PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 106-456, Part I.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Nov 5, 1999
Welfare-to-Work Amendments of 1999 - Amends part A (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) (TANF) of title IV of the Social Security Act with regard to Welfare-to-Work grants to States. Changes from mandatory to discretionary the authority of a project grantee to expend its funds for the benefit of TANF recipients. Repeals current allocation percentage requirements, as well as the current requirement that a recipient meet two of the following criteria: (1) be a school dropout or have no general equivalency degree, and have low reading or math skills; (2) require substance abuse treatment for employment; or (3) have a poor work history. (Retains the current requirement that a recipient must either have received Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) or TANF for 30 months or be within 12 months of losing eligibility because of a time limit.)Prescribes criteria for the provision of project funds to assist certain noncustodial parents to participate in employment or related activities that will enable them to make regular child support payments. Prescribes requirements for such recipients, including an oral or written personal responsibility contract containing certain conditions.Authorizes Welfare-to-Work projects to assist: (1) children between ages 18 and 25 who have received foster care maintenance payments; (2) State TANF recipients with significant barriers to self-sufficiency (as determined according to criteria of the local private industry council); and (3) custodial parents with incomes below 100 percent of the poverty line.Makes vocational educational or job training for up to six months an allowable activity.Permits certain grantees which are not private industry councils or workforce investment boards to provide Welfare-to-Work employment services directly.Repeals the requirement for quarterly State data reports on the Welfare-to-Work program.Reduces the set-aside under provisions for grants for successful performance bonuses.Reduces appropriations for FY 1999.
People & committees
Rep. Goodling, William F. [R-PA-19] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 106-456, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 106-456, Part I.
For Further Action See H.R.3073.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3172 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3172 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3172 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3172 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.