Attorneys for the state and for thousands of welfare recipients whose benefits were reduced beginning this summer argued in court Wednesday over the procedures state officials used to make the cuts.
The state failed to obtain federal waivers or give proper notice to recipients as required by the federal Food Stamp Act before implementing welfare program cuts made by the 2003 Legislature, said Ralonda Mason, an attorney with St. Cloud Area Legal Services.
Welfare recipients abide by detailed rules to maintain their benefits, and "what [they] don't understand is why [state officials] are not required to follow the law," she argued.
Patricia Sonnenberg, an assistant attorney general, said the state did not violate federal laws or rules in making the welfare-benefit reductions.
That was made clear, she said, in a letter state officials received from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in mid-July that approved changes without requiring any new waivers.
Welfare recipients who brought a class-action lawsuit against the state in June are asking Ramsey County District Judge Judith Tilsen to rule that the state violated the Food Stamp Act and to prohibit the state from making further benefit changes without prior federal approval.
They are also asking Tilsen to order the state to refund housing subsidy reductions.
Tilsen took the case under advisement at the end of Wednesday's court hearing in St. Paul.
She issued a temporary restraining order June 30 halting some of the welfare-benefit cuts, but she lifted the order July 18 after federal officials said the changes did not require Food Stamp Act waivers.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/467/4247445.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is this a violation of the rights of welfare recipients, or just comon sense with all the cuts in Goverment Aid?
The state failed to obtain federal waivers or give proper notice to recipients as required by the federal Food Stamp Act before implementing welfare program cuts made by the 2003 Legislature, said Ralonda Mason, an attorney with St. Cloud Area Legal Services.
Welfare recipients abide by detailed rules to maintain their benefits, and "what [they] don't understand is why [state officials] are not required to follow the law," she argued.
Patricia Sonnenberg, an assistant attorney general, said the state did not violate federal laws or rules in making the welfare-benefit reductions.
That was made clear, she said, in a letter state officials received from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in mid-July that approved changes without requiring any new waivers.
Welfare recipients who brought a class-action lawsuit against the state in June are asking Ramsey County District Judge Judith Tilsen to rule that the state violated the Food Stamp Act and to prohibit the state from making further benefit changes without prior federal approval.
They are also asking Tilsen to order the state to refund housing subsidy reductions.
Tilsen took the case under advisement at the end of Wednesday's court hearing in St. Paul.
She issued a temporary restraining order June 30 halting some of the welfare-benefit cuts, but she lifted the order July 18 after federal officials said the changes did not require Food Stamp Act waivers.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/467/4247445.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is this a violation of the rights of welfare recipients, or just comon sense with all the cuts in Goverment Aid?
