Tag Archives: welfare

Drug War, Featured, Politics, US

Wisconsin to Begin Drug Testing Welfare Recipients

Leave a comment

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker announced that he has signed off on the state’s plan to drug test some welfare recipients, which will be implemented on November 9th.

Walker’s office released a statement on Tuesday which said that the program submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Children and Families is “another step forward in implementing drug testing of able-bodied adults seeking certain welfare benefits.”

Walker said that the program will apply to “certain able-bodied adults seeking benefits and/or training through Transform Milwaukee, Transitional Jobs, and noncustodial parents in the W-2 program.”

[pull_quote_center]Our 2015-17 State Budget implements common-sense reforms that put in place drug screening, testing, and treatment mechanisms, so we can continue strengthening Wisconsin’s workforce Employers across the state frequently tell me they have good-paying jobs available in high-demand fields, but need their workers to be drug-free. These important entitlement reforms will help more people find family-supporting jobs, moving them from government dependence to true independence.[/pull_quote_center]

Under the new plan, Walker also noted that “individuals who test positive for a controlled substance without a prescription would be eligible for a drug treatment plan.”

While Walker dropped out of the presidential race in September, creating a drug-testing program for welfare recipients was one of the plans he highlighted when he announced his campaign bid in July.

“In Wisconsin, we enacted a program that says that adults who are able to work must be enrolled in one of our job training programs before they can get a welfare check,” Walker said at his campaign launch. “Now, as of the budget I just signed, we are also making sure they can take a drug test.”

[RELATED: Walker Takes Feds To Court To Drug-Test for Food Stamps]

Wisconsin filed a lawsuit against top officials at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in July, challenging the federal rules surrounding the U.S. food stamp program known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Federal rules were unclear regarding whether states could legally drug test welfare recipients.

In February, ThinkProgress reported that after looking at similar programs in Arizona, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah, it found that the states are spending “hundreds of thousands of dollars to ferret out very few drug users.”

The report noted that according to statistics, while the states collectively have spent nearly $1 million on the drug-testing efforts, welfare applications test positive for drugs at a rate of 0.002 percent to 8.3 percent, which is lower than the national drug use rate of 9.4 percent.

Politics, US

Indiana GOP candidate defends Facebook comments

166 Comments

John Johnston, an Indiana GOP candidate running for the House of Representatives, is defending controversial comments on poverty he made via Facebook.

“For almost three generations people, in some cases, have been given handouts,” stated Johnston on Facebook.  “No one has the guts to just let [poor people] wither and die.”

Johnston continues by calling out political candidates from both sides of the aisle on not calling a “spade a spade,” and “enabling” this type of behavior. “As long as the Dems can get their votes, the enabling will continue.  The Republicans need their votes and dare not cut the fiscal tether.”

Some have called Johnston out on these comments saying he wants to end welfare and food stamp programs.  Johnston has replied to these accusations saying he does not believe a thoughtful society would let people go hungry, and he was simply speaking in hyperbole.  He also said he has no intention of ending these programs.

Later, Johnston commented on a Facebook post from Mad Mac, a Facebook group which satirizes and makes fun of politics in northern Indiana, saying, with regards to his earlier statements, “Able bodied people are trapped in poverty because they have nowhere, no idea, no hope of anything other than the subsistence life that the government gives them.”

Politics, US

Food Stamps Used To Buy Lingerie In Louisiana

16 Comments

Kiss My Lingerie in Louisiana has been accepting Electronic Benefits Transfer cards as payment, according to a video report by KSLA-TV. Recipients of the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)” receive Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards. The cards, which are the contemporary version of “food stamps,” look and function like a debit card but are only supposed to be used to purchase food.

The Louisiana lingerie store has reportedly been accepting EBT cards for over eight months, suggesting misuse of welfare benefits that is potentially significant in scope.

KSLA-TV reported that the store owner accepts food stamps as payment so that he “does not discriminate against customers.”

One unidentified woman told the station, “We were told anything could be purchased there, with the food stamp card. No child I know eats edible underwear… It’s still the taxpayers dollars that are being used in a store like that and that really upsets me.”

In some states, EBT cards may be used to purchase items necessary to “family needs,” in addition to food. It is nearly impossible to make the argument that lingerie fits into that category.

