Proof that Progressive Policies are Successful

[Newt]

Details 370 Percent Increase of Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents on Food Stamps


The fastest-growing category of food stamp users under President Obama has been among able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs), according to Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Robert Rector.

“In 2008 there were about a million [ABAWDs] now they’re at about 4.7 million. This is the most rapid growing part of the caseload,” Rector said in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News Wednesday, previewing his upcoming report on food stamp use among ABAWDs.

“ABAWDs are largely young adults who don’t work or are working off the books and hiding that income. They get a maximum of about $200 a month from the food stamp program,” Rector said, adding that this group of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or food stamp users cost taxpayers up to $11 billion a year.

While many ABAWDs make money off-the-books in the “gray market,” Rector said, they are not necessarily spending it on food.

“What we found was 50 percent of the ABAWDs smoke cigarettes regularly and those who do smoke are spending about $111 per month on cigarettes. That’s about two-thirds of their Thrifty Food [Plan] allotment — what they are supposed to spend on food,” Rector said.

“What is clearly happening there is these individuals are electing to spend their own revenue on cigarettes and then requiring the taxpayer to pay for their food for them and that doesn’t make very much sense,” he continued.

Rector’s paper, which is due for release later this month, is slated to spotlight Maine’s recent success with getting ABAWDs off the SNAP rolls — presenting the state as a case study and model for improvements at the federal level.

There the state of Maine put restrictions in place, including instituting work requirements, mandating that ABAWDs work, do community service, or take part in a job-training program in order to receive food stamps for more than three months.

The number of ABAWDs on SNAP in Maine plunged.

“The Left likes to say that these policies are just kicking people off the rolls,” Rector said. “But they very explicitly did not do this in Maine. Every single one of these recipients was given the opportunity to come in and do community service work or do training or anything like that and the bulk of them simply never responded at all, even though there were aggressive outreach activities for them.”

According to the poverty expert, the federal government should look at Maine’s success and incorporate those reforms to the program on a national level.

“What I recommend is that the federal government do this exact same thing nationwide on all the ABAWDs and that would save the taxpayer — if you have the same results that you had in Maine — and adding a few other reforms,” he said, “You end up with $7.9 billion a year in savings from this requirement alone.”

One of the effects of a work requirement, Rector explained, is to prevent double-dipping welfare fraud brought about by unreported income.

“What happens when you impose a work requirement like Maine did — people can’t be in two places at once,” Rector said. “So if they have an off-the-books job and you’re requiring them to come down to the welfare office at arbitrary times several days a week, they can’t do both things. And what happens is people who have off-the-books employment tend not to come down to the welfare office at all and fall off the rolls.”

Rector argues that any governor could apply the same reforms Maine Gov. Paul LePage did, however given most SNAP funding comes from the federal government, there is less of an incentive to reduce the rolls.

“For the most part they have no interest in this because it is federal money,” he said, adding that it is an “illusion” to believe that state governments are systems for conservative reform.

Rector’s report, he said, will also show the popularity of work requirements for ABAWDs.

“About 90 percent of the population believes that able-bodies adults who get cash, food housing or medical care from the government should be required for work or prepare for work as a condition of getting that aid. This is a very popular position,” he said, adding that Republicans are not the only group that approve but Democrats too by high margins favor work requirements.

“So the only people that disagree with that are Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
2%
, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
9%
, and President Obama,” he said.

Add Pine Mountain to that list.

Rector further lamented that since the 1996 welfare reform, which mandated work requirements, Republicans failed to capitalize on it as a positive solution for other assistance programs.

“Instead the Republican Party has sort of turned away from that and ignored the issue almost totally. And that’s a repudiation of basic conservative ideas,” Rector said.

PM was wrong, the republican party establishment also believes in giving to the lazy deadbeats. Its no surprise they hate Ted Cruz.

[Pine Mt Beagles]

I personally Believed that,Physicals and Drug Testing ,Should be Manditatory Requirements,,Before any one can recieve any,,Food Stamp ,,SSI,,Housing assistance or any True Entitlement.

This President has Addresed this Problem More than Any Republican ,by making Actual cuts.

