This is the latest in an occasional series analyzing the issues,
records and platforms of the candidates seeking the governorship in the
upcoming election. This installment focuses on welfare and the
Since Gov. Cecil Underwood took office, the number of people on
welfare has dropped more than 70 percent, the governor boasts in
his campaign literature.
What the Republican governor does not say is that the drop was caused
by three things, all of which were at work before he took office.
First, the number of people signing up for welfare was already
dropping and had been since 1993. Second, Congress dictated most of the
changes in a 1996 law that cut off the majority of West Virginia families
during the last four years. Third, former Gov. Gaston Caperton's
administration interpreted that law, and prepared a bill for the
Legislature before Underwood took office.
Underwood's administration has zealously carried out those changes,
however, even the ones that were tougher than federal law required, that
cut assistance to families with disabled members or made it difficult to
pursue college degrees or other training. Under his administration, 12,000
of the state's poorest children were cut off Medicaid in 1997 and 1998, at
least some because the state incorrectly carried out federal
welfare law, according to the Children's Defense Fund.
In April, the federal Health Care Financing Administration sent letters
warning states they had cut families and children off Medicaid because of
computer errors or inadequate welfare evaluations.
West Virginia's tougher welfarerules cut about 30,000
families off welfare. In August, 11,395 families received
Because Congress froze West Virginia's welfare budget at old,
high-enrollment levels, the state has about $180 million left over in
Washington, according to Olivia Golden, assistant secretary for the U.S.
Administration for Children and Families. That money is supposed to pay
for services to improve the lives of the state's poorest residents, to
help them avoid the need for welfare forever.
Underwood's administration has been slow to spend the money. States
that don't spend it are in danger of losing it.
In one category - child care - Underwood's administration did act.
People who go to work won't keep a job for long if they don't have
reliable child care, so Department of Health and Human Resources Secretary
Joan Ohl transferred $20 million of the state's welfare money to
child care during the past three years, according to the U.S.
Administration for Children and Families.
Underwood's campaign materials tout 3,050 child-care slots and more
than $2 million in grants to child-care providers.
The administration has wiped out a waiting list of low-income parents
in line for help to pay for child care and raised the rates child-care
By paying child-care providers on time and at the same rate that
unsubsidized parents pay, Underwood's administration encouraged day-care
centers around the state to take children of low-income families and to
expand their businesses to accommodate more families.
In addition, child-care providers are offered $1 an hour extra per
child for certain activities, such as improving care through training or
for offering child-care during nontraditional hours.
Underwood also transferred millions to social services for
low-income and troubled families, and increased the amount each family
But the state still has millions left over, and Underwood's
administration has been reluctant to spend it.
Only this summer - just months before the election - did
Underwood begin to release about $22 million of the money to
various community and religious groups with plans to help unemployed and
Underwood defends his timing.