Skip to comments.My Solutions. You're Welcome.
Posted on 01/17/2012 11:45:47 PM PST by gabriellah
My Time at Walmart looked at the incredible and outrageous abuses of the welfare system that I observed while working summers at Walmart. My follow-up looked at how those who didnt like my message made me the message. This one will blow your mind.
Some like to make the issue of welfare a complicated mess, filled with statistical anomalies and outliers. The solutions, while not always politically correct, are simple. And they meet the standards of common sense.
1. Welfare recipients should pass a drug test before they receive benefits of any kind.
I had to be drug tested to get a job at Walmart, and my parents had to be drug tested to get their jobs too. If I had been injured on the job, I would have had to submit to another drug test, and I would have lost my job if I had failed it.
If taxpayer dollars are going to be distributed to someone claiming to need help, it would be nice to know that the person isnt doing drugs. Despite what progressives may say, welfare benefits are a temporary privilege, not an absolute right.
A person who has nothing to hide has nothing to worry about. If one is truly destitute, they shouldnt be spending money on drugs. Bottom line: if a person fails the welfare drug test, they should have to complete rehabilitation or sober up, and pass a test before receiving anything. Period.
2. Require photo identification to use an EBT card.
Some stores require a photo ID to use a regular credit card. The Walmart I worked at would prompt for an ID at random times on the register after a credit card was swiped; I dont think an EBT card should be any different. There have been reports of EBT cards from states like Missouri and Florida being used as far away as New York, Alaska, and Hawaii. Either the person using the EBT card isnt being honest about their income, has a rich relative, or the card is being sold. I think options one and three are more likely.
A photo I.D. requirement would also significantly diminish the chances of an EBT card being sold. If the user is elderly or homebound, a proxy individual could be assigned and given permission to use the card, similar to how WIC works.
3. Restrict the items that one can buy with an EBT/SNAP card.
I think WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) is a great program when used correctly, and I dont see why its ideas and conditions cant be applied to SNAP. If SNAP were reformed so that benefits were earmarked for vegetables, milk, bread, peanut butter, etc. (all items that can be purchased with WIC in Maine) healthy eating would be encouraged, as would responsible use of the card. When food stamps were first implemented, Twinkies, frozen pizzas, and energy drinks didnt exist. A person doesnt need them to survive, and as tasty as Twinkies may be, theyre not healthy food. If a person wishes to buy something outside of the list, they can use their own money.
The program does not encourage healthy, sustainable food consumption, as it should. A person who is permitted to buy unhealthy items with government money is likely to have additional health problems. If this person happens to also be on Medicare, their unhealthy consumption would eventually cost the state even more money. One of the administrations focuses during the debate over healthcare reform was preventative care. Encouraging responsible consumption would go far and actually be effective in that arena.
4. Reform TANF so women would be encouraged to marry before having children.
TANF currently aids women who are living without a husband or man in the home. TANF was developed as a more restrictive version of AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), which was originally intended to help widows, but was expanded as part of Johnsons Great Society program to include unmarried mothers. The statistics speak for themselves. Since AFDC was modified, the rate of out-of-wedlock births has skyrocketed, and the majority of AFDC recipients were no longer widows. This is incredibly troubling.
Today, nearly one out of three white children, half of all Hispanic children, and three out of four black children are born out of wedlock. Those statistics are mind-boggling. Thats a lot of children growing up without a father figure in the house. Statistics overwhelmingly support that marriage is one of the greatest weapons in the fight against child poverty. Conservatives should use these statistics to make a more concerted effort to promote marriage and a stable home life as an effective means of combating poverty.
The singer of the famous satire, Its Free Swipe Yo EBT song, Chapter, grew up with a single mother and witnessed the potential for welfare abuse firsthand. She believes that her mother had her and her siblings simply to get more money from the state. Thats incredibly sad. A child is not a cash cow. A child is a child, and should be cherished and loved, not viewed as a source of income.
