cochran





About the Michigan Senator I was born in Detroit, Michigan and graduated from Denby High School. After my senior year I got the opportunity to intern on the Senate floor. I went on to Princeton University where I graduated with a Bachelor’s Degree in political science. I continued my education receiving a J.D. degree at Yale Law School. I moved back to Detroit, married my high school sweet heart, and studied public policy at University of Michigan. I interned at the state’s capitol and got a first hand look at the issues Michigan faces. I am a senator for the people. I represent my state's people and try not to let my personal liberal views and beliefs only/completely direct my actions in the Senate.

Michigan has one of the highest unemployment rates, and the gap between haves and the have-nots continues to grow. I have dedicated my work at the capitol to squeezing the gap together through government. We need to make more equal opportunities, and the only way to do this is through the adjustment of the welfare system with more federal involvement. I want all the moms on welfare to be able to stay on welfare once they get a job. Once they get jobs their benefits are taken away, so they aren't being rewarded for becoming taxpaying citizens. The current system is not providing any incentive to hard workers. They'd make more money on welfare then they make at their jobs, so they'd rather stay on welfare. Their low-income jobs alone are not enough to pay for housing, childcare, health care, and all the other expenses that come with being a taxpaying citizen. The result is foreclosures, homelessness, and more unemployment. This is the current problem. Allowing the benefits to continue for a short set time once they get jobs and work a certain amount of hours per week. It is our job as a united country to help our hardworking brothers and sisters.

May 12, 2010 Senator Katherine Cochran Senator Hannah Solsky Senator Kelsey Warren Senator Flannery Broach An Act Title I. A woman with children who gets government assistance can improve her economic situation by working just part-time. She’d still be in poverty, but she would be able to retain most of her benefits. Therefore, there are economic rewards for being in the workforce only part-time. The system, however, penalizes the woman if she decides to work full-time. Although her wages would double, she would loose most of her government benefits. Thus her increases in earnings are really cut in half, by the loss of benefits. Instead of applauding, encouraging, and rewarding these hard-working mothers for becoming active members of today’s workforce; we effectively drive them away. All Americans want the members of their communities to be contributing members of society. No one wants a subgroup of our society trapped in the endless cycle of poverty. The current system provides no incentive or reward for being a low-income full-time worker.



Title II. Findings Today, public assistance programs only really give assistance to families with little or no income, so benefits decline fairly quickly as a family’s income raises. The eligibility ceilings and benefit levels for major entitlement assistance programs are shown in the big table. These programs are not really connected to work; they give benefits and help families by supplementing their incomes. For the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, beneficiaries have to meet certain work requirements. However, when a family gets a low-wage, part-time work the income raises above the eligibility threshold! The rest of the programs might not require work, they do phase out as the income rises. Therefore, low-income working families get little assistance. Families can qualify for federal rent subsidies. These pay the difference between the families’ rent contribution and the actual rent for a house or apartment. Families with incomes up to 80% of their local area median can qualify for federal housing assistance, but it is actually available for only about 1/3 of all who are eligible. The waiting lists are super long that some agencies only allow new applicants one every one or two years. Housing agencies target assistance to families with the lowest incomes (below 30% of the local area median) or the most severe housing needs. The average incomes of households receiving fell below $10,000 in 2000, and less than 1/3 of these families received most of their incomes from wages. __Earned income tax credit:__ provides benefits only to families with earned income and is the benefit low-income working families are most likely to receive. -22 million families (75-85% of eligible tax filers) benefitted from it in 2005 __Child Tax credit:__ largest tax benefit to families with children, not targeted at low-income families -Only 1% of total benefits go to families in the bottom income sector -While 60% go to families in the top two income sectors
 * Findings ** :

