has a real conversation about the things that divide us and the differences oft our experiences but yet to remain a single family with this single issue to make sure every part of the american family feels valued i am starting tonight with law-enforcement. teefour nd on, as miss . .

and we are pleased to have three members of the house today to talk about their report and here reactions from notable experts on the programs. but first, and perhaps most importantly, we are going to start outside of washington. and hear from experts in the field of helping low-income americans moving up. they work in places far removed from the halls of congress about their work has informed some of the ideas contained in the steering committee's report. i have a special affinity for these outside of washington experts, as that is where i worked prior to coming to washington. i spent 19 years working in social service agencies in the state and city of new york and i have some idea of the dedication, hard and wisdom of people who work in peace

programs, and i always love to be among them. so i'm very pleased to welcome and introduce to you the first panel which features three 3 mef community-based organizations. first will be owed l. cleveland the administrative officer for the baptist church in greensboro north carolina. he was the president, ceo and cofounder of the welfare reform liaison project i project in gr, which began in 97 as the nation's first faith-based community action agency. he's developed a broad range of partnerships at national, state and local levels including the white house neighborhood partnership, the north carolina aarp and north carolina medical society foundation. we are glad to have you back don't start it because i'm going to introduce roberta and dean. roberta keller is afghan

antipoverty agency headquartered in new york. as director, she worked to foster economic development opportunities for low-income individuals to help them gain economic independence. they've been awarded several distinctions and she's been director including the department of housing and urban development home ownership of work in a best practice agency status by the state department and new york state community action association technology award. in 1999, she was awarded the visionary director award by the coordinating council, a council i was a member of sublime particularly happy to have you come and she received the women of distinction award in 2005. dean hammond has worked in while income and homeless housing more than 30 years including founding a company focused on hud housing software. he joined the part of the boarde foundation for affordable housing in 2004, served as the

chair man and was contracted as the president before stepping down in 2012. he is now a consultant to the board. dean is a retired army major and was awarded the purple heart and distinguished cros cross in the vietnam war and the defense territory as metal as the chief of aviation of the military training mission in saudi arabia. after these three presentations, people have the congressman, and present on sections of the report and then the professor coulter and doctor angela come and make comments on that report and during parts of this at different times, we hope to have a dialogue with the audience as well with questions. i have one other person to introduce, and she's here somewhere and that is nicole who isn't a timekeeper. she's over there and will be giving the signs so we can keep everybody on schedule. i'm sorry to say, but that's part of what happens when you try to run a well-run seminar. i want to say one last thing about seminars, because roberta

is from the county. some of you may know the institute as one of the earliest sort of institute of good thinking and sharing of ideas in the united states and when president johnson was president, he would get frustrated with things and say we are going to have one of these darn seminars. that didn't get a laugh i was hoping for but that's okay. [laughter] the point is, this is something like that. we want a free and open discussion, an and without i wil start with odel. >> i've want to say thank you for coming. when they talk about the time, everyone looks at the baptist preacher and says that's who you need to keep the time for. we got -- first, glad this discussion is on the table in a form that goes on both sides of the aisle. when i read the book the conservative heart and look at the other reports, it's

interesting because 20 years ago when i got into this business life as a divinity school doing my masters thesis on the 96 welfare reform act and the thesis was the black church response to the 1996 welfare reform act. in that piece of paper, we talk about how can we do this. and then ten, 15 years later we were able to move folks up to the point that they had about $11 million of earnings. while we didn't do a good job of is to document how much saved us if odell was on the system. if you look at that number line we start looking at how much savings did it come to the bottom line. but when you start looking at the human impact of folks lives, how all of a sudden people start feeling good about themselves because they were working, all of a sudden they were successful. all of a sudden you had the faith community and the black

community that so many people believe in and out on the front lines of helping people give them a hand up and not a handout and being a cheerleader and helping them and going into the community, helping business owners say the same, you don't have to go halfway around the world on a mission trip. i have a mission for you around the corner. exercise your faith and get involved. let's help create jobs an and helpful these kind of things and that's how we became so successful. but you have to understand one of the things we did is the fact that people who didn't want help, we left them alone. you cannot make somebody want to change. i think in part of the discussion in the papers a lot of it you want to make or encourage someone to get married or someone that's been married 31 years, i love my wife and all that good stuff, that's for the younger guys in the group, you have to want to be married.

no former legislation is going to make someone gets married. but i was so disappointed when i read the current administration took the work requirements have. the work requirements must be put back in and stay in because that is a big driver that helps make this work. if you are asking the social workers isocialworkers and assie department of social servic socs we refer to the north carolina, that's not going to work. so when you partner with us usually we give the hardest to serve because people understand the game. they usually give the hardest to serve, how you are going to gett this person and that's how we do our miracles. no hocus-pocus, just going and building relationships with building business owners getting them to the ie iaea in and makea success. then you go back to the

individual and get him or her to buy into. a new. soapy leave the baptist preacher is going to push the time on because i look forward to the discussion and i'm excited to have this conversation because in spite of people's biases and stereotypes about poor people especially poor black people who look like me a lot of the stereotypes are not asterisks and my purpose here today is to make you show success and show people want a hand up not be handed down. a lot of the problem is systemic and i will end with this some people have seen the safety net which is a metaphor and they've turned it into a hammock. some people see poverty as a pillow and just maybe it has some lumps but you can get used to a lumpy pillow.

but you stay in the safety net or the hammock long enough and that will be there to protect you and end up in driving you and and tangling you for life issues and when you get ready to move you can't live. we looked for the enemy and the enemy was us. some say i'm not going to do anything and then we bring us for what we created. i should go to the next person. thank you. >> thank you. my name is roberta heller. i'm the director of the community action agency, an anti-poverty agency and our mission is to assist people living in poverty people are vulnerable to falling into

poverty and getting into poverty creating economic opportunities for the community to get out of poverty and to discover in our local community exactly what it is that is causing or assisting people to slide down economically into economic situations. in our agency labor: stickley with the people that we serve meaning that when you come, when you have a problem that affects all parts of your life so we are not there yet to deal with your children or housing or just your health. we deal with all of it. when you come you will be risk assessed across the different life domains based on the risk we will find all of the services you are eligible for the people measure you against the continuum of care that tracks

you from crisis to economic security. our goal of course is for everybody to be self-sufficient to reach the middle of that continuum. but our hope for everybody is that they move towards economic security. it's a validation of the proce process. we are not as economically secure as we thought we were so we are teaching sound financial principles and training people to be responsible to take responsibility in their lives and we use our services and our and i'm probably agency that covers. we are a development corporation and financial institution, a licensed home care agency, child care research and referral agency as many titles that allow us to do a whole plethora of

services for people and assist people to develop their own plan toward economic security. plus our continuum does is it shows people where they are. for most people living in poverty they are in generational poverty and they don't realize where they are or where they can be. we don't take somebody that's homeless and talk about homeownership. we take people from where they are and look at the next rung along the continuum, and that's something they can relate to and understand the collateral cost of where they are today. so incrementally, they make that process. they make short and long-term plans, and we assist them across the continuum. we track and measure those incomes. we've been doing this about 20 years. we are in evidence-base an evid, and it works.

