The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 is not entirely consistent with Christian social ethics. As Thompson (58) points out, the reformers of our original welfare system "had a variety of motives and objectives," many of which had nothing to do with the well-being of welfare recipients. Although the premise that "Welfare should be a second chance, not a way of life" is laudable, the Act encumbered poor people with time limits and other restrictions that they must meet or else lose their benefits (Thompson 58). Although, as Thompson (58) notes, the Act produced good results in terms of lower welfare rolls and a decrease in unwed mothers, it is also true that part of the reason the welfare rolls were lower was that many welfare recipients could no longer qualify for assistance due to the many restrictions in the Act.
In his book Champions of the Poor, Barend A. de Vries (39) states that "a basic first principle is that concern for the poor deserves a central place in all our social deliberations." De Vries (39) notes that the Bible "considers poverty a critical issue deserving our urgent attention, and expresses God's love and concern for the poor." By restricting access to welfare funds for the poor, setting time limits, and otherwise relegating many poor to a situation where cannot qualify for aid, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 violates this Christian principle.
de Vries, Barend A. Champions of the Poor. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1998.
Thompson, Joseph Milburn. Justice and Peace: A Christian Primer. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2003.
...