, Larry Tolliver ($74,000).
I was really impressed to read that an additional $2,232.65 came in voluntarily, including $300 from Mr. Tolliver himself for furniture he bought in North Carolina.
I'll bet processing the paperwork cost more than the total collected.
Larry Norwood, Baltimore
The handicapped aren't all wheelchair bound
I also feel angry about people who are not handicapped using handicapped parking space ("Parking dispute will go to trial," Aug. 7). But I disagree with those who assume that because a person doesn't look handicapped, he or she isn't.
Many disorders affect one's ability to be mobile, but are not obvious to others -- heart problems, lung problems, multiple sclerosis (MS) and others.
I know whereof I speak because I have MS. I often have difficulty getting around, and someone who doesn't know me probably wouldn't be aware of this fact. But my handicapped tag makes it easier for me to get to the store or doctor's office or wherever I might have to go.
Although I am entitled to park in a handicapped space, when I'm not in my wheelchair I have been confronted about using those spaces.
I should not have to be confronted and expected to explain my medical condition to a stranger. Would you like to be confronted by someone demanding to know your medical history?
So I would caution people that the absence of a wheelchair or other equipment doesn't mean the person in the handicapped spot is not impaired.
Margaret Cary, Baltimore
Registered nurses are more than 'line workers'
The Sun's article "Starched uniform over a kind heart" (Aug. 6) was a lovely testimony about Jean Akehurst, the generous deceased registered nurse who became a benefactor of the Johns Hopkins Hospital.
However, I was flabbergasted by the reference to nurses as "line workers."
The next time the person responsible for using that term is hospitalized, I hope his or her primary caregivers are "line workers" rather than registered nurses.
JoAnn Ferrer, R.N., Towson
To our readers
The Sun welcomes letters from readers. They should be no longer than 200 words and should include the name and address of the writer, along with day and evening telephone numbers.
Send letters to Letters to the Editor, The Sun, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore 21278-0001. Our fax number for letters is 410-332-6977. The e-mail address is letters@baltsun.com.
All letters are subject to editing.
Pub Date: 8/14/99