>> the current president of the foundation for affordable housing and i like to think aei and the congressman for having us here today discussed this topic and we are all part of the topic and we have to find solutions to the problems. the affordable housing has been in the business for 22 years and i'm going to focus it right down to that and talk about a model we talk about and support and roberta brought up several areas of the concerned agencies that we use. but in any case we built in 1994 to 100 unit facility to house the homeless and we came to find out that many of them fall into a couple of categories especially those who are on some sort of a disability or welfare payments where they have an average of $815 to live and that isn't going to change.

they paid $360 a month and that is more than a 30% of the income going away from that model considerably. they have an affordable place to live and continue to live there safely and some of them it is the last place that they will ever lived. in 2005, we constructed the veterans weighing that is a 30 unit facility that was published by that grand and some tax credits and home funds. we used that with a support intensive transitional housing program supported by the veterans administration grand per diem program. we have men and women in the program and they can be in that program a maximum of 24 months, and that is part of the program. some of them labeled transitional housing advocates and the case at all.

if you give an opportunity to provide the tools and incentives they can develop to a good citizen and move on and what the target is his own subsidized housing, permanent unsubsidized housing and certainly they can continue on up the ladder as roberta talked about. the model is the one i'm going to talk about today. i will be referencing some statistic associated in the program over the last 43 months and whether we speak of a model like this for a way to try to turn a life an around before it goes completely bad we look at the checklist of the objective. stable housing, good environme environment, permanent work, work, training and education, two different things. when we look at the models what do we find in there all the time, structure it's always structurand that's the key fact there.

they give uniform structure, special programs. the military same thing, prisons unfortunately. sometimes they go back to that. and family, structure again. so we have to create an environment where they can create their own structure. now it's mostly about we are going to treat you as a good citizen until you are one. it isn't one-size-fits-all. we have to look for the person. we are looking for a specific client. he or she may never have been in jail or probably has an addiction and has no structure. now here is the decision. we can enroll the individual in the course offered by the university of incarceration where he or she can learn the skills, have access to drugs, meet influential people, have bad checks, still not pay their child support, graduated with a degree in recidivism, go back to the environment where they left

and returned to prison in three years, 68% were in five years 77%. 84% of inmates, 24 or younger will be back in jail within five years and there will be no family reconciliation war we could enroll this individual in the course of study by the addiction life recovery that's already to the addiction as we well. targeted job training or seeking, meet influential people, be drug and alcohol test often, complete dave ramsey's financial peace university, dress appropriately, have a resume and a key component, one of the components, participate in a mandatory savings program. we are going to help you get a job that you are going to do savings and that program is kind of a adjusted. 33% of the adjusted income into thincome intothe building to tht first it will do for savings.

our veterans saved an average of $2,200 per veteran. 94 over the last 43 months have saved $206,885. these are homeless people that come to us. 124 participate124 participatede $259,000. a quarter of a million dollars. to b be up-to-date on the child support for the habit of paying rent starting in the second quarter of the program do not go back to the environment of the left. moving to permanent housing. permanent housing, e.g. 6.4% is the percentage right now. moving to the non- subsidized housing, 74%. and family reconciliation networks. remember they came to us homeless and penniless. penniless. let's do the comparison in the university. federal prison the average in 2014, $30,619. a state prison of new york, 60,000.

the city of new york, jail, 167,731 a year. it is just more money. the university of life recovery, $22,900 a year. so i asked you which on ask yous better, 30,000 or 23 or 167,023. these are the three news bulletins. 48-years-old a white female served a drug year sentence. in a program 15 months working part-time three jobs, saved and because she got a match for another program paid cash for her car and furniture and she says i will not be returning to prison and working to reuniting with her daughter. so, this is not a giveaway. you have to work to what you're doing in the program.

92% can really change their lives. 86% can be a stable life condition and 72% can be a permanent place for the job. this is the reality of rebuilding a life. thanks. >> can i say one thing? all practitioners that have been successful if you have discovered that it take us comprehensive and we have the same approach with our customers the money of the funding for the antipoverty programs do not follow this approach and it takes an organization to step back. we have a model and we will find the money and use the money to follow our model. we won't be an agency that implements the contract.

government contract, the anti-poverty program are not designed at all in any of the ways you heard the three of us talked about and they are not in any way measuring success or breeding success. there's not one government contract that i operate but requires an outcome, and i operate $17 million worth of government contracts and none of them require one outcome. i've taken those contracts and put them on the side burner and used them as tools and bend them in order to make them work to help people change their lives and apply them when they are appropriate. for example, and eiffel use these to very brief examples if i can. the section eight subsidized

housing is extremely useful if you don't tell somebody they can for the rest of their lives which they can. but you don't told them that. and you accuse it at the right time and the right way and the way it was designed to be but has become a crutch that allows people to live in poverty forever as you said. the other is the energy assistance which we go to great length as an agency to help people develop sound financial practices and to establish good credit and many seniors who fallen into hard times since 2008 and/o2008 and are on a fixe and they are partying and in order to get to new york state, the full energy assistance which isn't going to carry you through the winter anyway, you have to default on your bill and you

will ruin your credit and when they default, the energy company shuts them off into charges everybody if he and the companies don't lose money, they go to the commission to say we lost money last year so we are going to raise the rate for the subsidy for the person on energy assistance is now defaulting to get the full benefit and that is costing the taxpayer more money because the rates will go up rap because the utility companies are paying more money. all you have to do is pay the company to give eligible customers a subsidized energy rate and cut out ten layers of bureaucracy and stop putting people into default. this is a small example of every antipoverty program that exists. every single one of them is flawed and needs to be reworked

together but they are all operating in the government silos and it takes an organization who offered either many kinds of housing programs to be able to step back and take that approach. >> i will make a few comments on what i heard. we heard about work requirements and coordination among programs serving the whole person as opposed to one aspect of the person and we heard about the federal role it seems to be clear that there is a federal role helping low-income americans. the people on the frontlines recognize that, providing resources, money and assistance and finally we heard about local control, the ability of localities and local leaders to structure the programs the way they want.

i also think i heard the willingness to accept evidence and measurements to hold you accountable. we have three distinguished congressman from the house of representatives and going in order we will start with the congressman who served in the house of representatives from kentucky's sixth congressional district since 2014. the members of the financial services is creating a better environment for job creation and economic growth and the priority is included promoting economic development for wages for families. he's serving his full third term in congress representing the 23rd district.

he's engaged in the house of hof representatives antipoverty efforts and efforts of tax reform, energy security and manufacturing policies. before his time in congress, he was a small-business owner working in the wall and real estate and public service began in 2008 was a successful run in his hometown. in the finger lakes one of the beautiful parts of america i wanted to that plug-in, that's where my mother grew up. congressman walker represents the sixth district in the house of representatives and is currently serving the first term in congress and the house committee on oversight government reform, homeland security administration. he's a member of several caucuses including the bipartisan historically black college and university caucus. he was elected and served as a pastor, music and worship pastor and lead a pastor. wpastor. we are pleased to have you here. congressman barr, you are first.