5. Cut Medicaid to better align Maine with the rest of the nation.
We have all heard the horror stories about people losing their health insurance. The reality of the situation is that the majority of the people who would potentially lose coverage would not be covered in many other states, including neighboring New Hampshire. Most states do not cover adults that are not disabled and do not have children. Theyve managed to survive so far. The state of Maine cannot afford to cover these people. Maines Medicaid system has grown way too fast. The states Medicaid population has increased 78% in recent years, without a similar rise in the poverty rate. Something is not right. Maines unemployment level and poverty rate are consistently below national averages, yet the state spends more on welfare than most other states. The Obamacare bill that prevents any new changes to Medicaid eligibility now traps the state into paying for people it can no longer afford to cover.
6. Tie benefits to work.
The federal government operates around 77 separate welfare programs, and thanks to the Republicans efforts in 1996 to end welfare as we know it, one (TANF) is currently tied to work. That legislation was enormously successful. After its passage, welfare caseloads were cut in half and overall poverty levels dropped significantly.
The widespread abuse evident in both state and federal welfare programs demonstrates the need for much greater reform. Republicans in Congress are now working to pass The Welfare Reform Act of 2011 which would expend the reforms of twelve years ago, including tying the SNAP program to work programs or job training. As Newt Gingrich articulated in the debate the other night, conservatives seek to help people become independent and self-reliant, not more reliant on the government.
We should measure welfares success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added. - Ronald Reagan
The welfare system is broken. Someone needs to fix it. Nanny states dont work, and I dont want to see my country go the way of Europe.
Even make-work programs run by government shoo off quite a few would-be claimants. It’s not like they even claim to be disabled, which if genuine could be investigated and would pan out — it’s just shoo, gone.
“6. Tie benefits to work.”
Someone needs to remind the author of this piece that jobs are somewhat hard to come by under the Obama Administration. Fail.
There was a girl working temp at my company being thought of as a full time employee. She took the drug test and they found she used her dog’s urine.
Obviously she was not hired.
Florida passed a drug test requirement for welfare last year.
The ACLU immediately got a federal judge to put a stay on it.
Newt is right. Time to houseclean the Judiciary.
I remember going up to the local minimart to get a Sunday paper & something sweet. In front of me was a youngish girl using her grandma’s EBT card to buy sliced bologna, many gatorades, candy, & chips. It would not go thru at first, but, yay!, they finally got the EBT card to work.
As steam came out of my ears.
I was at the local Food Lion picking up milk and looking at the reduced meats. I go up to the register and the young, hispanic woman in front of me bought a $22 cut of beef with her EBT card. I was furious.
“I had to be drug tested to get a job at Walmart, and my parents had to be drug tested to get their jobs too. If I had been injured on the job, I would have had to submit to another drug test, and I would have lost my job if I had failed it. “
We used to call this FASCIST. For the record I have NEVER taken a drug test and never will until such time that ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND PUBLIC SERVANTS are Tested DAILY and imprisoned for LIFE if they fail. Until Government at all levels live up to the same standards, why bother. JUST SAY NO. I did have a Judge ask me if I would take a drug test during a custody dispute, and I stood up in open court next to my lawyer and said, I will go with you your honor when you go take yours, I will even drive us both if you want. Needless to say the issue never came up again and I was awarded FULL CUSTODY with NO visitation for the Egg Donor.
NOBODY SHould ever give anybody bodily fluids for any reason other than medical necessity, unless ALL ARE REQUIRED, Including the Uppity One and his lackeys.
Yes I am self employed, and have been for 30 years, and will never under any circumstances Bow to FASCIST POLICIES.
When the Feds asked my Brother to take a Drug Test while working as a Private Contractor (Software Engineer)and was the only person qualified for this project, they finally demanded he take a drug test, he quietly started packing his bags preparing to leave in the middle of a Top Secret Project that he was in charge of, the fed asked what he was doing and my brother looked at him and said, Sorry I will not give you any kind of drug test ever, I don’t need this Job, I took it it as a favor to a friend. They stopped him cold instantly and right then and there decided that he NEVER HAD TO TAKE A DRUG TEST. He finished the Job.
