Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Here's my idea of welfare reform...comments?
Me | 6/22/11 | Self

Posted on 06/22/2011 9:31:03 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee

Here's my idea of welfare reform: comments? (document presented in language of applicant)
Public Assistance Implementation and Usage Contract.

This contract, entered into on (date) and expiring on (18 months from implementation date) by the (state agency) and applicant(s) listed herein (must submit names of applicant and children born to her via birth records),allows for the provision of food,housing allowance,child care and education for the purposes of job placement during the contract period,and is understood by all parties concerned that the provision of aforementioned assistance is on a one-time basis,not to be repeated or reinstated at any time for any reason between the applicant(s) and the agency named herein,and is for the aforementioned time period only,and can only be implemented following presentation of documents proving legal citizenship status and a drug screening process,both of which are to be conducted by the agency.

Once legal citizenship status and drug screen results are known by the agency and the applicant and found to be favorable,this contract can then be implemented.The following covenants hereby apply and are agreed upon by both the named agency herein and the applicant(s) seeking assistance (failure of any one of these covenants will be considered a contract breach on the part of the applicant,and will result in immediate termination of the contract;assistance will be terminated immediately and can never be reinstated at any time in the future for any reason:
Applicant will submit to random home visits which will be unannounced and will occur during the 5-day work week,normally during the mid-day hours;
Applicant will submit to random drug testing as directed by the agency;
Applicant must not conceive,adopt(formally or informally,including family members,immediate or extended),marry or co-habitate during the contract period;
Applicant must attend a one-year vocational program via a voucher provided by the agency;
Applicant must attend each class (two absences will be allowed during the contract period and a doctor's note must be submitted upon returning to class for each absence) and a transportation voucher will be provided by the agency for transportation during class hours;
Child care will be provided by the agency during class hours only.

Once applicant graduates from vocational training, a two-month job-placement period will commence,with child care provided by the agency; Upon applicant's employment,there will be an additional 4 months of ongoing assistance to allow applicant enough time to establish themselves in their occupation and to make child-care arrangements for after the contract period.
Once this contract has reached its expiration date,the assistance provided,all provisions and covenants and financial considerations as well,will cease and terminate permanently.The applicant is barred from any and all future assistance.

I,________________ hereby agree to adhere to all covenants,rules,etc of this contract. I realize and fully understand that I am bound by this contract in order to receive assistance in any form,and that any violation or breach will result in my receiving any form of assistance any further. I agree further that this contract was fully explained to me by the agency caseworker and that I will fully comply.
(sign & date here)____________________________
Agency hereby agrees to and will implement to the best of its ability and obligations,all covenants of this contract. (agency sign & date)_______________________


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Education; Society
KEYWORDS: getajob; gettowork; reform; welfare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: gimme1ibertee

One caution: anything the government does for “the poor”, it usually tries to force on everyone eventually. Obamacare is just one example.


61 posted on 06/22/2011 11:53:09 AM PDT by Ellendra (Remember the Battle of Athens, Tennessee: Aug. 2, 1946)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee

His point was there would be an immediate drop in the crime rate, school funding would be freed up for students who want to learn, they would live like kings on the money in their home country and we would not be responsible for the next generation.


62 posted on 06/22/2011 12:04:58 PM PDT by READINABLUESTATE (Most leftism can be traced to childhood birthday trauma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: rokkitapps

Or even a childless white woman. I was in a wheelchair for 3 years, at the time we didn’t know if I’d be able to walk again, and I still can’t use my right shoulder. I was turned down for disability benefits. (I was fortunate enough to have family to fall back on.)

It bugs the heck out of me to see healthy, strong people living on disability benefits when I know several genuinely disabled people who were turned down.


63 posted on 06/22/2011 12:23:14 PM PDT by Ellendra (Remember the Battle of Athens, Tennessee: Aug. 2, 1946)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: READINABLUESTATE
they would live like kings on the money in their home country

They're living like kings here now,without the added expense of a first-class plane ticket.Besides,for many of them,this IS their home country.
64 posted on 06/22/2011 12:30:16 PM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee

Ending welfare ends the throwing the money at the problem, as you state.

I did not see in your proposal the main thrust of dealing with welfare people to be training. I saw it more to be about random tests and more government more involved with what they are or are not doingto comply with the terms of the contract. You are far more heavy on “you can’t do this or that and we’ll be checking on you” than “we will give you training”. Didn’t get that vibe from your comments.

the bottom line is government has no business being involved in anything charity-related because government is not set up to do charity. I think you know that. you’re only beef is the reaction people who believe they are entitled to benefits will have when they are taken away. HOw about being concerned about the people government continually is taking money away from to give to these people.

You also assume that these people actually want to train for something better, and would rather work for their money than have it handed to them for doing nothing. You have not met the kind of welfare recipients I’ve had the displeasure of running into. They don’t want to work, they don’t want to train, they believe they deserve this and who the hell are you to tell them they need to better themselves? That’s the mindset we’re dealing with here. The ungrateful, unashamed, happy with themselves, welfare recipients.

Read the thread, others were calling for castration for some of them.

If more and more people were needing private services for assistance, it sounds like a good job-growth industry. Perhaps we would see an increase in such groups to meet the demand. You are so stuck in the mindset that only government can do welfare, but they’ve really only taken it over the last 50-some years. Before that and before our government existed it was private groups and charities that did the work of helping others. They were able to also make better distinctions between people who needed help but wanted to make it on their own versus those who just wanted to live off the sweat of others. They were compassionate but they weren’t stupid.


65 posted on 06/22/2011 12:37:59 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

FORGET THE ‘TRAINING’

Government ‘training’ programs are not any better than anything else the govern,ent does.