>> thank you for hosting this important forum for my colleagues and to our constituents who have come to share their stories in combating poverty. i would like to thank dean hammond and lexington kentucky who demonstrated through their model is successful model of combating poverty helping people recovery from addiction. the urban poverty and th in ther eastern part of my congressional district we have a number of counties that are designated severely economically distressed as a part of the reachable commission and there is poverty not just my congressional district throughout appalachia and through the country. after years on the war on poverty and taxpayer dollars spent i think it's fair to say that washington has failed many americans who are most in need.

the inertia has crept into the government officials who refuse to give up o on failing policies that they almost treated as a dogma. for example housing and urban development secretary julian castro, who appeared before the house financial services committee again this week pushed the housing first model that ignores all other factors while being. when he testified before the committee i asked him how he measured success and he responded to putting a roof over someone's head and he touted a number of people in public housing was increasing. but is that an appropriate measure of success, most such as alcohol and drug recovery programs focus on the number of people that they've actually helped achieve sobriety or recovery and not how many are currently in the program.

we need to focus on outcomes. there will always be the need for safety net programs, and for those that have fallen on hard times to assist those that cannot work for just the seniors and disabled. but it should be how many people are struggling in poverty. the measure shouldn't be how many people are struggling in poverty and bar propped up by taxpayer dollars. it should be how many people have we helped achieve state poverty and achieve upward mobility and the american dream. despite the $22 trillion spent on the poverty program since the announcement in th in the great society that rates have been essentially leveled. today there's about 46.7 million people including more than one in five children who are struggling in poverty. and worse measurements of the

mobility appear to be in the wrong direction as the business formation and entrepreneurship are not a general low. so you are likely to remain in poverty today as you were in the great society announced in 1965 and that's obviously the reverse of the american dream that we all share. so more of the same cannot be the solution. that's why my colleagues and i working empowerment initiative have produced a comprehensive review of the federal programs to inform the legislative proposals to create a new model and this is a better way to fight poverty. my focus has been on housing reform, an issue in the jurisdiction of the committee. they can no longer treat those as warehouse liabilities are publicly assisted housing.

our fellow americans want to recognize the full potential contributing to the communities, to the body politic and the natural economy. and of course arthur brooks in the american enterprise institute so eloquently put it in his book the conservative heart when he talked about poor people as not being liability for some distant remote government bureaucracy in washington, d.c. but they are dormant assets and the view that work is not a punishment. work is a blessing that gives people an opportunity to achieve their potential and to give back to their fellow human beings. the most effective program known to man is a good paying job. that's why we are advocating requirements for able-bodied individuals and housing to get people back in the workforce and reduce poverty and is the cost of tax payers.

the more assistance, the more people we can reach with limited federal resources. this model has worked before. we are building on the success of the 1996 welfare reform model that led to the increasing 15% and dramatically reduced child poverty. poverty. and in recent years they have been chipped away and the result speaks fo[inaudible] themselves for the low participation rate. the lowest participation since the late 1970s. our plan also improves flexibility for states and encourages the establishment of the pilot programs to test innovative assistance models like those demonstrated by the panel. the word of dean's hammond isn't compatible with the hud housing first model. we must break down such arbitrary barriers that would meaningfully improve lives.

warehousing poor people is not a solution. identifying the underlying causes of homelessness and dealing with those issues is a better approach. we should also show the beneficiaries receive unemployment, food assistance and housing benefits on one place while getting their questions answered quickly to avoid being caught in the red tape and the plan would also encourage competition so that scarce resources for the vouchers for housing would not be simply allocated to one public housing authority but instead, the housing authority is out there that are doing a good job helping people graduate into the non- subsidized situations they would be reworded for services that are actually working and they would take on a greater responsibility and i believe we should open up to the institutions of society, faith-based institutions,

churches, synagogues and nonprofit organizations that have better results when it comes to graduating people from public assistance into self-sufficient situations. finally the plan results and accountability. no more useless matcher x. or statements. programs administered by state and local governments are not moving to self-sufficiency than they shouldn't deserve to taxpayer support. one definition is doing the same thing expecting a different result. washington's approach to fighting poverty is insane and has been a failure. we must do better to ensure no american is limited by the conditions of his or her birth or unexpected hardship. if we worked together on the legislative solutions i do believe that we could restore the american dream. thank you. [applause] thank you to my colleagues for

joining me here today to odell and roberta and dean for sharing this story and taking on poverty. i will tell you i'm often asked why. why have you made this a priority and the fundamental answer to the question just as many of you, i care and i'm a republican member of congress and i told my mission in life in congress is to penalize people and judge people and not show any compassion for people and i can tell you we do care. they just offer a different way. i will share the story of my life with you and the story being the youngest of 12. they were given a curveball in

life and given a choice you can either develop a chip on your shoulder, gets knocked down and never get it back up or you can take that curveball and make lemonade and get back up. you can smile and count your blessings and treat each other with respect and that is the lesson she turned to me. when i got out of school on a represented the attorney is appointed foattorneysappointed s actions throughout the court system i've met with one of my clients has an 8-year-old young man in western new york as robert pointed out and it was essentially at appalachia. i asked him what do you want to be when you get older to develop a relationship in that proceeding and the response was

eye-opening, essentially what do you mean? this is what we do. i thought he would say astronaut or police officer, cure cancer, something like that but then it dawned upon me. how could i expect that young man when he's 21, 22 to know anything different than the life that he was exposed to? that's the cycle of poverty that i have seen firsthand. when i come to this issue from the perspective we need to do better the status quo in the federal government that has been taking over the war on poverty for decades just doesn't work. i'm influenced by a lot of leaders in the country i and former leaders and i see jimmy his father comes from western new york. jack is someone i looked up to each and every day and what he taught us to be is a happy