After several national media outlets picked up the story, Kiss My Lingerie’s owners attempted to vehemently insist that they never accepted EBT cards as payment. One employee from Kiss My Lingerie said, “We don’t accept that for adult toys. No, no way.”

The extreme, left-leaning “news site” called “Americans Against the Tea Party” (AATTP) accused several outlets, including the libertarian magazine “Reason,” of publishing a story “based on lies… [it] seems like an obvious attempt to turn Louisiana residents against the food stamp program.” AATTP reported that Reason “didn’t really fact check too well before they published this piece.”

But it is AATTP that didn’t fact check. The picture below shows Kiss My Lingerie’s front door with an “EBT Accepted Here” sign on it. KSLA-TV’s full video report can be viewed here.

Screenshot 2014-03-15 at 1.37.18 AM

This story signifies a serious problem in the food stamp program. While many may blame Kiss My Lingerie for welfare abuse in this instance, the blame should be instead placed on the federal Department of Agriculture, where the root of the problem lies. SNAP has become so mammoth in size that EBT cards have become a common, acceptable form of payment in many situations. What was once meant to be a small-scale program to help struggling families put food on the table has become a way for the federal government to subsidize various wants and needs for one-sixth of the U.S. population.

 Follow Kristin Tate on Facebook and Twitter. 

US

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) “Why should taxpayers subsidize starvation wages?”

103 Comments

During a Congressional panel discussion on Thursday, Indpendent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont blasted the Walton family for what he sees as their tax-subsidized fortune.  He contends that they maintain their status as some of the wealthiest people in the world by paying poverty wages to their 1.4 Million US employees.  He states the taxpayers are left paying for the rest for the workers and their families with taxpayer subsidized Medicaid, food stamps, housing, and other government benefits.

Sanders was calling into question whether its morally or ethically right for a massively wealthy and profitable company to have such high rates of full times employees on government assistance.  He says the discussion about income inequality inside the Beltway are divorced from reality, and that the lobbyists and representatives for these large corporations are getting rich off fighting for corporations that hoard the earnings of the labor for just the executives and board of directors, as well as shareholders.  Sanders said in the 1950’s the average working class wage was (today’s equivalent of) $37/hour.

He said today the average wage is $8.80, with the net result of exploding rates of poverty and workers needing help just to pay their bills and raise their children.

Sanders said there are more people living in poverty today than in the history of the US.  This is likely due to big boxes stores and mega-corporations running the small mom & pops stores out of business, the ones that populated every neighborhood into the 1970’s, where wealth stayed in the town.  Now with mega-corporations, the labor is extracted from a town the benefits don’t go right back reinvested into the neighborhood, they get moved out to the shareholders that are in other parts of the country, or other parts of the world.  Sanders nearly edges into the idea that shareholders at the mega-corporations that exploit workers are similar to a modernized slave owner.  The shareholder and executives of the corporation own the labor whereas the laborer just barely subsists for their 40 hours per week.

Sanders goes on to say between 2009 and 2012, 95% of all new income generated went to the 1%.  He also says the top 1% owns 38% of the nation’s wealth.

The bottom 60% of people own 2.3% of the entire nation’s wealth.  He asks the panel if this makes moral or economic sense.  He asks is it okay that one family (The Waltons) own more wealth than the bottom 40% of the American people.  He also says the Walton family is the wealthiest family in America, and yet they are the biggest recipient of welfare in the US due to the taxpayer covering the gap on their employees needs.   The Walton’s are reportedly worth $100 Billion.  They are the largest employer in America.

Senator Sanders posted his panel discussion to YouTube.  There is much more in the less than 7 minute clip, check it out here and tell us what you think and feel about the issue.

 

Politics, US

Democrat Rep Insists The Word “Welfare” Be Changed To “Transitional Living Fund”

53 Comments

111011_flagperry_ap_328

A temporary and effective safety net to help struggling Americans during hard times undoubtedly makes sense. But government welfare was never intended to be a career opportunity.

Still, certain politicians continue to push the “war on poverty,” endorsing the expansion of government programs that were originally intended to provide a temporary hand-up.

Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-TX) is one of those politicians. During a speech on the House for this Wednesday, Jackson said we should change the rhetoric surrounding welfare and that “a safety net has to be something for all of us.” She said, “Maybe the word ‘welfare’ should be changed to something of, ‘a transitional living fund.’ For that is what it is — for people to be able to live.”

