Back in 1995, the Cato Institute published a study entitled, “The Work vs. Welfare Trade-Off,” which analyzed welfare benefits in all 50 states, and concluded they were a disincentive to work. A year later, the Congress enacted, and President Clinton signed, welfare-reform legislation that ended Aid to Families with Dependent Children, replacing it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program.

This year, the Cato Institute reviewed the work-to-welfare trade-off and found that our welfare policy is still a disincentive for people to move from welfare to work. Here’s what the study found.

Nationwide, less than 42 percent of adult welfare recipients work. Caveat: the 42 percent figure is probably high because “work activities” such as job training and job search are included as work. Cato concludes that less than 20 percent of welfare recipients have unsubsidized, private-sector jobs.

Tracking welfare requires following 126 different federal programs in the form of cash, food, housing, medical care, utility assistance, etc., of which 72 either provide cash or in-kind benefits to recipients.

The remaining programs are either targeted to communities or are categorical, such as belonging to a disadvantaged group. To this number, add a multitude of state, county, and municipal programs. Federal and state welfare programs combined now cost taxpayers nearly $1 trillion annually.

I focused just on New York state to measure the disincentive to move from welfare to work. In inflation-adjusted terms, for a mother with two dependent children, New York has increased its welfare-benefits package between 1995 and 2013 from $33,430 to $38,004, a 13.7 percent increase. Keep in mind that the above numbers are after-tax dollars. A working person in New York must earn $43,700 in gross wages to net the $38,004. Based on a work-year of 2,080 hours, that’s the equivalent of just over $21 per hour or 110.5 percent of the state’s median salary.

Clearly, not all welfare recipients utilize all of the programs available, but those on welfare for long periods are likely to receive multiple benefits. Despite help from the earned-income tax credit, the child-tax credit, and other aid to transition from work to welfare, those who opt out of welfare must be prepared to pay for items such as transportation, childcare, and clothing.

For all of the hoopla associated with welfare reform back in 1996, not much has changed, except that the level of benefits for New York state recipients is more generous. While welfare recipients are required to work or participate in a job search, the definition of work activity is so broad as to exempt the majority on welfare and the benefits so generous that a recipient can earn more on welfare than in the workplace. The result is a huge financial burden to taxpayers and a trap for many recipients who choose leisure over work.

Any idea that the nation has a public policy to encourage work over welfare is belied by the figures. Until we reduce the current benefit level and tighten the eligibility standards, nothing will change.

Under these circumstances, deciding to draw welfare and not work is a purely rational choice.

Norman Poltenson is publisher of The Central New York Business Journal. Contact him at npoltenson@cnybj.com

There is a new water-level plan proposed for Lake Ontario that will threaten shoreline property, recreational activity, and damage public infrastructure. Plan 2014 has been proposed by the International Joint Commission (IJC). The IJC is comprised of six members from Canada and the U.S. It was created to help handle issues in shared waters, such as the Great Lakes.

Proponents of the plan say Plan 2014 will return the lake levels to a more natural state, and therefore, create higher highs and lower lows, depending on the time of year. I fear these new highs and lows will have a significant and detrimental impact on all property and business owners along Lake Ontario, and communities have not been given enough consideration with this new study.

Lake Ontario water levels are adjusted by the Moses-Saunders dam at Cornwall, Ont., and Massena, N.Y., which was built in the 1950s in order to produce hydropower and permit larger ships to navigate between Montreal and Lake Ontario. The current lake plan system has been in place since 1958 and generally keeps levels within an expected range. It has worked for 60 years, keeps water more contained, and property along the shore generally protected from storms, high waves, and flooding.

I agree that we need to create policies and management plans that will better our environment. In this case, however, the environmental benefits to implementing such a plan are not being made clear. Some have said muskrats will multiply with this new plan. Muskrats are already prolific. Another advantage that has been mentioned is Northern Pike will flourish; however, they too exist in healthy numbers.

I also understand Plan 2014 may increase our ability to harness more hydropower, but the property, community, and infrastructure damage it will cause surely outweighs the expected increase in hydropower. The increased volume of the lake may not allow water to freeze. Without the ice and snow build-up, this inhibits natural storm shore protection during the winter.

         Another aspect missing from Plan 2014 is it does not make provisions for homeowners along the shore, for when their property floods and erodes, and property value likely decreases and flood insurance increases. While the study contains detailed data outlining how wildlife will be impacted with charts, it does not include estimates of private or public property loss, job losses, loss of tourism revenue, or cost to prevent floods, all of which are important to the many communities and residents that will be affected by any lake plan.

         Homeowners along the shore, however, estimate that along a six-county region, there are 10,025 private and public parcels with a total assessed value of $3.7 billion. This property has a few effects on the economy and local tax bases:

§ At an average 4 percent property and school tax rate, there is $148 million annually, which supports local economies.

§ At an average of 1 percent (data found on cost of annual maintenance of property) the annual cost to maintain the properties equals $37 million into local economies. Since property maintenance involves most likely taxable products, this equals a loss of $2.96 million per year to state and local governments.

§ If just 10 percent of properties are damaged due to Plan 2014, this will equal damages amounting to $370 million.

The public had until Aug. 30 to submit comments. Many local municipalities, counties, and landowners have already voiced opposition to the plan. Some municipalities have put forth resolutions calling for further study on the impact this will have on communities. Many others, however, have unfortunately voiced support for the proposed plan, including some federal representatives.

Both the Canadian and U.S. Federal governments will decide whether or not to implement the plan. There is more information available to the public at http://ijc.org/en_/losl.

William (Will) A. Barclay is the Republican representative of the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses most of Oswego County, including the cities of Oswego and Fulton, as well as the town of Lysander in Onondaga County and town of Ellisburg in Jefferson County. Contact him at barclaw@assembly.state.ny.us.