Poverty and Welfare in America

Welfare in America

Econ 3150.001 Fall 2010
Economics of Discrimination

Abstract
This paper will discuss welfare in America. Being from California and living there for 21 years, I have seen many minority groups struggle, including blacks from central LA, and Hispanics legal and non-legal in San Diego, and across Southern California. I am curious to explore how much taxpayers pay for service programs and welfare in our country as a whole, and will be taking the side of limiting welfare or requiring more strict rules to qualify and continue these service programs, or requiring repayment.

It is said that about 1 in 8 Americans live in poverty or about 12.5 %.of the population. ( Bernadette D. Proctor) That means there are about-----------Americans on welfare today. Where does that funding come from? It comes mainly from tax payer dollars—the hard working citizens of America. Today it takes little to qualify for assistance and takes little to continue receiving assistance in some form. As a result, I see a need for serious welfare reform. I believe there needs to be more strict rules to qualify for assistance, stricter requirements to remain on assistance such as work programs, and in most cases the repayment of assistance in one way or another.
Currently each state receives approximately $16.5 billion annually from the federal government to fund welfare programs. (welfareinfo.org) “Almost two thirds of welfare recipients will be on the welfare rolls for more than 8 years during their lifetime” (Republican study committee, “The War on the Poor”)
First, there are many types of welfare programs such as, but not limited to,: Food Stamps, Medicaid, Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC), Women with Infants and Children (WIC), HUD homes programs and Supplemental Security Income or cash assistance. Children and truly impoverished people need the welfare system, but currently the requirements to qualify and remain on welfare are not strict enough. Although requirements vary from state to state, generally, to qualify for food stamps, you just need to not have a job, be born on or before Aug 22 1931 or your household cannot have more than $2,000 in resources. (ssa.gov)
For most states, to continue receiving food stamps, you have to only fill out a certain number of job applications per month, and or attend job training or job finding/getting skills program. It is too easy for people to just turn in an application, or say they did, or show up at a program a few times a month and not take job hunting seriously, therefore taking advantage of the welfare program. If there was some form of accountability such as a shorter time benefits were available, a declining benefit amount, or recipients were required to perform some type of public service while receiving benefits, there would be less spending of tax dollars on people who don’t really need public assistance, but instead are intent on gaming the system.
The welfare system encourages dependency and fraud and discourages family formation and the will to work. I will start by giving a personal experience; I have a 28 year old cousin who lives in California with 2 half-Hispanic children and a long term Hispanic boyfriend, with illegal immigrant parents. She currently receives WIC, AFDC and receives cash assistance, food stamps, housing assistance and medicade even though between herself and the father of her children they could afford to live comfortably. They are not getting married and forming a family because they would lose the benefits she receives from being an unwed and unemployed, single mother, and the father of the children lives in the government provided housing! Deceit and fraud like this gives positive reason for the need of re-payment of benefits. I don’t want anyone, especially children, to go hungry or without a home and basic needs, but if all but those truly unable to work due to serious mental or physical disability knew they had to pay back all or a portion of their benefits in the future, I think it would breed a more responsible welfare population and discourage fraud, and encourage more welfare recipients to find jobs faster thus decreasing tax spending. The programs should be there to lend a hand but not be a hand out.
There has been much research on the US welfare and entitlement system, and all reports find that it is ripe with abuse, creates multi-generational families in which nobody has worked or mother have married, and takes away the incentive to form and maintain healthy family units. The US taxpayer cannot support a system that rewards and supports such a society.
In the case of medical assistance, no one deserves to be hurt or turned away; or denied at least emergency medical care. With respect to illegal immigrants, the problem is that although they do not qualify for cash assistance or food stamps, they can qualify for housing and medical assistance for which the tax payers of America get to foot the bill. Almost unique in the world, a guarantee in our constitution allows anyone born in the US, regardless of the parents ' citizenship status, to be considered a US citizen if born in the US, and immediately subject to all of the benefits accorded thereto.
This is an especially attractive feature for pregnant illegal would-be immigrants and a problem for the states that border Mexico. Pregnant women from Mexico, Central America and other areas will cross the border illegally with the intent to give birth to their so-called “anchor baby” on US soil. If such women succeed, they receive American medical care for themselves and their babies, as well as temporary or permanent housing, food stamps, WIC, AFDC and medical care for the child. If they have minor children with them, those children will be allowed to stay and will get schooling, free school lunches, school clothes and supplies, and Head Start programs in many states, as well as medical care. I realize these women just want a better life for their families, but at who 's expense? The US taxpayers! Is this fair? Is this right? I think not. Maybe it is not for me to decide, but if we had stronger rules such as deportation of mother and baby after medically safe to do so, maybe this would deter illegal immigrants from trying to take advantage of the taxpaying Americans and an over generous US system. There is a reason other countries do not make persons born on their soil citizens - it is not economically viable to do so, and the vast majority of studies here have reached this same conclusion. Behavior is influenced through incentive, and as long as there is an incentive for persons to enter the country illegally and take advantage of the US taxpayer and our generous system, it will happen,
Americans are generous, but there is true poverty in America that needs to be addressed and those that legitimately need some form of temporary assistance due to job loss, illness, medical bills, or unexpected hardship. There are and should be programs to help such persons get back on their feet, learn new job skills, get through their medical difficulty, etc. However, there is a limited amount of assistance available and it should be just for those that are truly in need and are here legally, and the aid should be for a limited time, be designed to help that person help themselves, and the recipient should be held accountable.
Under the current system with its fraud, abuse, and disincentives to get off of aid for some, the assistance programs use a lot of taxpayer dollars, are not efficient, and the general opinion of those receiving assistance is not very high in the eyes of the public. If there could be an overhaul and tightening of the welfare/aid criteria, and illegal immigrants were excluded, the truly needy could be helped in larger and more effective ways, people would have incentives to get off of aid and become self sufficient, those needing permanent aid would get much better and more generous care due to more funding availability, and the US taxpayers burden would be lightened.
I think that if reform in enacted the discrimination or stigma on the less fortunate could be lifted. The need for welfare is real, the current environment breeds somewhat of a destructive circle of poverty and abuse, but with reform I believe we can not only appease the tax payers to an extent because they will know their tax dollars are really going to good use, but we can also help to end this area of discrimination.