Jackson Lee was referring to all welfare, including food stamps, unemployment, Medicaid, and Medicare.

She continued, “Quite frankly, of all the wealthy nations, we have the lowest safety net and the highest poverty, because we’re not willing to accept the fact that sometimes an American needs help. Even a veteran — even a soldier. So today, I honor the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty, Mr. Speaker, and I ask us  not to give up the fight because the American people are looking to us to win the war.”

Give me a break.

Government welfare has become completely out-of-hand — nearly half of Americans now depend on checks from the fed. Welfare is well intended, but it can make poor people comfortable remaining in poverty and often discourages work. When a recipient starts making too much income, they lose most government benefits. The incentive to find a job is gone.

Instead of expanding government dependency and welfare, politicians like Jackson Lee would do a better service to the unemployed by allowing the private sector to flourish. Getting rid of red tape and invasive laws lets businesses expand and hire more employees.

Follow Kristin on Facebook and Twitter.

Politics, US

You Can Now Pay For Starbucks With Food Stamps

27 Comments

Starbucks

One woman pulled it off. The story is starting to make waves on the internet again.  Jackie Fowler, a Salem, Oregon food stamp recipient, went inside the luxury Starbucks franchise located inside of a Safeway grocery store with the local Fox News station filming. She purchased one tall Frappaccino and a slice of pumpkin loaf. Her total was $5.25. She slid out her Oregon Trail food stamp card, paid in part by the federal government, and handed it to the cashier who processed the transaction.

Fowler only made the purchase to assist Fox News with the investigation.

“They’re overpriced as it is,” said Fowler of the luxury brand. “That’s money that somebody could be eating with — a loaf of bread, a gallon of milk.” Fowler says the program is in need of reform due to the abuse.

It doesn’t seem like management is trying to discourage the use of food stamps inside of the Starbucks. In fact, they are advertising it, as seen in the sign.

Corporate stores do not accept food stamps. However, because the store is run by the grocery chain it is offered as a “grocery item”. Such Starbucks outlets are located inside of  airports, malls, colleges, Target, Alberstons, Fred Meyer and other chain grocery stores.

 

 

Politics, US

Food Stamp Enrollment Jumps 211,708 Despite Increased Household Wealth

3 Comments

Food stamps are typically a measure of household economic stability.

Thus, is unsettling that enrollment in the program jumped up by 211,708 people in the second-quarter, despite household wealth increasing $1.3 trillion within the same time period.

As reported by Breitbart News, “Roughly half of the $1.3 trillion increase ($525 billion) was due to residential real estate values improving, and roughly $300 billion of the gains were attributable to corporate equities and mutual funds.”

Even as the economy improves, food stamp enrollment continues to hit record highs.

The Obama Administration, set on expanding food stamps, spent $43.3 million tax dollars to advertise the subsidies in 2011 alone. Government-produced, colorful commercials enthusiastically encourage people to sign up for the subsidies.

Moreover, the commercials portray food stamps in a wholly positive light. To be sure, government efforts to distribute food stamps should not demean recipients. But there is a better balance to be struck between safeguarding the dignity of recipients and making them feel that food stamps are an admirable, unqualified entitlement.

The commercials show up frequently on various television and radio stations. Here is a radio ad produced by Obama’s US Department Of Agriculture (USDA), telling listeners that food stamps will make them “look amazing.”

There are even food stamp ads targeted at illegal immigrants.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA works with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal immigrants.

As Judicial Watch reported, “The promotion of [food stamps] includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance.  Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, ‘You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.'”

Amazingly, almost one out of six Americans are now on food stamps.

Despite spending $80 billion on food stamps last year, the Obama administration is now pushing to spend more. A new government study argues that the ballooned welfare program needs increased tax dollar funding to help “food insecure” homes.

Where does it all end?

A temporary and effective safety net to help those in need is absolutely necessary. But when one sixth of the American population is receiving food subsidies, there is clearly something wrong with the system. Instead of making poverty more comfortable with government subsidies, incentives should be created to encourage hard work and self-sufficiency.

Your thoughts on these statistics? Let us know in the comments section below.

Opinion, Politics, US

House Votes To Cut $40 Billion From Food Stamp Program – But Don’t Expect Spending To Actually Decrease

22 Comments

As we reported last week, the ballooned food stamps program costs taxpayers $80 billion per year. Nearly one sixth of Americans now rely on the food subsidies.

