Noting the while there may be much support for the principle that families on welfare should have access to 2 years of education and training and then be expected to work, this paper contends that it will be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to design a coherent and constructive program within the probable federal budget constraints. In arguing why a 2-year limit, followed by work for welfare, is a bad idea, this document makes the following points: (1) the 2-year plan disregards what is known about the way many families use the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program over time; (2) imposing a 2-year clock from the moment AFDC receipt begins would force recipients to make irrational and inefficient decisions about whether and when to initiate education and training activities; and (3) the structure appears to preclude access to what is likely to be the most promising route out of poverty for a single parent, that is, postsecondary education. The report concludes that an alternative approach that could work, and end welfare as it currently exists in the United States, should involve the restructuring of the JOBS (Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training) program. Elements in the reconceptualization of the JOBS program are discussed. (SM)