Most everyone agrees these days that Maine’s welfare system is broken and needs to be reformed.

Gov. Paul LePage has implemented many reforms – life-time limits, proper documentation, photo identification on EBT cards, and drug testing for convicted felons, to name a few. This is a good start, but there’s a lot more we can do. A couple of years ago when the town of Windham took control of its General Assistance program it implemented similar reforms and by simply helping those in need navigate through the system and requiring proper documentation, the town cut its GA expense by over 80 percent.

When the 127th Legislature convenes, one of the top priorities will be addressing welfare reform. Here are a few ideas:

First, we need to eliminate the perverse “benefit cliffs” that incentivize the wrong kind of behavior. LePage and Republicans support this proposal. So does independent Eliot Cutler, according to the plan he released last week.

Workers who are not on any form of welfare know that working more means higher income and, in most cases, a better life. But for workers who have relied on a public assistance program, the correlation between work and household income isn’t the same. Because of the crudely structured guidelines of most programs, welfare recipients who work more can, perversely, earn less.

The benefit cliffs mean that a working woman on welfare will at some point face the decision whether to work another hour and risk losing her benefits. In other words, she’s working harder to improve her own lot, but the system is so crudely wrought that she’ll be punished for doing so with a $200 to $300 drop, or more, in her household income (or, even worse, the loss of her housing).

That’s a pretty big incentive not to work that extra hour. Advocates for the poor are right to say that providing a social safety net is the humane thing to do. But it’s the height in inhumanity to have a system that keeps people trapped in the social safety net.

With a little collaboration, lawmakers could figure out how not to punish Mainers for working harder and taking control of their own lives.

Second, we should revisit a proposal that died last year to limit junk food purchases under the Food Stamp program. It is, after all, formally called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, so why are we subsidizing the mass consumption of unhealthy candy and Coca-Cola?

This change would take little effort and could leverage technology already available in the private sector. Anyone who has a Health Savings Account (HSA) knows that credit cards can be embedded with limits on what an individual can and cannot buy.

So let’s put restrictions on EBT cards that ensure benefit recipients are purchasing healthy nutritious food, not Slim Jims and Little Debbie snacks. The benefits of this change would bear themselves out in healthier Maine families and lower health-care costs.

Third, we need to bring some accountability to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

Maine made national headlines when The Maine Heritage Policy Center showed how TANF welfare benefits were being used in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and at strip clubs, gambling venues, liquor stores, strip clubs and Disney World.

Although the TANF program is much smaller than Medicaid or Food Stamps in terms of the money we spend on it, the program is far more vulnerable to abuse because it provides a cash benefit. Once the welfare benefit becomes cash, it’s quite impossible to know how it’s spent. So let’s change that.

There are few good reasons welfare recipients need cash. Perhaps they need to pay a babysitter while they go out for a job interview. But there is no reason we can’t set a proportional limit on the amount of the benefit available in cash. The Legislature should pass a law that limits the cash availability of a TANF benefit to 20 percent of the entire sum. The other 80 percent must be spent through the card.

In practice, this doesn’t limit individuals using their TANF benefit for the intended purpose. They can still buy diapers, laundry detergent and other household necessities wherever credit cards are accepted – which is pretty much everywhere nowadays. The only people this change would affect are those who spend most of their TANF cash on the black market.

Fixing the benefit cliffs, ending the subsidization of junk food consumption, and restricting the flow of accountable cash – these are just a few ideas that could improve our welfare system. But in the meantime, it’s helpful to remember what our welfare programs are supposed to do.

Welfare is not supposed to provide a “living wage” and it’s not supposed to bring about income equality. Welfare is supposed to serve as a basic safety net that helps people who have fallen on hard times get back into the work force and take control of their own lives.

Peter V. Anania is chairman of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, on the board of the Windham Economic Development Corporation and a former Windham town councilor.