In Washington, the Biden Administration is battling with House Republicans over their relatively paltry reform plans attached to debt ceiling legislation that would raise the ceiling by $1.5 trillion in exchange for a slower rate of growth in federal spending over the next decade.
In all, the Republican plan would cut spending by about $4 trillion over the next decade from the $60 trillion that will be spent. Democrats in Congress are pushing back in particular on this plan over the GOP proposal that able-bodied adults ages 18 to 55 be required to work or attend skill training for 20 hours per week in exchange for Medicaid or SNAP benefits (food stamps).The work or training requirement would not apply to those adults who are disabled, parents with dependent children, pregnant, or enrolled in drug treatment. The Congressional Research Service says there are over four million who do not meet those exemptions – but only one in four is employed.
At the same time, the post-pandemic edition update of a fascinating 2016 book entitled “Men Without Work” by economist and demographer Nicholas Eberstadt observes that “over six million prime-age men were neither working nor looking for work” in the U.S. Eberstadt defines “prime-age” workers as ages 25 to 54.
The conservative Foundation for Government Accountability argues that with some 11 million jobs unfilled nationally and employers offering bonuses and other incentives to attract workers, the lack of a work component to welfare disincentivizes the traditional American work ethic.
Between 2000 and 2021, U.S. Department of Agriculture data shows the food stamp program added 24 million recipients.
While Democrats called the House GOP plan a “non-starter” there is quiet confidence among Republican leaders: “Everybody believes in a safety net, but I don’t think many people think it’s right to be paying billions of dollars to allow people to sit at home ... and not work when everybody’s looking for workers,” House Majority Leader (R-La.) told The Hill on April 4.
So how does this national political battle over the debt ceiling and welfare spending play in Mississippi? First, it’s important to look at the statistical stakes in the poorest state in the union.
In 2020, SNAP benefits were extended to 413,700 Mississippians – or some 14% of the state’s population. That compares to 41.2 million recipients in the U.S. or 12% of the population. Some 72% of Mississippi food stamp recipients are in families with children.
In Mississippi, 36 percent of those food stamp families have older adults or are disabled and 43% of those recipient families are in working families. From an economic impact standpoint, 3,061 food retailers redeemed $605.8 million in SNAP benefits in 2019.
As is the case in modern politics, this standoff has become almost cartoonish in the red v. blue party characterizations. But “welfare for work” is not a new concept. Democrat Franklin Roosevelt gave us the Work Progress Administration back in 1935.
The WPA created jobs, taught skills, and remade the nation’s infrastructure in terms of highways, roads, bridges, and public buildings. The base football stadiums at Mississippi State and Ole Miss were WPA projects.
America’s infrastructure is today in many cases greatly in need of rebuilding and repair. There is an inarguable lack of workers. The national debt cannot continue to escalate unabated.
President Bill Clinton proposed similar welfare reforms in 1996 and then-U.S. Sen. Joe Biden supported it.
Outside of the obvious fiscal wisdom of requiring able-bodied adults to exchange employment and training for government assistance is a concept that this country embraced during the Great Depression. Will it take another depression for Americans to dare to implement a work component into the national economic safety net for those who can work?
13 comments:
Well reasoned, common sense approach by Sid…which is why the Dems will block it
Why is it so difficult for those in DC, both parties btw, to comprehend that spending has to be drastically reigned in or our children and grandchildren won't have a country anymore?
Sounds like a great plan and they can’t claim racism either, because they always point out that there are more whites on welfare than any other race.
"...only four million..."?
Hell, there are that many in Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas, alone, drawing those benefits who are able to work but have no appetite for doing so.
Back in the 1970-80 time period, this and other states operated a federal program named WIN (Work Incentive) that flat required work and/or counseling and job search training of those able to work, not exempted, and drawing these various 'welfare' benefits.
For years state agency regulations required attendance at JSST (Job Search Skills Training) for those drawing unemployment insurance. Quite a small requirement in exchange for weekly checks.
There were many similar programs operated throughout this state, some particularly concentrated in the Delta counties. All eventually folded to the political cries of discrimination and hardship.
Sid was alive and editorializing back in those days. Not sure how he missed it. He's welcome to contact me if he'd like to get up to date.
Here's the BIG difference between the WPA of the 1930's and any similar plans for today. In the 1930's, the American public was used to working. That's what people were expected to do if they wanted to eat. Today, however, multiple generations have grown up not having to work in order to eat and expecting handouts.
Oh yes they can-and will, 9:06. Look ar what our own Baby Chock says when he doesn’t get his way
As a former deputy sheriff and as a state auditor, I have helped put many criminals behind bars and had no regrets about doing so when necessary. 2014 State of the State
Isn’t there already a federal law that requires work or attending school to acquire welfare? Passed under the Clinton Administration. The law is there I think, but just not enforced.
You expect me to . . . WORK!?!?
The Clinton work-to-welfare program was long on words and short on accomplishment.
See this link for a million words on what the White House program-design gurus claimed the work-program would do and its lofty expectations, none of which was achieved.
https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/case-study/personal-responsibility-and-work-opportunity-reconciliation-act-the-clinton-welfare-reform#:~:text=In%201996%2C%20the%20Clinton%20Administration,Needy%20Families%20(TANF)%20programme.
Are these numbers even real? A country that's already $31 trillion in debt expects to spend $60 trillion more over the next decade? How?
@ 9:12 PM, How? Money printer go brrr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r.
1012, Sid was alive in the 1970-80 time period, but despite your claim, he was not editoralizing back then. Best of my memory he turned 20 at the end of your reference; can we ask how attentive you were to these type events in your teenage years?
Thanks, though, for your treck thru history. Enjoyed Sid's article more though.
Post a Comment