Government losing its 50-year “War on Poverty”

Sen Doug Whitsett

by Sen. Doug Whitsett

The federal government appears to be losing its fifty-year “War on Poverty”.

According to the Heritage Foundation, our nation has spent nearly $21 trillion in inflation corrected dollars to address poverty within our borders during the past five decades. President Lyndon Johnson famously declared his intentions to do whatever was necessary to correct the poverty suffered by fifteen percent of the U.S. population in his 1964 state of the union message. His stated plan was to end poverty in the U.S by giving folks a hand-up to help them become self-sufficient. He believed that, given the opportunity, most adults would use that assistance to learn to become accountable and provide for their families. He promised that the return on his investment in poverty reduction would stimulate the entire national economy for future decades.

According to the 2012 United States Census, fifteen percent of our population continues to live in poverty today.

However, current standards of poverty, as defined by the U.S. Census, are significantly different than in 1964. U.S. Census and other available federal data describe the conditions of the average American living on an income below the federal poverty level. A very large majority of these folks are not undernourished. Most do not suffer from hunger for a single day of the year. They have automobiles, multiple color TV’s, and live in a house that is larger than the average European family’s dwelling. Their homes have air conditioning, cable TV and most have computers. Virtually all have cellular telephones and as many as a third have flat-screen TV’s. To be certain, the standard of living in poverty is much better today than those suffering in poverty in 1964.

The taxpayer dollars spent on fighting U.S. poverty over the past half-century significantly exceeds our current $17 trillion sovereign national debt. Yet the origins of poverty have not been diminished. In spite of President Johnson’s good intentions, those forces have become even more prevalent and pervasive.

There has been a sharp reduction in the percentage of participation in the labor-force by men. That reduction has accelerated during the past few years to near unprecedented levels. In fact, much of the alleged reduction in unemployment during the past four years is attributable to fewer people seeking employment rather than more people being employed.

The number of people receiving disability benefits from Social Security, Workman’s Compensation and pension funds has skyrocketed during the past five years. Both the total increase and the rate of increase of disability claims are virtually statistically impossible to explain. These newly disabled workers have also left the workforce.

Unemployment and underemployment among men twenty five years of age and under  exceeds 25 percent. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that in families living below the federal poverty line the average parent works only about 16 hours per week. To many, living on monthly welfare benefits has become an acceptable life style. That welfare dependency has too often become familial and generational, ensuring the accelerated decline into even less self-sufficiency.

Our public education system is failing to prepare young people for the workforce. Employers are virtually unanimous in their concern that many high schools and colleges are graduating students with few useful communication or workforce skills. Moreover, they point out that most graduates have been encouraged in school to be non-competitive, to have little work ethic, and to have not been taught critical thinking skills to solve problems. For these and other reasons, employers are reluctant to hire many young Americans.

Six percent of American children were born out of wedlock in 1963. More than 40 percent of our children were born to single mothers in 2012. Each additional child serves to increase the monthly welfare stipend. This more than six-fold increase in children born to single mothers is strong evidence of the disintegration of the traditional family structure. For too many, the welfare check has replaced the family wage earner.

The federal government currently operates more than 80 means-tested welfare programs. According to the Heritage Foundation, more than 100 million Americans received aid from one or more free cash, food, housing, medical care or other social services programs in 2012. These programs provide benefits to about one fourth of our population. Their total cost for 2012 exceeded $900 billion. This means that the average welfare recipient received about $9,000 in federal benefits in 2012.

Both state and federal welfare programs actually advertise and encourage people to sign-up to receive a variety of free benefits. Those that have learned to game and abuse the welfare systems are capable of accessing much larger monthly sums. We believe that some Oregon families are capable of taking home as much as $10,000 per month in federal and state welfare benefits.

That $900 billion annual cost does not include Social Security benefits and Medicare costs that have largely been paid by payroll taxes levied on the recipients. It does not include all of the federal dollars spent to provide Emergency Unemployment Compensation to more than 14 million people who have exhausted the unemployment insurance benefits for which they paid insurance premiums. Neither does it include the burgeoning costs of disability benefits.

Our society needs and must have adequate social safety-nets for our most vulnerable citizens. Any society must be graded by its treatment of its older, infirmed, disabled, and severely disadvantaged citizens. However, able bodied Americans should not be encouraged or allowed to live on the dole.

In my opinion, in order to access welfare benefits all non-elderly adults who are capable of working should be expected either to perform some job or to be preparing for a job. Moreover, they should be monitored to ensure that they are drug-free in order to remain employable while receiving benefits. Those adults that refuse to work, or refuse to comply with drug monitoring, should immediately be denied their welfare checks.

Further, the benefit structures must be changed to stop penalizing those who choose to work but cannot earn enough to live-on at an entry level wage. People should be encouraged to start work by helping them to become self-supporting.  The current processes too often penalize those who try to work by reducing or eliminating their benefits before they are able to make enough to get-by. The result is the perverse incentive to quit work and to go back on the welfare dole.