Works Cited
Albelda, Randy Pearl., and Nancy Folbre. The War on the Poor: a Defense Manual. New York: New, 1996. Print.
Allard, Scott W. Out of Reach: Place, Poverty, and the New American Welfare State. New Haven: Yale UP, 2009. Print.
Chappell, Marisa. The War on Welfare: Family, Poverty, and Politics in Modern America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2010. Print.
Contrast, By. "Hispanics: A Statistical Portrait." American Renaissance. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. .
Merino, Noël. Poverty and Homelessness. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2009. Print.
Seccombe, Karen. "So You Think I Drive a Cadillac?": Welfare Recipients ' Perspectives on the System and Its Reform. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1999. Print.
US Welfare System - Help for US Citizens. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. .
Watanabe, By Teresa. Featured Articles From The Los Angeles Times. 05 Sept. 2010. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. .

Cited: Albelda, Randy Pearl., and Nancy Folbre. The War on the Poor: a Defense Manual. New York: New, 1996. Print. Allard, Scott W. Out of Reach: Place, Poverty, and the New American Welfare State. New Haven: Yale UP, 2009. Print. Chappell, Marisa. The War on Welfare: Family, Poverty, and Politics in Modern America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2010. Print. Contrast, By. "Hispanics: A Statistical Portrait." American Renaissance. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. . Merino, Noël. Poverty and Homelessness. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2009. Print. Seccombe, Karen. "So You Think I Drive a Cadillac?": Welfare Recipients ' Perspectives on the System and Its Reform. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1999. Print. US Welfare System - Help for US Citizens. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. . Watanabe, By Teresa. Featured Articles From The Los Angeles Times. 05 Sept. 2010. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. .