warrior to look at people in the eye and recognized the potential that is their. they just don't do that. the silos that have been talked about recognizing under our proposal the better way we need to look at the realistic approach. i've represented her in the county and she's doing amazing work. when you deal with poverty it's not a one-size-fits-all solution. when you have solutions that not only cause you to be penalized when you work but we also have a life-changing impact you lose your daycare and heating assistance and boost your transportation assistance our

policies need to be coordinated and have to look at the entire approach as well as the better way looking at work and recognizing we can be there during that time to offer some type of assistance via cash assistance for the crisis situation that takes care of the individual for the moment. we need to stand with them to get the skill set and education that will empower them for a lifetime. it's the old adage you give a man a fish yo and teaching for a day, teach them to fish and you take care of him and the next generations to come. that's the policy you see here today we have to break the silos of bureaucracy and stand with work. the other reason we are standing with work as a member i get chastised old to want to do this

penalize people and force them to work. work .-full-stop to me is work is good because it not only gets a paycheck that i've talked with people that have received the first check after going through life struggles and its reworded their souls. it's touched them here. it's allowed them to take pride in ownership and what they achieved and that's what the policymakers and operators lose sight of each and every day is that by empowering people to earn their own way they not only earn a paycheck but they earned the confidence and pride and that ability to go on only for themselves but the children of the next generation. it's us as human beings to say this is a better way to the status quo and we need to move

forward in a positive and proactive way. >> i love hearing the stories from mr. hammond and ms. keller on the success probably overnight but the years of hard work and specifically my friend odell cleveland junior. when i begin the process not having any time for political background or experience that i felt compelled to do is find people in the community regardless of their affiliation of people who were making a area difference, a measured difference in the community and i found the gentleman that was respected by the democrat independence and republicans alike crafting relationships. one that worked with him for many years was a legislative correspondent liaison in the office who does a great job.

i want to break this down in two ways. one the other aspect is the public. when it comes to the system i want to talk about the specific piece of legislation that is conducive to building a base level foundation that can curb the potential poverty in the various family structures. all men are created equal and while it i it isn't the governms job to fulfill the dreams and goals as lawmakers we have an opportunity to empower people as opposed to enabling them to have the american dream. every man, woman, boy and child should have that opportunity to achieve the full potential as god has created that person to accomplish. one of the things we have seen the last couple of years in my tenure that 17 months in congress is the dc opportunity

scholarship program and some of the greater choice but has provided $8,000 a year i believe the choice plays a huge impact not just in the scholarship opportunity but if we could zoom out about 30,000 feet this legislation is part of a plus act which specifically allows both states and loca local areno opt out of the federal mandates that continue to keep the federal funding to invest and put it into the local arenas that have seen some success. that is a common sense approach and federalism at its finest when it comes to empowering the people that are there on the ground at the battle wine making that kind of difference. we need to take a hard look at the governments approach for the last five decades. it would be one thing if we had measured success and we can see the different testing and get

different results if something hasn't worked since the creation of the department of education and aspects we have created tons of programs and many more different vehicles and creative avenues. be a plus act allows the schools to be able to take the funds and invest it in the greatest impact. a great education shouldn't be a privilege with only available to the wealthy yet several are trapped in the schools with no education options. there's not a lot of flexibility. i'm sure everybody is familiar with common quarter and one of those is the one-size-fits-all strategy. we want to out while those teachers and i would dare say if i were to ask you a teacher that made the most impact in your life it was someone outside the box that was allowed to take their personality and creativity

that would impact and make a difference in the future life. in the mind of a child is precious thing. there is no one-size-fits-all solution. parents know their children do best. not a bureaucrat sitting behind the desk in washington. let me take a momen moment to vn talking about families. one of the things the act does is gives us a chance to continue to restore the family. a lot of them are issues we have seen the family dissipates since the 1960s when you're able to do anything that brings the family back in that empowers them and gives you the best chance by limiting itself the government can expand an opportunity to pave the road to students and teachers. that is the system part of it.

we have the nitty-gritty but i do want to forfeit some of my time unless i talk about also the public side of this and to be this is maybe the most important aspect we talk about the programs and policies and sometimes we neglect to fail the conduit if the programs are delivered and i think timmy any program succeeds or fails based on how it is delivered and you say what do i mean by that? my background is in the places of the inner cities of baltimore, new york and cleveland long before there were any political aspirations. specifically sunbeam elementary school in cleveland ohio took the team of 60 to 65 to try to do their best to refurbish the school. remember the playground had one piece of equipment left it with

a plastic bench the lack of hope impacted me to come back and talk about transitioning from two decades of ministry to be able to talk about what is it that we are missing in the government that we bypassed and skipped over that are fundamentalist impact to begin to make those investments i look at it from a faith perspective that god created every individual with unique skills, and i believe when the federal government gets to put itself in there i think some things we do a disservice because we limit those opportunities to achieve for fulfill those wonderful things. i have the opportunity to teach at the divinity school and it's interesting when you are teaching these younger pastors because they can't wait to get

out there and change everything from the music and the carpet and we have t the plan of the thesis i'm ready to go with it. what happened is sometimes we fail to understand it's about putting the relationship first. when you're able to build trust you are able to make a difference. i will conclude and hopefully have a chance to share more. thank you very much. [applause] angela is going to go over the there. when we started to decide to invite the congress to this report, they said they didn't just want it to be about them.

they wanted people from the communities that taught them so much about these issues and they also wanted some pushback, some give and take discussion. so when we are looking at these issues i couldn't find to greater people and their integrity and wisdom than the professor from georgetown and angela here at aei. i will introduce the two of them. then angela, you are second and i hope that we can have some response in the back and forth. i know i have a couple follow-ups. but we do the introductions first. harry is the professor georgetown university and institute at the institute for research in washington. he's the former chief economist for the department of labor and economics at michigan state university. he's a nonresident senior fellow at the brookings institution and affiliate at the institute for research on poverty and wisconsin madison among other

affiliations. he edited enough in books and several dozen articles mostly on their disadvantaged workers and employers in education issues and labor market policy. he holds a phd in economics from harvard. angela is a research fellow at aei where she studies the effects of existing support programs on low income families. a former deputy commissioner for policy research evaluation of the social services of new york city she oversaw the team of analysts on the studies used to help local officials make informed decisions on how to work in the public policy to reduce poverty and improve the situation of the four families. a phd in social welfare policy, she's written research papers for aei and putting on child care, the marriage penalties and the earned income tax credit and failed participation. we are grateful to have you here. >> thank you for having me here

today. when my friend called me a few weeks ago and asked me to do this, i had a quick look at the report and i said i will have to say a lot of critical things. he said it's okay just to be polite. it's a little problematic because as some of you know polite isn't always my strong suit. this is a very blunt report and anything else would be dishonest but at the response of the bluntness if i fail to get that balance i apologize to everybody in advance. and i will tell you a little about who i yam and the way that i look at the world i am an economist and i served in the clinton administration. but unlike many of myself though democrats, i think that it is really important. i think they did improve the incentives into some of that was good and created other problems i will mention in a minute.