My Point is simple A true Conservative NEVER stands for FASCISM. Even if it sounds good.
I’m just curious if your position applies to government required drug tests only, or if it applies to private entities requiring a drug test for employment?
For the record, I tend to agree on the government front.
But I think that private entities should be allowed to require drug tests for the purposes of employment. That is especially true for jobs that can endanger other individuals. I suspect at some point drug testing will fall be considered discrimination, since we are heading that way for things like educational history.
Ni I disagree with ALL DRUG TESTING for private employers, They do not own me and have absolutely no right whatsoever to have any say in my private life. While on the Job maybe, but that is not how drug tests work. So either ban all of them or require ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, OFFICERS OF THE COURT, AND EVERY PERSON RECEIVING TAXPAYER FUNDS OF ANY KIND INCLUDING RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS to take Mandatory Drug Tests every 3 days where ALL RESULTS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS, I would also include Performance Enhancing Drugs (steroids) with the penalty for a positive test, MANDATORY MINIMUM of 10 Years in Prison and complete civil asset forfeiture. Then I will consider the option of Private Employers requiring drug testing. I would like to add that you will not find executives of companies or lawyers taking drug tests in the business they work at, while the regular employees are required to. Until then it is all meaningless fluff.
Someone needs to remind the author of this piece that jobs are somewhat hard to come by under the Obama Administration. Fail.
Receiving benefits or checks from the government without having to do any work is tantamount to having a government job..........
So it sounds to me as if you want the GOVERNMENT to BAN these tests. Do I read you correctly? It's one thing to refuse to take such tests yourself and it's quite another to say that an employer shouldn't have the right to administer such tests as a condition of employment.
Your eight hour day is somewhat shortsighted. Sometimes one is asked to travel and represent his employer. I don't know about you but I really wouldn't want a druggie representing me.
And if I cannot find out about drugs, can I find out about college records, or citizenship records? Or do I have to wind up with a schmuck like Barack Obama on my payroll?
They are private employers. It's my business, my place of work. If I'm an employer and something you do in your private life may affect how you do your job, the cost I pay for health care benefits, and so forth, I give you the option. Take the drug test . . . or find work elsewhere. You don't have a right to work for me. You don't have a right to work for anybody other than yourself.
In particular, if you're diving a forklift for me or another motorized vehicle, or treating a patient for me or prioritizing patients for treatment, or writing a legal opinion that's backed by my malpractice coverage (and next year's premiums are going to be affected by your work) . . . or if I just don't like drugs . . . or for any other reason that's not illegal under the Constitution or applicable law? If I make a drug test part of the condition of employment, they you have the choice. Work for me and take the test or work elsewhere.
You don't have a Constitutional right to work for me.
Let me guess- you own a thousand shares of stock in a company that produces drug testing kits??? < /sarc >
You are absolutely correct I do not have that right and neither do you as an employer. I do not believe Government should ban it either, they have already done enough.
But regarding your views on drugs, maybe you could clarify a little. Is there a list of “Good Drugs” and “ Bad Drugs” you go by?? Is it “ ALL DRUGS” regardless of their nature? would it include or be limited to “ Any Mood Altering Substance” ???. Or is your thought limited to just “Illegal Drugs”. Now think carefully before answering and remember there is NO SUCH THING AS AN ILLEGAL DRUG, there are only “ Controlled Substances” which the Government has Decided you need SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR.
I await your response.
I’m laughing because I go right to the reduced meat section. Take it home, wrap extremely well, put into a freezer bag, label, & freeze. It is so nice after a long day to just be able to pull something good out of the freezer.
I don’t understand why there are not specific limits on what food items can be purchased. It all is completely out of control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.