Right now a mother of two in Detroit would have a net income of about $10,800 after receiving benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families programs and Food Stamps. She and her children would have public health insurance as well. For tolerable housing, she’d have to use more than 85% of her income for annual rent. She takes on a part-time job, that’s 20 hours a week, at $10 an hour. She receives tax credits and can still get food stamps, but her TANF benefits are taken away. She still receives public health insurance and childcare subsidies, which lower her childcare costs. Now her income, after taxes, childcare expenses, and including benefits is roughly $18,000; and her housing cost would only take 51 percent of her income. Therefore the working mother is rewarded. We see problems when this mother starts working full time and earns $20,800 a year. Her income now is too high to qualify for food stamps, the value of her Earned Income Tax Credit falls, and her payroll and state taxes rise. Even though she doubles her work effort, she only gets to keep about $5,000 of the $10,400 she earned by adding 20 hours to her week. She also might not be covered under Medicaid, even though her children would still be eligible for public health insurance, and her childcare expenses would rise because she doubles her working time. That eats up her $5,000 right there.



• Working families with children o Both renters and homeowners o Annual earnings exceeding the earnings level at which the EITC is fully phased in • EITC phase out o Benefit families earning $16,000-$45,000 a year • CTC refundable credit o Benefits lowest earning working families with incomes up to $24,000 a year o Not receiving federal housing subsidies • For the Federal Incentive Fund— o Jurisdictions are able to receive awards from this fund only if they reduced regulatory barriers to affordable housing production and demonstrably expanded the supply of moderately priced rental housing within their borders Terms and Benefits ** : • Phase out the Earned Income Tax Credit more slowly as earnings increase o Rate change from 21.06 percent to 15.98 percent § That’s the rate for families with one child—making it equal § This way $360 more a year for typical low-income families o This would give working families a tax cut and allow them to keep more of their earnings § They then would be rewarded for working more § Boosts after-tax incomes of low-income working families o If this rises, phaseout rates fall, eligibility ceilings for assistance and tax credits rise § Families receiving benefits receive more, meaning families now are able to have higher income and more become eligible for help § MEANING—families earning $48,000 could still claim benefits o Increases purchasing power—more money in the economy o Cost $3.7 billion annually • Make the Federal Child Tax Credit (CTC) refundable starting with the first dollar of earnings o 10% phase-in rate allowing families earning $10,000 to receive full credit § Instead of requiring $11,300 in income before receiving credit o Families below $110,000 receive full credit already -- no working low-income family would lose their benefits as their income increased § Not until they were no longer “low-income” o This would offset the phase-outs of other program benefits o $6.4 billion annually • Fill the gap between the cost of decent housing and what low-wage workers can afford to spend o New, refundable tax credit to help cover high housing costs work low-income working families § Calculated to cover the cost of decent housing in the communities where they live o The credit’s value would raise as annual earnings increase § Stop when annual earnings reach $17,060 (just above full-time minimum wage) § Would equal half the difference of $4,524 and the family’s annual rent or mortgage payment (up to a maximum—the fair-market rent where the family lives) · $4,524= “affordable” housing expenditure for a family supported by one full-time worker earning the minimum wage (as of June 2009) · Fair-market rent= cost of modest, decent-quality housing available on the market (HUD calculates for all metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan countries nationwide) § For families earning less than the amount required to receive full EITC benefits ($12,060 for families with 2 children in 2008) the credit would increase from zero up to-- § Families earning $17,060 would receive the full amount of credit § Until a families earnings top $40,000 the amount of credit would remain the same · Once a family tops this the credit would phase down from the maximum value by $20 for every additional $100 in earnings o Maximum amount of credit would vary § Local housing costs § Calibrated to substantially narrow the gap between what a full-time, low-wage worker can afford to spend on housing and the actual cost of housing in the local market § The value would be greatest for families with earnings at or above the full-time minimum wage level o Would serve about 12 million families and cost $27 billion annually • Increasing minimum wage by $2 will bring it up from $7.25 to $9.25. o This allows more purchasing power in these economic times. o Keeps pace with inflation • Expand and retarget Low Income Housing Tax Credit program that is working through the states to provide tax credits to inventors in housing development deals o 20% increase in the program’s size o direct more tax credits to states where rental housing is in short supply (and fewer to states where the supply of rental housing is adequate) o target to locations within these states where moderately priced rental housing is scarce o Cost $1 billion annually • New federal incentive fund to spur more affordable rental production o Use for any housing or community development purpose o $1 billion—would support awards of $10 million each to the 100 top-performing jurisdictions across the country
 * Eligibility ** :