President Obama signs $8.7 billion food stamp cut into law----------CUTS,,,,CUTS,,,,CUTS

By Ned Resnikoff

On Friday, President Obama added his signature to legislation that will cut $8.7 billion in food stamp benefits over the next 10 years, causing 850,000 households to lose an average of $90 per month. The signing of the legislation known as the 2014 Farm Bill occurred at a public event in East Lansing, Mich.

The food stamp cuts are one component of a massive omnibus bill which also includes billions of dollars in crop insurance and various other programs and subsidies involving American agriculture. Before he signed the legislation, President Obama praised it as an example of bipartisan problem-solving that would help create jobs and move the American economy forward.
“Congress passed a bipartisan Farm Bill that is going to make a big difference in communities across the country,” said the president.

Obama’s remarks also focused heavily on economic inequality, which he has previously called “the defining challenge of our time.” The Farm Bill, he said, would “give more Americans a shot at opportunity.”

When House Republicans originally argued for a food stamp cut of between $20.5 billion and $39 billion, the White House threatened to veto both of those proposals. During his Friday speech, the president did not say whether he was satisfied with the final $8.7 billion figure, or even mention the cuts at all. Instead, he praised the food stamp program and said that the final Farm Bill preserved much-needed benefits.

“My position has always been that any Farm Bill I sign must include protections for vulnerable Americans, and thanks to the hard work of [Senate Agriculture Committee chair Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich] and others, it does just that,” he said.
Stabenow, who played a key role in Farm Bill negotiations, fully embraced the cuts in a speech delivered shortly before the president took the stage.

“This is a nutrition bill that makes sure families have a safety net just like farmers do,” she said. “The savings in food assistance came solely from addressing fraud and misuse while maintaining the important benefits for families that need temporary help.”

Speaking to reporters on Air Force One before the speech, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack made much the same point, saying that the $8.7 billion cut “probably makes the program more legitimate than it was.”

In fact, the benefits reduction would eliminate the state-level “Heat and Eat” policies currently employed in 15 states and Washington, D.C. Left-wing opponents of the Farm Bill, including Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., expect the burden of burden of the cuts to fall disproportionately on the elderly and disabled.

“Poor people are getting screwed by this Republican majority [in the House] and Democrats in my opinion aren’t doing enough to push back,” he said. “I wish there had been more of a fight from the White House and others.”

McGovern also admitted to being “puzzled” by the White House’s silence on hunger and food stamp cuts. He predicted that Republicans’ success in getting a several billion dollar food stamp cut meant that they would soon try again for even more.

“They know they can’t get a $40 billion cut right off the bat, so what they’re doing is they’re chipping away at it,” he said.

[Rabbithoundjb]

This POS president ain't cut $hit. He added as much debt almost as all of the previous presidents combined, LMAO!!!!
Proof progressive policies make more poor people.

[Pine Mt Beagles]

Rabbit
That's just more stupidity,,and you know it.

[Rabbithoundjb]

That's just a fact PMB and like most dependent leftist you either can't handle the truth or your blinded by mailbox fear.

[Mr.Glock]

The US has almost 100 million people unemployed / under employed. Obama is going to leave the US with a national debt of almost 20 trillion dollars. Another economic collapse is coming, get ready.

[Alabama John]

And after the collapse a war with someone(?) will follow. War always brings us out of a depression. Death to our young men looking for jobs, and folks going to work to aid the war effort. Easy to recruit men when they are out of work and starving and the military is paying a wage each month they can send home.

All countries, winners and losers, will have all debt erased and the winner will take all but generously help the losers get back on its feet.
This has been the pattern since time began and we can read about it working in our WW1, WW2, Korea, Viet Nam, and many skirmishes unknown to the average citizen of the USA.

[Pine Lakes]

Oh by the way, Rufus quoted an article by a known socialist who writes articles for Al Jazeera. Here's what wikipedia had to say about the media group.

"Al Jazeera has been called a propaganda outlet for the Qatari government and its foreign policy, by analysts and by news reporters, including former Al Jazeera reporters. The network is sometimes perceived to have mainly Islamist perspectives, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, and having a pro-Sunni and an anti-Shia bias in its reporting of regional issues. However, Al Jazeera insists it covers all sides of a debate, it says it presents Israel's view, Iran's view and even aired videos released by Osama bin Laden."

Great job Rufus. We all knew you were an America hating muslim at heart.