i think a stable too. families is the best way to raise children in america. i wish we had buttons we could push but i think the conservatives have been right about that. i was one of the authors of the poverty report. i stand by every word of the report so i'm used to reaching across the aisle to work with my conservative friends and even reports that the poll brian rayford wasn't my favorite in the world but i found some positive things to talk about and think about. my reaction to the report was pretty negative. with all due respect to the congressman i found a bug report to be extremely partisan and extremely ideological. it's nasty in tone to people like me that th are democrats ad it is full of gratuitous slaps at president obama and president

johnson any of which serve no purpose than to alienate people like me. it's polarizing in many ways it doesn't have the tone people place. there's many statements in the e paper that i believe were demonstrably false. if you look carefully at the research i will talk abou i've t the research evidence using rigorous methods. some of them are grand general statements. by the way, the inherent programs have a lot of problems into the silo mentioned before are issues no doubt about it. all three of you said the current system of fatal yea fair and one of the statements, johnson's big government welfare state has been a failure. the stigma is demonstrably false and when you look at the evidence on the programs it is

simply not what you can conclude by looking at that evidence. you can be critical and say that it's mixed and costly or that they don't get at the underlining issue but to say that it's a complete failure it ignores the positive that you find in this literature, and in fact if you measure poverty correctly not using the official rate, it actually has declined over time and is easy to link to the programs that are in this report. obama has gutted the work by result that is a false statement. ron haskins has told me it is false and has looked and break in on a lot of the rules and regards those and i trust him. he pretty much wrote the welfare reform policies and i trust his judgment on that and i think that he disagrees completely.

for example, we heard early in the report to 800 billion. that's fine. half of that is on health care. medicaid and a few other programs, which to me tells how outrageous it is rather than the overspending on this. all the other stuff may sound massive but it's 2% of gdp in america. it's not a huge massive government when you compare to all other industrialized countries on the low-end of what we spend is a fraction of gdp and those countries all have more generous safety nets and lower poverty rates have been the dupe so again this notion that the program is so generous that it's trapping people and one more thing about this report that is upsetting to me, there were 42 footnotes and the census bureau.

the majority of the articles are papers coming out of the right-wing think tanks and outlets or conservative political appointees. not one footnote further rigorous article in the journal of which there's a large quantity, not one tells me the information that was driven. let me tell about that a few of the programs. it's not that they don't have negatives but the reality is more complex. first, welfare reform did a lot when the economy was strong. however, since then, the number of disconnected as well as from welfare has gone up dramatically and millions of those not on welfare and not working because they are hard to employ and i will get back to back, they no

longer raise almost anyone out of the poverty is one half of the poverty line. as if nothing in the recession to combat the rising poverty that occurred when the jobs were disappearing. on the other hand, food stamps that was demonized, food stamps does raise millions out of poverty. poverty. its successful at doing that. it did come back to the recession and it had a countercyclical role and the evidence showed food stamps have this quality for children that is a fact when you look at the evidence and they might do better than adults than those that don't have access to that. so the rise in food stamps is perusing that obama has been a failure and it's simply false in my view. the earned income tax credit. the report doesn't have a

positive paragraph then it talks about all the fraud that we need to be more strict on combating fraud. we have one problem, the irs has been demonized the last six or eight years and the funding has been cut so it is hard to get another mandate to do this work. the juxtaposition of the comment strikes me a little bit. there's a lot about the marginal tax rate. i might need a little more time. people face of these cliff clipd the office wrote the report last year on the marginal tax that is nowhere near as high as in the report. i think there's little to hide but it is expensive on the tax rate and thursdays changes in the effort. there is a literature on the evaluated ck programs and workforce programs none of which

were cited in this report. you would think that doesn't exist anywhere. .. >> at. >> to develop very early in life to compose more rules on their parents will solve that and then by the zero -- and then.

but a lot of them a choice programs still some charter schools are successful in than make softer statements. work is a great thing. however they have badly deteriorated that the federal minimum wage working full-time working fourteener $15,000 per year when it is still below the poverty line and the decline of real wages clearly drives them out of the labor force.

you can debate that magnitude in this was a lot of the action. i'd like marriage. we don't have policy but consider marriage has gone up in red states and blue states with the policy environment that is another false said we have fought -- strong evidence for those and then national campaign? it is true they will address those problems they are very hard to solve but the notion that they will solve the deep structural problems. i am open to the to

consolidate and opening the marriage if you do them carefully and thoughtfully the you have to meet me halfway. but some of these really to perform positive things. hit him if he'll have extra work requirements provide appropriate services but the gorgeously mondo work requirements not doing anything to help people that refers back to nobody should be kicked off with they have not been offered a work activity along with the services and support that principle.

people networking large numbers sometimes have to be in job creation in private market doesn't always get that right. and it would still be money well spent so i will stop by a willing to meet people half way but not in the context of a report like this. thank you. [laughter] >> i have a few things i would like to talk about. >> angela between five and seven and a. >> net know-how to follow that up but i will try. it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon in trying to

reduce poverty and low income in america for a decade i were to the new york city department of social services for policy research thinking of how they function at the ground level sell my comments are influenced by that experience by working more in the field and the ground level in the academic work as well as here at a.e.i. and i am very much a realist and it comes to a great extent from my midwestern roots also in the new york city welfare department so my comments do reflect some

of those experiences. i had a very different reaction and many of his comments resonate but i didn't have the same reaction. i feel that the plan articulates very broad themes that i think to resonate with a number of people. i didn't look at it so much as the reports coming out of a scholarly institutions but to recognize it is a political body and trying to articulate broad themes and they do resonate with based on my experience and research. is but if we dismiss the rhetoric we don't get into the real issues. so i want to focus on broad

-- three broad themes one is a work level sides to agree for and how do we encourage employment? we can be an effective way to do that if employment it appropriately and fairly which to be honest, and they are not always but and to hear from the members of congress earlier. and then also agree with the comments earlier and it should be an opportunity to have training for those that may not be connected to those types of services.

