Late last month, Massachusetts State Auditor Suzanne Bump released a report outlining serious deficiencies in the Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA), which oversees the commonwealth’s welfare system. The accusations levied in the audit that hundreds of welfare recipients have found ways to cheat the system and collect benefits to which they are not entitled are very serious and should be taken as such.
While several lawmakers and government officials including Governor Deval Patrick have questioned the accuracy of the report, saying “nine out of ten of the conclusions [in the report] are wrong,” (a statement Bump has refuted) the potential for abuses of the welfare system should not be ignored. Regardless, it is important to note that this report condemns the state for systemic failures to prevent fraud, and it should not be taken as evidence against the value or necessity of public assistance.
But when it comes to finding a solution, policy makers should not jump to conclusions on what actions should be taken without fully vetting the potential consequences. Since the release of the report, state legislators have proposed several reform measures. One of the most significant of these is a proposal to require photos on Electronic Benefit Transfer cards to prevent welfare recipients from selling their cards for cash, as the audit speculated may have happened because of instances of people asking for replacement cards excessively.
The report found that millions of dollars in welfare benefits were being collected on behalf of dead recipients, recipients claiming deceased dependents or recipients who had used false Social Security numbers to collect more payments than those to which they are eligible. Those claiming that a sweeping welfare reform is necessary or even proper to solve these problems are mistaken, as these issues are those of welfare recipients violating existing rules. Raising standards for benefits will not stop these abuses.
Instead, an independent investigation into how it is that so many people were able to dupe the DTA is necessary. More resources should be devoted to uncovering and fighting welfare fraud. More than likely, a change in DTA leadership will also prove necessary. Instead of creating new restrictions, the state should just try to enforce the rules that are already in place, although some new common-sense regulations may prove helpful.
In drafting legislation to ensure such reforms are taken, legislators will need to walk the fine line between necessary enforcement measures and putting undue burdens on, or even vilifying, welfare recipients. The state Senate recently rejected amendments from its budget that would have addressed some of the concerns raised by the report. While some, if not all, of these measures may eventually prove to be necessary, the Senate was right not to act with haste.
Instead of an emotional, gut-reaction to this politically-charged issue, all options should be carefully considered in regards to the effect they will have on those who truly need welfare benefits and do not abuse the system, and how well they will address not only the symptoms of the problem, but also the underlying causes.
Almost 900,000 people in the state receive benefits from the DTA, and the instances of abuse account for a miniscule portion of this population. While the inefficiencies of the system and abuses of it should be reduced as much as possible, the benefit of doing so must be weighed against the potential cost to the state’s neediest people.
