by Sam Huntington
Having created a welfare system in this country, the left seems to have produced a deep hole into which we pour literally hundreds of billions of dollars each year. In spite of all these expenditures, we seem to end up with more impoverished people. One wonders how this is even possible. One wonders how long we must continue shoveling money into the abyss of welfare programs before we able to conclude that it is time to consider other avenues. It would be preferred if we could put physically-able people back to work —but with this president, this is asking too much. It doesn’t appear to fit his narrative.
One popular refrain from the right is that leftists want to increase welfare programs; it is a means of growing government, which benefits statists, and there is something to be gained, and maintained whenever the impoverished become dependents of the state: political power. The conclusion, therefore, is that the left actually cares very little about the penurious —they are only a means to an end.
Welfare programs are a partisan issue; there is no escaping that. Part of the problem is that we do not really know any of the data that helps us to understand the truth about welfare in the United States. Some even believe that those who benefit most from a welfare state have intentionally muddled the issue quite so that it is confusing. I am writing now about politicians who hinge their careers on loudly supporting perpetual welfare. We must also not forget the career bureaucrats who will do whatever it takes to retain their high-paying jobs —even sinking to low as to fabricate welfare data. Keeping the issue confused is a clever ploy, for if no one understands the true cost of welfare programs, if there is no clear picture of attendant fraud and waste, then there will be no consequential changes to what many consider illegal spending at the federal level. The leftist imperative is to maintain this chasm no matter what it costs.
Conservatives insist that welfare fraud is rampant; leftists argue that welfare fraud has never exceeded 4%. What is missing is an honest broker. Since the word trust is no longer part of our lexicon describing the federal government, we have an issue with the credibility of information provided by welfare management agencies. Wee simply cannot know whether what we are being told is true.
The 2010 Census told us that there are 115-million families in the United States. A full third (34%) of these are receiving welfare assistance. This tells us that 39-million homes are being supported by the American taxpayer, at an average cost per working household of $11,500. Now, if it is true that welfare fraud doesn’t exceed 4%, then 4.6 million families fraudulently receive welfare benefits —at your expense. Even if the percentage of fraud is low, the cost to the American taxpayer is high. The suggestion here is that were it not for fraud, we could be doing a better job on behalf of the legitimately impoverished.
Of course, we have no evidence of a serious effort by any federal or state legislative body to decrease the number of impoverished citizens. In fact, the opposite is true. If federal and state welfare program enrollment criteria are relaxed to the point where there are no serious restrictions, then there can be no fraud. It’s all good. No problem, Amigo. Just pay out money to everyone —it doesn’t really matter.
(Continued next week)