Why Are We Upset?

The vast majority of us Americans are industrious, decent people who shoulder our responsibilities and contribute to the common good where we can. We also are eager to help out when we see someone in need. Problems arise, however, when rapscallions connive to bilk the system, and take advantage of America’s generosity toward the needy.
We all hear it regularly from the hard-working majority that we feel misused when we pay our bills and taxes and see other able-bodied people not only not contributing, but milking the system. This mood is rising to a head as we debate what type of a president we desire to lead us for the next four years.
It is not that we only feel personally abused, we also fear for the fabric of our country, and we don’t want to see it unravel. According to Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield of The Heritage Foundation, food stamps are the nation’s second largest welfare program, and growing rapidly, from 17 million recipients in 2000 to 46 million last year. The cost quadrupled from 2000 to 2014 to $83 billion.
If we were convinced that we were helping people to stand on their own two feet, (if they are capable of that), then that is one thing, but the most rapid growth has been in able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) between age 18 and 49. This group increased from 2 million in 2008 to 5 million today.
Why does our government even give assistance to ABAWDs? Fox News drove the absurdity of this expenditure home by reporting on a 29-year-old man named Jason Greenslate who was receiving food stamps while spending his time surfing and playing in a rock band.
The State of Maine said enough is enough and instituted a work or training requirement for such people.  Despite an abundance of low-skill job openings, 80 percent refused to work or train, and as a result, they lost their food stamps. Nine out of 10 Americans believe that non-elderly, able-bodied adults who receive food, cash, or housing assistance should have to work or be in training in order to receive help.
The reality is, many of these people are working, and being paid under the table, and the work requirement interferes with their off-the-books jobs. Another interesting fact is over half of this group smokes, at an average cost of $111 per month. In the general population, that number is only 17 percent.  Thus these people expect taxpayers to pay for their essentials, enabling them to spend their own money on cigarettes.
Ninety percent of food-stamp money comes from the federal government, and if the federal government were to institute this one change nationwide, it would save almost $10 billion annually. The work requirement was a component of our earlier welfare structure, which for one reason or another, fell out of favor. Restoring this common-sense requirement would not only save our tax dollars, it would go a tiny way in restoring faith in government.
Changing the way government goes about managing this is not as simple as one might think. I recall being in a meeting after Bill Clinton and the federal government instituted welfare reform and dramatically reduced the welfare rolls. There were bureaucrats from the local welfare office present and they were not happy campers because the reduced rolls threatened their employment; it’s not realistic to expect people to work against their self-interests. We’ve got to remember this as we try to claw these expenditures back, not just from the recipients, but from the bureaucracy that makes a living on dependency.
Art Hall
From the Bible:  If anyone will not work, neither let him eat. 2 Thessalonians 3:10