TANF Reauthorization: Side-by-Side Comparison of Current Law, S. 667, and H.R. 240 (TANF Provisions)

Publication Date: September 2005

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Social conditions

Type:

Abstract:

The 109th Congress is considering legislation to reauthorize the block grant of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) for five years. Congress has inconclusively debated long-term TANF authorizations since 2002, instead adopting short-term extensions. The latest extension (P.L. 109-19) funds the program through December 31, 2005. Thus far in the 109th Congress, the Senate Finance Committee has reported S. 667 (S.Rept. 109-51). A bill introduced by House Republican leaders, H.R. 240, has received approval from the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Human Resources.

S. 667 and H.R. 240 are very similar in terms of how they would continue funding under the TANF program. Both bills extend basic TANF funding at current levels ($16.6 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the territories) through FY2010 and extend supplemental grants provided to 17 states through FY2009. Both bills provide new, categorical grants for marriage promotion activities totaling $200 million per year financed through a reduction in current TANF bonuses to states. The major difference in the TANF funding provisions of the two bills is how they provide extra contingency (recession-related) funding to the states. H.R. 240 essentially extends the current law fund that provides matching grants to states experiencing high and increased unemployment rates and food stamp caseloads. S. 667 eliminates the requirement that states expend additional money to access contingency funds, and instead bases extra funding on the cost of increased caseloads for states that meet revised unemployment or food stamp caseload criteria.

The two bills would substantially revise the TANF work participation standards that states must meet. Under current law, 50% of TANF families with an adult or minor household head must participate, though the 50% rate is reduced by caseload reductions that have occurred since welfare reform. Both S. 667 and H.R. 240 would raise this standard to 70%, though under both bills the standard could be reduced through credits (though the credits differ between the two bills). Both also eliminate a separate 90% participation rate requirement for two-parent families. Both bills would raise the minimum hours required of family members in order to be considered full participants, though H.R. 240 would raise them by more than would S. 667. The bills also differ in the activities countable toward the participation standards: H.R. 240 narrows the list of activities countable, requiring recipients to spend at least 24 hours in work, community service, or work experience programs except for a short (usually three-month) period when states may themselves define what counts as "activities." S. 667 keeps all activities under current law as countable, and allows states to count a wider range of activities for three months (more under some circumstances).

Both bills contain non-TANF provisions relating to child support enforcement, responsible "fatherhood" programs, and transitional medical assistance (not addressed herein). This report will be updated as S. 667 and H.R. 240 move through the legislative process.