The Health bulletin [serial] - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

equest for an expansion of such programs
on the assumption that full
need would be met. That is one of the
things we asked for and didn't get.
Something we did not ask for and
did get was the ceiling which the Committee
placed on the AFDC program.
The proportion of children on the
rolls because of the absence or deser-
tion of a parent would be frozen as of
the proportion obtaining in January of
this year. 1 will recommend to the
Senate deletion of the provision.
Under the House amendment, the
Federal Government would be fore-
closed from sharing in the support of
children whose condition is precisely
the same as that of children already be-
ing assisted. The States would be en-
couraged—virtually forced—to estab-
lish even more restrictive eligibility re-
quirements, or else to lower the al-
ready inadequate support being paid.
I do not believe that children should
have to pay for the shortcomings and
inequities of the society into which they
are born. I
do
not believe that chil-
dren should have to pay for the real
or supposed sins of their parents. And
I think
it would be shortsighted of a
society to produce, by its neglect, a
group of future citizens very likely to
be unproductive and characterized by
bitterness and alienation.
Earlier, I spoke
of the new oppor-
tunities we have to start to do the job
that we know needs to be done. But
it would be dishonest not to acknowl-
edge the real obstacles we face in try-
ing to do it. Since we don't have all
day, I
won't
name them all.
The first and most obvious thing to
say is that many of the problems en-
countered by the welfare program will
not be solved within the context of the
welfare program itself. They are rooted
in the fact of poverty and all that
goes with it— bad housing, poor schools.
dismal and decayed neighborhoods,
crime, family life that is often unstable,
and the feelings of despair, apathy, and
hopelessness harbored by so many who
are trapped in such environments.
I believe
that those in public wel-
fare have been criticized, too often
and unfairly, for failure to surmount
problems that are beyond their scope
and power. Poverty itself is the enemy,
and it will take a good deal more than
changes in the welfare system to con-
quer it.
But we here today have to work
within the immediate context, with
the resources we now have available
and within the restrictions placed upon
us. We are able to reach only a frac-
tion of the poor— about one-fourth—
with financial help. We are able to
reach a much smaller fraction of those
who need social and rehabilitative serv-
ices. The very least we can do is to
deliver the available money and services
effectively to those we are now
able to help. We must be ardent advo-
cates for these immediate clients of
ours, but we must also strive to keep
the eyes of the Nation on the 24 mil-
lion poor Americans who receive no
financial help; on the 5 million chil-
dren whose fathers work full time all
year round and still cannot make
enough to support their families ade-
quately; on the millions more, poor or
not, who need various kinds of help
and service to cope responsibly and
fully in a complex society.
I said that we have to act within
the present context. That does not
mean that we cannot look beyond it.
The extremely valuable report made to
me by the Advisory Council on Pub-
lic Welfare enlarges our vision of the
job remaining to be done. One may or
may not believe that the route proposed
by the Council is the best possible one
to reach our goal. But it makes vividly
10 THE HEALTH BULLETIN September, 1967