But on Thursday, the House voted to cut $40 billion from food stamps over a 10 year period.

To achieve these cuts, it would be made harder for able-bodied adults with no dependents to get waivers. Healthy adults with no dependents would be limited to three months of food stamps over a three year period, unless they enroll in a government job training program or land a part time job.

The program would also be means-tested more aggressively to focus on the truly needy, and eligibility rules would be strictly enforced.

The proposed cuts are enclosed in the House Republicans’ Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act of 2013.

Rep. Marlin Stutzman from Indiana was a strong advocate for the cuts. On the House floor he said, “In the real world, we measure success by results. It’s time for Washington to measure success by how many families are lifted out of poverty and helped back on their feet, not by how much Washington bureaucrats spend year after year.”

But most Democrats do not agree.

Democrat Debbie Stabenow is the chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. On the Senate floor, she said the bill “will never see the light of day in the United States Senate.”

Nancy Pelosi said the bill is “dangerous” and takes food away from needy mothers, children, and families. Similarly, Rep. Donna Edwards from Maryland called the cuts “mean.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro from Connecticut said the cuts are “immoral,” and that it “goes against decades of bipartisan support for fighting hunger and would be disastrous for millions of Americans.”

Regardless of what the House passed this week, food stamp spending will almost definitely not decrease. President Barack Obama said on Wednesday that if the bill gets to his desk, he will veto it.

Good grief. When will the spending stop?

Food stamps are well intended, but it is time for politicians to start thinking with their heads instead of their hearts.

A temporary and effective safety net to help those in need is absolutely necessary. But when one sixth of the American population is receiving food subsidies, there is clearly something wrong with the system.

Government spending is not the sole answer to poverty. If it were, America would have the lowest poverty rate in the world. Instead of making poverty more comfortable with government handouts, incentives should be created to encourage hard work and self-sufficiency.

Anyone who has taken an intro economics course knows that people respond to incentives. When you subsidize a benefit, there will always be more people seeking out that benefit. Why are Washington bureaucrats oblivious to that?

Opinion, Politics, US

One-Sixth Of Population Now On Food Stamps – Is There Any End In Sight?

24 Comments

Government welfare is well intended, but it can make poor people comfortable remaining in poverty. Why pay your own way when Uncle Sam will pay it for you?

Food stamps, or in USDA parlance, the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” is an expensive and bloated welfare program. A temporary and effective safety net to help struggling Americans put food on the table undoubtedly makes sense, but SNAP has spun out-of-control.

Almost one in six, or 47.5 million, Americans now receive food stamps. Over 13 million more people receive the food subsidies today than when Obama took office.

15% of the US population is on food stamps, but some states rely on the benefits more than others.

The Wall Street Journal points out that in some states, nearly a quarter of the population relies on food stamps. Mississippi and Washington, DC top the list of food stamp enrollment “by state,” at 22% and 23% respectively.

Screen shot 2013-09-09 at 9.40.02 PM
Graphic by the Wall Street Journal

Don’t expect SNAP to downsize anytime soon — despite spending a whopping $80 billion on food stamps last year, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) argues the program needs more funding.

The USDA is so set on expanding SNAP that it spent $43.3 million to advertise food stamps in 2011 alone. Government-produced, colorful commercials enthusiastically encourage people to sign up for the subsidies.

Moreover, the commercials portray food stamps in a wholly positive light. To be sure, government efforts to distribute food stamps should not demean recipients. But there is a better balance to be struck between safeguarding the dignity of recipients and making them feel that the SNAP assistance is an admirable, unqualified entitlement.

The commercials show up frequently on various television and radio stations. Here is a radio ad produced by Obama’s USDA, telling listeners that food stamps will make them “look amazing.”

Some ads are produced by state governments. This television commercial produced by New York tells people food stamps are “a quick, easy, confidential way to get help.”

It would be easier to swallow the heavy expense to taxpayers for ads promoting SNAP if the program itself were not already grossly out of hand.

There are even SNAP ads targeted at illegal immigrants.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA works with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal immigrants.

As Judicial Watch reported, “The promotion of [SNAP] includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA with a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they do not need to declare their immigration status in order to receive financial assistance.  Emphasized in bold and underlined, the statement reads, ‘You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.'”