then does have a component for those that are able-bodied without dependent children a dozen have robust programs to me that seems like a missed opportunity rather than an effort of punitive measures and i agree work promotion activities san requirements can be a larger part of our programs as well as the disability assistance program. research primarily does tell us that if families and individuals are working and then as mentioned earlier natalie for fluent people in

the census data shows 60% of core working age people do not work and all. those and are denied the opportunities that emplaning can provide. the reasons they give for not working is not the ability to have a jobless and 10 percent say that but it is primarily all this and disability with home and family responsibilities. but it can be though whole story that we need other efforts as well with reasonable work exhortations can be a part of this it has to be coupled with support child care assistance is a critical component which cannot expect parents to work in exchange for benefits if we're not providing assistance in the

forms of child care and also those policies as we should continue to support those as the earned income tax credit that is it mentioned it does have problems with improper payment i wouldn't be too quick to dismiss some of those but that is one area that needs to be addressed locally there is a report coming out that there is legitimate incredible ways to address these issues and i hope for people that are interested you achaean take a look. to this the hard thing to talk about as they have their own personal beliefs thinking about marriage from the public policy perspective but looking at

that from purely empirical the data is clear they experience lower poverty in children do better than in single-parent families there is a good deal of research to support that. to show that the government is a very good job to promote marriage but as it correctly outlines government should not be in the business to make low income parents you do decide making it a disadvantage to them. my own research found for that e itc with the actual unmarried parent that penalty can be in the range between 1500 and $3,000 of the married couple decides to marry instead of staying unmarried or raising a child together. the marriage penalties are real and need to be fixed if

it will cost money so that is another piece often not talked about him and it will cost money in these to be addressed in that context. the next point is around experimentation one of the points from all these funding streams these are the anti-poverty programs that are not set up that way. advocating for more flexibility i do think that is the direction we need to go with a pilot basis those that are streamlining to pay for the success models and other efforts as well states need the ability to

experiment. when they were experimenting with welfare programs and in that same sense of exploration -- experimentation today baidu understand it is a risk for poor families, but the federal government needs to take no role to hold states accountable with rigorous evaluation to make them accountable because of there is no results then it goes away. what last points the final statement about the federal government fiscal house to get in order to shrink government. while that is true it

doesn't have to mean cutting safety net programs or no new spending in my opinion it should be -- mean better targeting to spend money on things that will achieve the goals we want to achieve. we have heard that those are working and family and experimentation in that if you can have less spending nab paid leave for these low income families that will support work and family al looked at the report i see a lot of possibilities in the apartment planned.

we all won't agree are everything that is in the plan but i do believe there is a lot of agreement on all sides of experimentation and i hope that people will take up plan a little more as i did ben tried to work towards that. thank you. >> going to give the of numbers and opportunity to comment and then we might lead to engage the audience. >> i'll place to start by complimenting the professor for his passion. [laughter] i was perfectly polite. >> felony complement him in all seriousness because everyone of us should be outraged this up by witnessing people struggling

in poverty. we may have vigorous disagreements to be passionate about this issue it is unconscionable that people in this country built on the concept of the american dream that denies the american pain -- experience i absolute try to share in that fashion when amy to a young woman named sally with tears streaming down her face and says it is august we're going back to school and 82 children have grown out of their shoes and i cannot afford to buy them shares so i went to wal-mart to buy them flip-flops' just so they wouldn't be embarrassed to go barefoot. that deserves our passion

and our outrage she said the reason why i cannot afford shoes for my children is because my husband was laid off because the coal company does not have a permit so i would say first and foremost, let's not promote government policies that reduce poverty. first was not doing things that put people into a poverty. now let me come halfway to where the professor is. i think he deserves us to come halfway. some of these anti-poverty programs have been around 50 years with material deprivation to research an extent. the problem is the spiritual deprivation persist and is exacerbated. when we look at programs

like the st. james place not just on their margins but to provide cash assistance or housing the put people with a roof over their head we want something better we want to alleviate spiritual deprivation with the adl that people cannot achieve self-sufficiency to put a roof over their own head. it is not we deny that these programs on the margins has helped people like sally an eastern kentucky get through a rough patch because of environmental regulations but we want her husband to go back to work to have an opportunity for her to not only by issues but provide them with the life of

greater opportunity we don't deny we should come halfway of course, we should and we should all share in the passion to do better with the war on poverty our report does credits -- credit president johnson when he declared war on poverty to tackle the root causes not just mask the symptoms so in conclusion that is what we are trying to do. and not just a mask over a transfer payment the symptoms of poverty. >> and i also want to echo some of those comments and i will say i am the most senior member appear and the good professor articulated something that i have experienced especially in my

district and often i hear rhetoric such jazz does yourself that immediately answer in a partisan political arena and that we are attacking and i can respect that i respect that opinion that the end of the day what we cannot do and i can promise you, professor is that i'm not leaving i have done this numerous times i have been yelled at for an hour and a half called every name in the book that have actually been dammed to hell. [laughter] >> i will be in the confessional for many hours. [laughter] but after two hours i said i'm not leaving because i care about this you will find an area we can agree upon.

after you get through the rhetoric and a scene that washington, it is amazing what we can agree upon if we can get through the rhetoric to get through the substance so be believed in work that is where we spend our time where can we find the common ground? so the issues from our district has demonstrated from a lifetime of commitment so that the left and right hands of government know what is going on in the individual's life where can we promote those training skills to arm people for a lifetime? and i think the professor is

committed to that so it gives me a lot of optimism back home. this is what it operates for the first 20 or 30 minutes but when the camera is off fanlights are down there are colleagues who are here today given of themselves given up time to get the people's business done that will continue to do the work because it is the right thing to do. and we can find solutions because our fellow citizens deserve that. that is why we are here and i am inspired by jack kemp and the work that he did with his career in washington d.c. >>. >> once again it is the privilege to be here today i do believe that the professor's comments in some places were exaggerated

specifically with all the three panel members said of the blame all of this on these programs all of this is based on programs if you were listening to my comments talk about the family that was part of the issues as well. the other thing i heard you say was kids on food stamps are better off as adults. i would love to know what report that is based on and finally he said when it comes to school choice some of it is good and son is bad and that is of broad sweeping statement that doesn't give you an idea one where the other but in conclusion who is better to

make those choices? bureaucrats or parents? even if it is not measured tit-for-tat i would guess there is no concrete evidence, the times as parents we get to make the choice person is washington bureaucrat? >> but washington and whatever program you call it has failed with this particular genres of mindset when we measure success by how many people we put on as to how many we transition off until we take dash off of success than we have some problems. >> one of the things that we hear, thank you congressman and all of you but i want to focus on one issue of the work requirement to issue.

i think i heard you say that for the able to buy the individual sometimes this is where it comes to bear with an offered job that is declined or inactivity that fails to show up. line engendered in response from the agency in order to take them to take advantage to comply had to deal with the work requirement that isn't getting a job in the richer benefits but take the activity that is here and that is available tomorrow then if you fail it could be consequences. >> i am open to certain versions we have spent many hours over this issue some of the people that are called the able-bodied to suffer from severe depression or ptsd that could cause them not to show up whenever we talk about

work requirements the service pieces week the support is strong baby not the first time that a repeated pattern and if there are efforts made to be supportive then i am more open to considering a version. >> i would say in that experience in new york city we really pushed food stamps to supplement when wages were not be enough that was good but then it turned out many adults that are not disabled and recipients of food stamps to we thought we were giving work support weren't working and we don't know what they're doing and failing to address that is an issue. >> dave open for that. >> and then for you, what

grants or state experimentation? how do you feel about testing that kind of flexibility first? >> that is what we have written in some other proposals that are out there if you give them the waiver authority that it is unjust of blanket block grant like that is the solution to be all solutions but accountability to have that flexibility to make sure that we watch and look for the unintended consequences because this is complex and not as easy as black-and-white each case is unique i have learned seeing this first team in each family situation is very unique in one size fits all will not work.

