Mitt Romney’s campaign has hit new depths of truth-twisting with its accusation that President Obama plans to “gut welfare reform” by ending federal work requirements. The claim is blatantly false, but it says a great deal about Mr. Romney’s increasingly desperate desire to define the president as something he is not.

For years, both Republican and Democratic governors have sought waivers from the 1996 work requirements in the welfare program, sometimes to tailor programs to their states’ needs, or to experiment with demonstration programs. Last year, an aide to Brian Sandoval, the Republican governor of Nevada, asked to discuss flexibility in imposing those requirements. Perhaps, the state asked, those families hardest to employ could be exempted from the work requirements for six months while officials worked with them to stabilize their households.

Utah, also led by a Republican governor, asked for relief from some federal reporting requirements, and urged that refugee families be treated differently when seeking welfare benefits because of cultural barriers.

Reacting to these kinds of requests, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a memo last month granting states some flexibility. If states can find better ways to get welfare recipients into jobs, they can extend training periods or grant certain kinds of exceptions. The department “is only interested in approving waivers if the state can explain in a compelling fashion why the proposed approach may be a more efficient or effective means to promote employment entry, retention, advancement, or access to jobs,” according to the memo. Kathleen Sebelius, the health secretary, said all waivers would have to move 20 percent more people from welfare to work.