SNAP is also ridden with fraud. Many individuals trade their food stamps for cash and drugs, but the government does little to address this issue.

SNAP recipients receive Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, which look and function like a debit card but are only supposed to be used to purchase food.

ebt_card

Despite EBT cards’ intended use, a simple search online pulls up countless discussion boards where people discuss how to trade the benefits for cash.

Here is a discussion thread from Yahoo Answers:

Screen shot 2013-09-09 at 11.46.58 PM

Good grief.

Making matters worse is the fact that SNAP is often counterproductive by discouraging work. When a recipient starts making too much income, they lose the benefit. The incentive to find a job is gone.

Some liberals assert that food stamp use is up because the economy is bad, but that is simply not the case. Food stamp spending nearly doubled years ago, before the current recession. The program’s budget rose from $19.8 billion in 2000 to $37.9 billion in 2007. Congress should means test the food stamps program much more aggressively to focus on the truly needy, while eliminating disincentives for individuals to go to work.

This is certainly one of the most pressing issues facing the nation. But it receives almost no coverage from the so-called mainstream media.

What will it take for the media and citizens to wake up? Will it take 50% of all citizens receiving food stamps? 75%?

Americans have become obsessed with the “1%” and “99%.” They should instead focus on the 17% taking from the 83%. That is a statistic worth protesting in our public parks.

Politics, US

Has Obama Let The Black Community Down?

26 Comments

When President Obama won his election in 2008 many thought it signaled a change.  People were inspired across the globe. America had just elected its first non-Caucasian president. At Obama’s inauguration cameras fixated on the tears streaming down the faces of African American men and women.Obama

Perhaps Obama was going to inspire a new generation of minorities to break through the modern day psycho-social chains that bind them to poverty and crime. Perhaps Obama was going to be a catalyst for true change in our culture. It’s been 5 years and these are the headlines of today:

-On September 28th, 2012, Anthony Lee, 18, fired on a group of people in St. Louis. He shot a 13-year-old and a 17-year-old. Lee was an active member in a street gang named “Obama Boyz“. Lee was charged with 10 felony counts of first-degree assault, armed criminal action and firing shots from a vehicle.

-On August 11, 2013, Regina Young posted a video to her account of a young African American boy praying to Barack Obama as if he was God.


-Under President Obama, black unemployment has returned to twice that of white unemployment. A trend that decreased during the Bush years has now been returned under Obama.

-Welfare has skyrocketed under Obama. According to Pew research, 31% of African Americans have received food stamps. They represent the highest percentage per demographic. That is more than two times higher than whites at 15%.

welfare
Chart from Zerohedge/SNAP

With welfare skyrocketing, black unemployment returning to two times that of white, street gangs shooting innocent victims in inspiration of Obama and children being encouraged to pray to Obama as if he were a false prophet is the black community getting the wrong message from Obama?

Let us know what you think in the comments below-

 

Politics, US

Welfare Recipients Can Now Collect More Than Teachers Earn

491 Comments

A new study by the CATO Institute, a public policy think tank, found that some welfare recipients make more “income” than those in the private sector.

A mother with two children in New York, for instance, is able to collect $38,004 per year in welfare handouts. This is greater than the starting salary of a teacher in the state.

And the problem is not limited to New York. CATO found that many states give handouts with sums greater than what workers earn in the private sector. According to the study, Hawaii is generally the most generous with benefits — there, a mother of two is eligible to earn $60,590 per year.

The study also pointed out the least generous states. A mother of two in Idaho, the state that came in dead last, is only eligible for $11,150 per year.

Perhaps most unsettling is the fact that in 33 states, welfare recipients make more than they would at an $8 per hour job. In fact, in 12 of those states, welfare recipients make more than they would at a $12 per hour job.

welfare

Where is the incentive to work?

Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at CATO, said, “There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. But they’re also not stupid. If you pay them more not to work than they can earn by working, many will choose not to work.”

Welfare programs have ballooned since former president Lyndon B Johnson declared a “war on poverty.” Since then, a whopping $15 trillion has been spent on programs to help the needy.

Now, 83 federal welfare programs combined represent the largest federal expenditure. In 2011 alone, $1.028 trillion was spent on welfare payments.

Clearly, there needs to be a safety net in this country for those who need a hand up. But welfare has gotten completely out-of-control.

How can we reign in the spending, but still help those who truly need assistance? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.