>> i want to follow-up with the question is the microphone going in that direction? you have talked about federal programs they were not sure how they were working near where the money was going or why they were coordinated the people who work in the poverty programs in kentucky or north carolina or new york you know, the food stamp program. if washington decided in your state to use that funding source as the way to give states greater flexibility instead of rallying the government to provide that benefit through the lgbt card by gave it to the states and your program to use that money to service the clients you serve, would that alarm you? >> you mean to eliminate.

>> take it away and then take that money and instead give it to your state? you can give them your version but also a work program aural warning supplement or substance abuse program. >> it is like if you stop beating your wife you cannot get that cancer. but i think tech one thing to cut off i would not agree because i agree with the flexibility, i do but that is a super important program so as to just pick one i think we have a lot more complex problems than just taking one i could pick any one program anybody could say this is stupid and that is fine but this has to be a lot bigger than that holistic clique we have to do a least a two-pronged

attack to do with i don't have a job i cannot buy shoes but the of their party is like the future we have to fix education to make sure these kids are getting educated the matter what it takes. >> i really am scared of block grants in in new york is one of the our largest bureaucracies in this country probably and when your kid gets a block grant the first thing it does this bill in the? of the bureaucracy to keep the bureaucracy in tact and then the up program goes down i don't believe that europe is different than other states or other blocks your'' keep the bureaucracy first but other states may not philosophically believe been feeding children or believe in supporting

education. so for different reasons block grants going to different states they have terrible consequences. food and housing and these issues when i talk caustically, and the flexibility for more integration between the services, but i am not dead against them but i do think they need unbelievable oversight and accountability and the cftc is a perfect example there is a lot of questions during the bush administration. today think in the last eight years there has been no lot of oversight in the same thing with headstart the specially during the bush administration i think that is one of the most phenomenal programs in the country and people have no

idea what these children are coming to school with zero or what they would be if you can take the children who live in five generations of poverty to tell me in fourth grade they are equal to other fourth graders, you have performed a miracle. >> even though the trends are alarming idle think we keep that up by would say no to block grants to the state but i would say when you look at the department of labor in the internships a lot of times the employers or the job creators will love you we're doing but we all want to take the risk as it relates to somebody coming into our company now with the rules and regulations applying to them so when it comes to the academy we'll understand how

to relax those rules so we can go a change a the legislation so the employers who creates jobs will be able to minimize the risk so if they don't have anything against the internship bela kadar from the perspective of those to say we can help. >> ♪ to follow-up and i want to ask a question about the disconnected moms they're all on snap that is where they are they're not really disconnected. >> they are disconnected from cash assistance. so that avenue may not be to change the cash program to alter the food stamp program for i know where they are. there right there.

>> i don't know how blame sure it is a significant number but let's get the experience that is the ultimate block grant program i do think it did do some good especially in the first for five years with the market to be strong it assumes a strong labor market in then it didn't do wonders but there is another thing is the one thing we have learned that i recommend that hamilton projects at brookings they had a program about a month ago it was a very good paper talking about the pluses and minuses and they found in some ways the flexibility was abused by states just

like roberta said they spend a lot of the money things and not even remotely related so one of the recommendations that came out nobody wants to get rid of it but still belden this safeguards with the appropriate oversight maybe there should be your rule that says a some of that money should be on course support which is cast as this -- cash assistance or child care but that is why we ought to talk about the look at the failures as well as excess of flexibility and tried to come to a middle place that has the benefits. >> of the partial defense there is a letter of the law in spirit of the law and there is a sense of people who worked in the social services program and that

comes through with of tanf administration and other social services programs but i had another question. >> into ted shawn and though work requirement perhaps that doesn't accommodate additional jobs but there is a paradox rehab high and employment is historically high. but yet when you go and talk to plant managers and h.r. directors committee anecdotal evans is very

strong there is a huge a man for unskilled workers there is any plant managers tell me this is elevated unemployment in the east and they say but even need a skilled worker i need an unskilled worker who was on time and drug-free. so little bit of that is overblown there are jobs available remember our report refocus on able-bodied non senior citizen engaged for incentives and frankly i believe in the brotherhood that the disabled can complete -- contribute meaning field -- meaningful in the professor is right there are simply some systemic problems with work requirements that we have to deal with for example, the child-care issue for a single mom we have to deal

with this asking her to work can also transportation issues the report addresses that we talk about portability of the vouchers so people can escape those low income neighborhoods taken to a place where they can work. >> just quickly i mentioned this earlier but to emphasize the vast majority of poor working age people are not even working - - looking for work they list disability and hold and family responsibilities maybe they have given up because they are frustrated but when i hear we have a mismatch of jobs there are not enough jobs available you're missing the point there is a lack of even looking for work and we need to address those issues.

>> you agree i think all three would agree that a lot of the people who don't show up in the surveys are men with criminal records who have huge barriers because the employer doesn't want to hire them and if they have child-support we haven't talked about that so if the mom has a substance problem over ptsd or depression there is evidence. >> it is an absence of opportunity that people taking a vantage. >> there are low wage jobs available because they found them an attractive faking get married day drop out of the labor force it is complex but it is not either/or we just have to

kick them in the but to get them back. >> to any one of the three of you that we all agree that there is the inappropriate for improper payment ratio with the earned income tax credit which is the largest anti-poverty program food stamps his also depending on the year $70 billion per year 20% 18% improper payment rates to does listen device works so many people like it but if the irs came to you and said we can fix this view need to fund us to do what we need to do so rigo said the payments out to the wrong people how do you respond? >> if there is direct oversight i think there is an appetite for that conversation but it would not just be we will give you

more money overall it could be a conversation a simple as we need to prioritize. when can we reallocated real resources to be deployed into a higher priority i thank you could find that halfway ground and that is a conversation that is happening and will continue to happen because we recognize as the irs gets bigger the resources is a serious question but not the end all be all more money will not solve this problem i have seen that in the six years on ways and means and other agencies across the spectrum. >> congressman and i am curious we all recognize the long term to fiscal health of the country is at risk but we also recognize of bulk of the hundred billion dollars that we spend on low-income americans is

