Books > Social sciences > Politics & government > Central government > Central government policies
|
Buy Now
Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance (Paperback)
Loot Price: R377
Discovery Miles 3 770
|
|
Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance (Paperback)
(sign in to rate)
Loot Price R377
Discovery Miles 3 770
Expected to ship within 10 - 15 working days
|
Throughout the history of social assistance programs,
administrators have attempted to limit access only to those
families considered "worthy" of assistance. Policies about
worthiness have included both judgments about need-generally tied
to income, demographic characteristics, or family circumstances-and
judgments about moral character, often as evidenced by behavior.
Past policies evaluating moral character based on family structure
have been replaced by today's policies, which focus on criminal
activity, particularly drug-related criminal activity. The existing
crime and drug-related restrictions were established in the late
1980s through the mid-1990s, when crime rates, especially
drug-related violent crime rates, were at peak levels. While crime
rates have since declined, interest in expanding these policies has
continued. The three programs examined in this report-the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food Stamps), and
federal housing assistance programs (public housing and Section 8
tenant and project-based assistance)-are similar, in that they are
administered at the state or local level. They are different in the
forms of assistance they provide. TANF provides cash assistance and
other supports to low-income parents and their children, with a
specific focus on promoting work. SNAP provides food assistance to
a broader set of poor households including families with children,
elderly households, and persons with disabilities. The housing
assistance programs offer subsidized rental housing to all types of
poor families, like SNAP. All three programs feature some form of
drug- and other crime-related restrictions and all three leave
discretion in applying those restrictions to state and local
administrators. Both TANF and SNAP are subject to the statutory
"drug felon ban," which bars states from providing assistance to
persons convicted of a drug-related felony, but also gives states
the ability to opt-out of or modify the ban, which most states have
done. Housing assistance programs are not subject to the drug felon
ban, but they are subject to a set of policies that allow local
program administrators to deny or terminate assistance to persons
involved in drug-related or other criminal activity. Housing law
also includes mandatory restrictions related to specific crimes,
including sex offenses and methamphetamine production. All three
programs also have specific restrictions related to fugitive
felons. Recently, the issue of drug testing in federal assistance
programs has risen in prominence. In the case of TANF, states are
permitted to drug-test recipients; however, state policies
involving suspicionless drug testing of TANF applicants and
recipients are currently being challenged in courts. SNAP law does
not explicitly address drug testing, but given the way that SNAP
and TANF law interact, state TANF drug testing policies may affect
SNAP participants. The laws governing housing assistance programs
are silent on the topic of drug testing. The current set of crime-
and drug-related restrictions in federal assistance programs are
not consistent across programs, meaning that similarly situated
persons may have different experiences based on where they live and
what assistance they are seeking. This variation may be considered
important, in that it reflects a stated policy goal of local
discretion. However, the variation may also be considered
problematic if it leads to confusion among eligible recipients as
to what assistance they are eligible for or if the variation is
seen as inequitable. Proposals to modify these policies also
highlight a tension that exists between the desire to use these
policies as a deterrent or punishment and the desire to support the
neediest families, including those that have ex-offenders in the
household.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
|
You might also like..
|