I don't like when people put down individuals who receive welfare.  I don't like the term "welfare people" or the jokes about welfare queens or the condescending sneers.  I don't like the way the term itself is used to convey a litany of classist, racist, and sexist stereotypes which, unfortunately, now have the legislative muscle to keep poor women down and out. 

Feministing sent me to a great article on new welfare regulations at TomPaine.com written by Maureen Lane, co-director of the Welfare Rights Initiative at Hunter College City of University of New York.

For these families, the rules represent a narrowing of the best opportunity many have of moving, not just from welfare, but permanently out of poverty. Study after study has shown that when people receiving welfare have the chance to get an education?whether it?s earning a college degree, securing a GED or mastering the English language?their family incomes and long-term prospects improve far more than those families who remain trapped in low-wage jobs. Yet dead-end low-wage positions without benefits or security are frequently the only jobs people pushed off the rolls without education and training are able to secure in this economy.

Welfare is supposed to be a safety net for the most vulnerable people in our society.  Reform should include resources and programs that enable people to become self-sufficient, a standard that $5.50 per hour with no benefits does not accomplish.  That only accomplishes a vicious cycle of poverty with its full array of ancillary problems.

For details on local welfare rights inititiatives, go to Just Harvest.