Ex-welfare official answers his critics

Robert W. Patterson is editor of The Family in America, and recently exited the Corbett administration, where he was special assistant to the secretary of public welfare

During the last few weeks, The Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News have had a field day with the journal I edit, The Family in America, deploying scorn, ridicule, and caricature to depict me as an "extremist" unworthy of a political appointment at the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW). It's time to tell the other side of the story.

The Journal. Contrary to press misrepresentations, The Family in America is not a faith-based journal, nor is religion the "center" of the Howard Center, its Illinois publisher. Any casual reader will discover that the public-affairs quarterly relies heavily on empirical, academic research that quantifies the value of marriage and intact families to America's social and economic well-being. Religion is rarely discussed in the journal. Its stable of contributors and its 22-member editorial board are composed of respected policy experts and academics.

Even its much-maligned "New Research" commentary that generated the most derision - on semen's apparent antidepressive effects on women - was merely a recitation of a study previously referenced in Scientific American. Moreover, the assertion that I "condemn" contraception and working women misrepresents the journal's thoughtful essays questioning publicly funded birth control and gender-based affirmative action.

Yes, the journal promotes a viewpoint, deeply rooted in the social and biological sciences and increasingly accepted across the ideological spectrum, that men, women, and children - as well as society as a whole - are healthier, happier, and more prosperous in the context of monogamous, lifelong marriages with multiple offspring. We lament, as does social scientist Charles Murray in his new book Coming Apart, the retreat from marriage since the 1970s, a retreat that leaves not only the poor but also the entire American project at risk.

The journal and its work have implications for needed reforms at DPW. It provides solid, research-based intellectual underpinnings for the proposition that only policies that promote personal responsibility through family formation and the dignity of labor - rather than enabling unwed childbearing and family breakdown - can make any lasting headway in alleviating poverty.

In contrast, the policies of President Obama and his Democratic predecessors dating back to the Great Society offer troubled cities like Philadelphia merely the perpetuation of dependency, despondency, and despair. More welfare and more food stamps leading to further addiction to government programs will only lead to more hollowing out of once-thriving working-class neighborhoods like Fishtown, as Murray highlights in his work.

DPW Reforms. Given this clear contrast, Gov. Corbett could not have appointed a more qualified public-welfare secretary than Gary Alexander. Alexander is an accomplished administrator with a track record of saving taxpayers billions of dollars while improving care for the truly needy and the severely disabled - in one of the bluest of blue states, Rhode Island. His commonsense agenda has centered on removing noneligible individuals from the welfare rolls as federal law requires while seeking greater flexibility to channel limited resources to the most vulnerable.

Yet the secretary's modest reforms have touched a raw nerve in the ranks of liberal-advocacy groups, government employees, and legislators focused not on the best interests of the poor but on preserving their power base. The smear of The Family in America was, in reality, part of a campaign to malign Alexander, a campaign that reaches the highest levels of government.

It's no coincidence that shortly after The Inquirer attacked me, former Gov. (and former head of the Democratic National Committee) Ed Rendell held a Harrisburg news conference to denounce food-stamp reforms while the White House dispatched Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to Philadelphia to attack my former boss.

The Pennsylvania Taxpayer. If advocates for an already bloated welfare system succeed, they will bankrupt the commonwealth fiscally and socially. The state now supports about 2.75 million welfare recipients on the backs of about 5.9 million workers in the labor force. That ratio is unsustainable, yet the former governor, Secretary Vilsack, and President Obama want Gov. Corbett to put even more Pennsylvanians on the public dole.

The big question is how Corbett, who rode to office on the promise of reform, responds to the pressure. Will he fight for his welfare secretary, the true best interests of the poor, and the taxpayers who elected him? Or will he buckle - as he did in my case - to the media, the professional bureaucrats, and special-interest groups who are blocking needed reforms? Pennsylvanians should demand that the governor stand up for pro-family and pro-taxpayer principles that offer genuine hope for the poor and greater prosperity for their commonwealth.