POLITICAL: See “work requirements” shrink the welfare rolls

http://www.cato.org/blog/maines-recommitment-work-requirements

APRIL 1, 2015 12:52PM
Maine’s Recommitment to Work Requirements
By Charles Hughes

*** begin quote ***

Last week, the Associated Press reported that more than 9,000 food stamp recipients in Maine have been removed from the program because they failed to comply with the program’s work requirements. These requirements themselves are largely nothing new, but in the years since the recession, almost every state received a waiver exempting them from these provisions. By allowing the waiver to lapse, Maine will again enforce the requirement that able-bodied adults without dependents participate in some form of work activity. These rules only apply to a small fraction of beneficiaries, just 10 percent of Maine’s beneficiaries in 2013. A spokesman for the Maine Department of Health and Human Services revealed that the number of SNAP beneficiaries subject to the reinstated requirements has fallen from roughly 12,000 to 2,680. This is a steep reduction, but relatively small compared to the 250,000 people in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) when the rule change went into effect.

*** and ***

Part of the motivation for this renewed enforcement is to provide a better path for beneficiaries to transition off  the program and back into the mainstream economy. Many beneficiaries are on the program for extended periods of time, and for too many, next to nothing is being done to help them improve their employment prospects during this time. A recent national study found that, over a 56 month period, a full quarter of beneficiaries participated for more than four years. Some of these people are exempt due to disability status or age, but those with the capacity for work are not really helped by a program that leads them to languish for years on the welfare rolls.

*** end quote ***

The Gooferment is immoral, ineffective, and inefficient!

This just proves is. 

IT likes a “plantation of victims” that requires Gooferment bureaucrats to “care for them”.

I remember when Rudy required “welfare takers” to show up for their check. And, how many “ghosts” did that make disappear. The “work requirement” eliminated those working in either the underground or “above ground” economy.

While I think all charity should be private, if for no other reason that they Gooferment shouldn’t be doing it OR they do it so badly, I can “tolerate” if the takers are really not “moochers”.

It’s NOT so hard to tell the difference?

argh!

# – # – # – # – # 

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: