Next: workforce reform

TODAY MARKS the 10th anniversary of welfare reform, but hold off on the champagne. The country still hasn't won the fight against poverty. States have slashed welfare rolls -- a partial victory. In 1995, Massachusetts had 103,000 families on welfare. Today there are only 46,000.

But ``We still have too many poor people," says Peter Edelman, a Georgetown University law professor who quit his job as a White House official in protest when President Clinton signed the welfare reform act.

The poverty rate did fall from 13.7 percent in 1996 to 12.7 percent in 2004, according to Census figures. But given population increases, that's actually an increase from 36.5 million to 37 million people in poverty.

The fact is that welfare reform works best when the economy is hot. The banner year was 2000: The poverty rate was 11.3 percent. Eighty-six percent of the population had health insurance coverage, a 15-year high. And child poverty fell to a 26-year low.

In 2001, the economy imploded. Since then poverty has been making a comeback, growing each year.

One problem is low-wage work. These jobs may sustain a parent earning a second household income, but they can trap single, low-income parents. They need jobs that offer the possibility of advancement and higher wages.

This isn't just a welfare problem; it's also a workforce problem. The old job titles such as teacher or nurse aren't enough. Employers also want clinical coding specialists and quality engineers. To have a shot at work in a high-tech economy, workers need college degrees.

Sadly, new federal regulations rob states of the flexibility they had in 1996. Instead of experimenting, meeting local needs, and making progress as Massachusetts did, states now have to meet tougher federal work rules.

``We haven't gotten any more sophisticated," says Ruth Bourquin, an attorney with the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute. The federal effort doesn't recognize that many of the people still on welfare are the toughest cases, with poor English or cognitive difficulties and more. Crackdowns won't help. These recipients need extensive services.

To achieve real, lasting progress, the country needs a culture of success that would benefit low-wage workers and everyone else: a world with ample subsidized child care, English classes, affordable housing, health insurance, training for high-demand jobs, and first-class social services that build personal resiliency. Welfare recipients need help that's tailored to their individual circumstances, not increasingly generic federal marching orders.

It's not just a matter of welfare reform, but of widespread, strategic economic reform.