medicaid so health care world takes that with payments to providers in managed-care. highroad you react to that desire to find ways to spend more on some things are less on others that is less efficient with the programs for the core remains the same? how to react to the disproportionate spending? are you in this to find fiscal relief for the government long term or is there something else that is more important. >> it has to be a long-term goal it could use celebrated in certain circles but one of the reasons we said'' get this long term with our health care options we felt that would give us a long

term burst of reform in government that we talked about a think it is very crucial to let this from a long-term perspective health care or medicaid are on those issues we talk about. the easy trap is to take a quick solution and there are times but the reason my fellow congressmen are here with us today is to talk about these tough issues these are not a sexy issues or that is an easy fix and i commend my fellow members here who have been here longer than i have willing to tackle something that is a very big issue is easy to make the other issues famous

but i think long term these have to be resolved and i will say the people that will be the ones resolving this are the people who genuinely love the people we have a chance to represent. not to be cliche with those comments but if there is not a tournament -- genuine heart in tone and our spirit we accomplish nothing long term not to be blunt but to challenge the tone and spirit of the panel is inappropriate is not one that i don't believe we could but the reporters or decide that this has been overly partisan i think it is split right down the middle with comments made with this decision or that decision that nobody is appear bashing the left eye and not even sure the word

democrat was used so i want to make sure i addressed those that we come at this with the right tone and spirit looking for solutions we are back into the place to see the poverty of urban area. >> it is worth noting that the data shows of three of your districts have portions of a really struggling and not getting better so that motivates our member of congress to address those issues their constituents are facing. now i will open for questions to the audience for to we have 15 minutes we like questions we'd all like statements. of brief comment then a question and any of us can address that. get some hands up.

>> thanks for being here today and having this discussion is in powering i am from south carolina it is good to see this conversation going on from both sides. briefly and wanted to give an example then posed the question early in my career i worked in transitional housing through that experience i worked with a lot of individuals with job training and give them the skills that they needed one example was a woman had come into a transitional housing doing well winter job training we found an apartment for her she got to the point she was offered a raise in the promotion but if she took it and got the

promotion she was there is every benefit that she had so instead of moving forward which would have actually been a loss she got fired and lost her job and went back to square number one. in good almost ventura to say that if they don't move forward may find themselves in the same situation soho dealer policies address that gap between those of the reality especially in south carolina of minimum-wage jobs so hardly build support for them than bridge that gap is we don't incentivize people to go back to square number one in how to help the states use the earned

income tax credit to do so? >> it is the major issue of the proper calibrating of benefits see you are better off to take the higher paying job for additional hours per girl on the members to go first and i might make a comment myself. >> rabil not speak for maya other members but our thought process is it has to be a shared typo's solution between the taxpayer in the individual so when you have this effect we did a lot of work in our office the last couple years working with the disability community and your message is exactly what they hear they going to the office for the program services and if you do well you will be penalized we have to tools and my mind market pressure and

government mandates so by having for every $3 earned you keep in one goes back to the taxpayer or whatever the ratio could be some sharing that incentive makes sense not the cliff effected you go over the cliff yet you lose dollar for dollar it does make sense that the top-level but when you lived it and see it sharing the results of the positive step forward since the right message to those on the benefit you should be able to keep some of that but the taxpayer also shares in the savings and to come up with the solution to take that approach. >> i can say this quickly no transitional program should create a cliff environment for the recipient any

program is a teen -- just tooting there should be no penalty for the upward mobility process. if there is it is a huge she turns and then doesn't have much success. >> the other thing that happens the left in the right-hand don't know what is going on nobody knows where the cliff is of the individuals so scarry scared because they were told difference from one office stages know they want help they are trying to get assistance so there are different clefs at different levels or programs it is so complex from the feedback i have heard we need to put across the board were the cliffs are. >> in the cliff effect is not observe just like people like you with service providers with transitional housing but in the labor market and so were the h.r. manager or the plant manager is interviewing someone they

interviewed the job as a condition to continue public assistance but then declined the offer because it doesn't put them in a better position this is for data from multiple employers we are paying people to not work. sova to smooth out and end up -- to end the clef is critical. >> there are stories about cliffs and there are realities the evidence would get the cbo report the average marginal tax rates are not as high yes you can get to a place but do not exaggerate angelo was right we have solved the problem takes more money for the not have a clef but making a gradual it will take more money to provide transitional benefits even

with that atc the second income earner that cost more money so they do this. >> it is very important to note that our report is not about cutting budgets it does nothing about cutting budgets it is about lifting lives so we're saying is smooth it out yes it may take on the front and but the return on investment will be significant because issue will have people into stable long-term employment. >> just because that is the cluster data on how to keep it at that level of share at a lower amount you may not have to have as much additional money if you're at the starting point of today in now with the policy message we're in this with you.

>> this comes from my experience and as an administrator from a wonderful economist like harry we balance literally the hundreds of times you hear people out there tell you this exist they have talked to people who'd made a choice with regard to their future based on benefits in the economic evidence i have to say it is a close call i am not persuaded that this isn't what is really happening because i hear about it everywhere i go in a sea that in new york city and it isn't necessarily that they are worse off but they're not better enough off. they might be better but it is only marginal i only had they are accompanied with a requirement because if you

just smooth off the don't have the hassle we made this possible and you still declined the opportunity as entry-level but a job than that violates the of the ideas of the american people that want people to be helped but they also want them to be expected to make an effort to help themselves. what else do we have? >> this is the last question >> my dad was a pastor in the '80s, even back then the unification and treaty be where the government hand coming into your church what do we deal with with these issues how we incentivize the faith community to do

these things? >> that is a great question. we are similar minded from pastor preacher for a fifth decade to me and i believe there is evidence to support this look at faith based they are the first airline holding the hands of people getting it done so as much as we can keep government out of the way we do appreciate that we don't want to penalize them i think immediately when you said that to oklahoma with the newscast on cbs or nbc brian williams said if you're waiting on the federal government you may wait a while but the baptista already here gives you an idea how quickly the nonprofits can get together with the red tape that the same time there was of a

discussion just because the faith based organization and is connected we don't want to put to the many stipulations on them that restricts their ability to do the work they have done in the past. >> anything anybody wants to say they didn't get to say. [laughter] >> i am likely newly democratic political appointee in the room. [laughter] >> data when anybody to think i misrepresented myself. and congressman walker said it is and how may people guenon but how many people get off measure's success i don't think it is how many get on with those who get off there is a lot of working people in very low wage jobs that need the support its but food stamps to supplement them.