This bill would increase the net incomes of working families with earnings up to and beyond $40,000 a year, with the largest benefits going to full-time working families with low-wages. Families would still suffer from high tax rates, but their net incomes are significantly higher and their housing costs are more affordable. As families move into middle-income status, this plan’s phase out creates higher effective tax rates than exists under the current law. However, these families are more financially secure and will be increasingly able to take advantage of the home mortgage interest deduction. If more decent-quality affordable housing is built, low-income families benefit. It integrates low-income working families into the conventional marketplace and the social mainstream.
 * The effects of this bill: **



Amendment proposed by Senator Knowles: Amendment vote: yeahs 10 nays 6

 following benefits:

1. government provided financial aid in the form of government checks and/or food stamps for the specified duration

However the following restrictions will be put in place: 1. After filing for assisstance the recipient (s) of this aid have up to 12 months after being accepted into the program to find stable employment. The amount of assistance received per month shall __NOT__ exceed the amount that the recipient had received per month during his/her last job. If employment is found before the 12 month period is over the recipients will continue to receive a check each month until the 12 month period is over. If his/her new salary amounts to more than they had been receiving previously, the government will be prepared to match the amount of the new salary as long as it does not exceed double their previous salary. If his/her new salary amounts to less than what the applicant was receiving before, then the government will be prepared to continue with the amount of the previous payments until the 12 month period is complete. 2. For each dependent that the recipient has, he/she will be allotted an extra two months of assistance before being ejected from the program. A spouse does not qualify as a dependent. Each adult must apply for assistance separately and fufill the all of the requirements to receive payments. 3. If at __ANY__ time during the allotted period, the recipient fails to comply with the eligibility requirments listed above, he/she __will__ be ejected from the program. 4. If the recipient loses his/her job after having received benefits from this program, he/she may reapply for entrance into the program if the following conditions are satisfied: a) The applicant __MUST__ continue to fufill __ALL__ of the qualifications for initial entrance into the program specified above. b) The applicant MUST have held FULL-TIME emplyoment making at least minimum wage for a period of NO LESS than 12 month s. c) The applicant __MUST NOT__ have lost his/her job due to __ANY__ the following: 1. Numerous unexcused absenses 2. Inadequate job performance 3. Unwillingness to comply with the business related requests of his/her boss/supervisor 4. Unwillingness to follow designated rules and/or policies of the employer 5. Illegal activities resulting in a conviction d) The applicant __MUST__ have established a permanent residence prior to re-applying into the program, and be able to prove that they can maintain and finance that residence. e) The applicant __MUST__ not have a criminal record that is more recent than their original application to the program. 1. If the applicant is reaccepted in to program the following restrictions will be put in place:

A. The restrictions for initial acceptance into the program __STILL__ apply. Any violation of restrictions will result in__IMMEDIATE__ termination of financial assistance. B. After being reaccepted in to the program applicant will have a period of time __NOT__ to exceed 10 months to either reattain previous employment or to find new employment. For each dependent, the recipient will be alloted __NO__ more than an additional month. C. If employment is found before the 10 month period is over, the recipient will __NOT__continue to receive benefits until the 10 month period has expired. Benefits will cease after employment has been proven by recipient. However, the recipient will be allotted an extra 2 months per dependent. If a recipient with (a) dependent (s) finds employment before the allotted amount of time, the recipient will continue to receive benefits until the **__10 month__** period is over, however benefits will __NOT__ be received after **__10 month__s.** D. If, for any reason, the recipient finds his/herself without employment after the 10 month period has expired, he/she may __NOT__ reapply.