Welfare Reform: Why Deconstruction of the Federal Bureaucracy Is Necessary – How I See It

For much of the history of our great nation, aid for the truly needy was provided by private organizations that took personal interest in the people they were helping, teaching them how to work and, even more, teaching them how to live. Aid was hinged with a genuine desire on the part of the recipient to change the circumstances that brought him or her into poverty. Aid was contingent on the willingness of the recipient, to the best of his or her ability, to become responsible for his or her own lot in life. Aid was based on the need for the recipient to regain societal connection: with the donor, with family, and with the community. Aid rarely was received in the form of cash; more frequently, aid involved goods (food, clothing, temporary housing) and services (job training, health care, personal counsel). 

Charitable organizations, by and large, recognized that cash outlays to the poverty-stricken were most likely to lead not to an improved life, but to repeat impoverishment. When recipients had children for whom they could not provide, the private organizations could offer privately arranged foster care or adoption, among other options, for those individuals selfless enough to want better lives for their children than they themselves could give those children.

Let us quickly recognize that the system was not perfect (no system is). There were abuses by some organizations. Some charities did not route the donations properly. Some of the foster or adoptive families were found to be less than fit. But these problems, rare by comparison to the problems with today’s system, were usually corrected. Corrupt organizations found their donations drying up in most cases. Inept or abusive families were usually found out by the organization with whom they were affiliated. 

The key corrective measure of the system was the level of personal involvement between all concerned parties – a certain “in-your-face”-ness that kept people accountable and, usually honest. The best part was that most of what was donated actually reached the target population because the organizations relied heavily on volunteers to deliver goods and services and do the work needed to teach someone how to improve his life. 

While we are thinking of system abuses, we should also recall the corruption, burnout, and innate inefficiency of the federal system that has been in place up to now (most of us can recall news items about these kinds of situations).

What we have in our federal welfare system is a bloated welfare bureaucracy which eats up most of the dollars poured into it to keep itself alive. This author is aware of estimates as low as 17 cents on the dollar actually reaching the targeted population. If a private charity was this inefficient with its donations, it would find itself defunded by its donors, as well as smack-dab in the middle of some heavy-duty fraud litigation.

In addition, there is and can be no requirement for personal responsibility on the part of the recipient in the federal system as it has existed. There is no requirement that recipients learn trades for which they are physically and mentally equipped. There is and can be no acceptance of personal responsibility on the part of the recipient to recognize and change any behavior that may have led to or contributed to his impoverishment. And there is no moral imperative for the recipient to change behavior which would lead to the aggravation of the impoverished state (i.e., recreational medication, willing participation in activities which naturally lead to pregnancy, refusal to work, etc.). Finally, our child welfare systems have been in massive disarray with burned-out caseworkers trying to do too much in too little time, leaving thousands of children at risk every year for being left in or placed in unfit parenting atmospheres (and I won’t even go into child welfare workers taking children away who are in perfectly good homes).

FEDERAL WELFARE IS SLAVERY.

Let’s try something “new” – let’s get the Feds out of the poverty business. Let’s get all government out of the poverty business. If our collective national conscience can’t stand to return this responsibility in total to private charities, then at least let’s leave it to state and local governments, which are more creative, more flexible, more accountable, and more accessible than the Fed has ever been. And more in touch with the needs of the people – more able to put expectations on recipients to do their part to improve their own lives. Maybe then we would see a reverse in the rising trends of dependency.

Remember, the price of personal dignity is personal responsibility.

That’s how I see it!