Finally, the benefit structures need to be changed to stop penalizing those who choose to live in traditional family settings. Marrying a person who is gainfully employed too often results in total termination of social network benefits. That reality may cause a single mother or father to reevaluate the marriage choice. Once again, the perverse incentive is to remain a single parent and to continue to access full welfare benefits rather than work toward self-sufficiency.

By virtually any standard, the U.S. war on poverty has been a catastrophe. In my opinion, the effort will continue to fail spectacularly until we make the choices to deal with the root causes of welfare dependency and to restructure our welfare programs to encourage accountability and self-sufficiency.

Senator Doug Whitsett is the Republican state senator representing Senate District 28 – Klamath Falls

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 11:52 | Posted in Economy, Employment, Unemployment | 24 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • DavidAppell

    The funniest thing about this article is that Sen. Doug Whitsett writes like he’s not a part of government.

    News flash: Senator Whitsett, you ARE the government. Your job is to aid people’s lives, by, in part, helping to alleviate poverty. That means you don’t just get to sit back and laugh at the federal government, who, in your words, “appears to be losing its fifty-year ‘War on Poverty’.”

    That’s YOUR job too. YOU’RE at fault too.

    Has this honestly never occurred to you, admidst all your gloating?

    • Ballistic45

      David’s attempt to deflect from the truth… Bob and Weave David, Bob and Weave, Rope-A-Dope David… Doesn’t change the truth a bit but you just keep trying to change the focus David… Especially do to the fact that Democrats play a MAJOR role in wasting all that money in enslaving rather than freeing the poor…..

      • DavidAppell

        Do you have even a single intelligent thing to say on the subject of climate change? Because now would be the time….

      • DavidAppell

        Bob-and-weave from what? Whitsett’s article was pathetic — an admission that he simply doens’t care about the poor in his district. He’s only interested in who he can blame. In other words, just another big part of the problem.

        • Ballistic45

          Ha, Ha, Ha, you are a Hypocrite David, who better blames others for their failures than the left.. You are so funny David.. Jesus you gotta turn this into an act, you could make people laugh in Vegas or Atlantic City…. You are the poster Boy of the Blame Game… LOL … You are missing your calling…

          • DavidAppell

            When you have something relevant to say, put up a flag, OK?

          • .

            Of curse, Appell, your PMS (Partisan Mouth Saliva) is so sloppy, your flag must be a diaper or whatever else DEEP-ENDS-ing on your estate of mind.

          • DavidAppell

            Don’t you have a woman to protect from the armed hordes gathering outside your door?

          • Ballistic45

            David on an escalator would be easy to spot if it broke down, he would be the one yelling for someone to help him get off it.. You’re hilarious David… Oh, OH, yeah, I got a woman David, she shoots better than I do.. She would protect you too David.. LOL …

          • DavidAppell

            Real women don’t need guns.

          • DavidAppell

            Real women don’t need guns. Real women make enough money to live in the good part of town, where idiot gun-people aren’t trying to rob them every other day. They don’t live in constant fear, clutching a gun every hour of the day. Real women — and their partners — are smart and sharp and know how to avoid people like Ballistic45 and his wife.

          • Ballistic45

            I hope your fantasy of immunity from crime works out for ya… LOL Typical, dream of utopia prepare for nothing.. I suppose you don’t have fire extinguishers or home and auto insurance either cause you’re to smart to have a fire of car wreck no matter the behaviors of others… Good luck with that dream…. You are a hoot David, I will say that for Ya… I’m starting to look forward to your blatherings…

          • .

            Appell’s snide r house drools are rife with dregs from what’s left of US a pun a beach where Burt Lancaster deftly finds his voila vas is dis for DEMorrah Kerrring to be unsuitable when Montgomery Cleft’s ‘peers michael moore desirable.

  • HBguy

    Sen. W claims:

    “Employers are virtually unanimous in their concern that many
    high schools and colleges are graduating students with few useful
    communication or workforce skills. Moreover, they point out that most
    graduates have been encouraged in school to be non-competitive, to have little work ethic, and to have not been taught critical thinking skills
    to solve problems.”

    In an article full of ridiculously inflated claims and insults to all struggling Americans, this quote is the weirdest.

    Really? Employers are unanimous? I’m an employer, and I think this statement is crazy. But. that’s pretty much to form for the articles Sen. W. posts here.

  • Cheryl

    I need the safety net government gives me as I simply shoes not to work. I have been fine since making this decision 12 years ago. Everything I need is still mine for free. Everything.
    What a country.
    Glad to think you might not believe me, too, as that means I can keep right on not working.

    • .

      Ah yes, easy to spot Cheryl wearing a Tina Sanitary Napkin bib while est-rousing out from her uppity high chair.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)