They had 12 years of free high school to get all the training they should have needed.

Let them fend for them selves- put the kids up for adoption or in a government boarding school (THAT I can go for- it will teach them to hate the government more than anything else)

No, I am not joking.


66 posted on 06/22/2011 12:46:32 PM PDT by Mr. K (CAPSLOCK! -Unleash the fury! [Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee

Really so taking away the choice of pop and lobster and the option of section 8 would keep them in poverty longer rather than taking the high living life style away would is that what you are saying? Poorhouses worked very well in this country until the liberals decided it was degrading to have the poor to work the land to earn their keep


67 posted on 06/22/2011 12:48:33 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: rokkitapps

Yep just what I proposed exacept I allowed a room with bunks for ech family. Theyused t be called poorhouses.


68 posted on 06/22/2011 12:52:36 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: chris_bdba

Perhaps they could pick up trash on the side of the highways to pay for their room and board. Rake ready jobs.


69 posted on 06/22/2011 12:55:50 PM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee

every liberal always couches welfare as a moral choice as well as a necessary government function.

We have got to stop conceding the moral point to the left that welfare transfer payments are a moral imperative. When I refuse to agree that I have a moral obligation to help the poor, I am regularly castigated by such libtards (and even the pastor of my mother-in-law’s church) as uncaring and evil and greedy and such.

That is their method...to get you to concede the point that welfare is the moral thing to do, and then they ramp it up from there.


70 posted on 06/22/2011 1:15:07 PM PDT by Ouderkirk (Democrats...the party of Slavery, Segregation, Sodomy, and Sedition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Great idea but we’d probably hear a defening squeel from the state government empyees unions about how they were stealing their jobs.


71 posted on 06/22/2011 1:33:42 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee
My late sister was a welfare queen for more than 10 years.

That’s a very tough thing to have to admit about someone who is, or at least was at one time, close to you. It must give you a very different view from which such a destructive system can be made better.

So just let me gently suggest that it is not productive to speak of ‘reform’ when discussing destructive systems such as welfare. One gets lost in arguments about ways to make the system more workable or how better to treat its beneficiaries (victims), when what is needed is to simply take it out with the rest of the garbage.

Sorry about your sister. RIP

72 posted on 06/22/2011 2:22:19 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

Please read my very first post on this thread.


73 posted on 06/22/2011 5:28:13 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Sporke

I knew a person who bragged about all 12 grown children in a family being on Social Security Disability. Most of them chose ‘mental’ because it’s impossible to disprove. Some were as young as in their 20’s - and they’ll get full Social Security - none of this ‘based on what you earned’ crap ... nope - and totally free medical - - for life.


74 posted on 06/22/2011 7:24:03 PM PDT by GOPJ (In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act. - - Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
I did not see in your proposal the main thrust of dealing with welfare people to be training

Wrong. That IS the main thrust.Had you read further down in the conditions for receiving assistance,you would have noticed that.

You are far more heavy on “you can’t do this or that and we’ll be checking on you” than “we will give you training”

You completely misread the contract.And you still aren't getting that it's government involvement on a local or state level,not federal.And,yes...random visits to recipients is a good idea.There must be checks and balances.

HOw about being concerned about the people government continually is taking money away from to give to these people.

This is EXACTLY who I am concerned with-people like you and me..the hard-working,taxpaying individual who's tired of endless "free money" being doled out to those who have no incentive to get out and work for it.

You also assume that these people actually want to train for something better

No,I am not assuming any such thing. This contract is completely voluntary-you either sign it or you don't,but if you do not,you get NO assistance whatsoever.This ferrets out those who will try and pull themselves up by their bootstraps,and if they don't,too bad,no more assistance-ever.How could you read that any other way?

You are so stuck in the mindset that only government can do welfare,

Wrong again.I am actually against the federal government being involved in anything but doing the will of the people who put them in office.I am talking about a scaled-down version of a hand-up approach as opposed to a hand-out approach.You are reading this all wrong.It's not about more govt oversight,or intrusion.Who,outside of the federal government,do you think is going to handle this if not a local or state government agency? A church? The Salvation Army? Get real.

Before that and before our government existed it was private groups and charities that did the work of helping others.

society is very different now from the way it was then. You're asking people to go back to a mindset and culture from decades ago...good luck with that. Meanwhile,we have a huge problem with a bunch of people that either need to get trained and go to work,or just fend for themselves.I daresay with a plan that pushes an ultimatum,you would see more people getting training and finding a job than you see now.In additionally,had you read the entire contract carefully,you would have noticed that the applicant gets 18 months of assistance and no more,ever again,regardless of their situation.Better that than your solution.
75 posted on 06/23/2011 8:00:42 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk
every liberal always couches welfare as a moral choice as well as a necessary government function.

I am about as far away from a liberal as you could ever hope to get. I am not making any moral judgments here,and I am 100000% in favor of smaller,less intrusive government.
We do NOT have an obligation to help the poor,though we do,because as Americans,we are a benevolent people,and we certainly shouldn't be obligated to foot the bill for those who think they're owed something or are too lazy to work.
The contract would be executed not by the feds-they would be completely taken out of the equation-but by the smaller and more manageable state and/or county governments.The ultimate goal is to end welfare,get people to work and ease the burden on us taxpayers.
This crushing weight on our backs needs to go,and should never have gotten to this point. We need to do something about it.
76 posted on 06/23/2011 8:10:58 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee

Well given what you say, it might not be a bad thing.

I think the biggest problem would be getting places to change their own mindsets to do this. Too many people would fight for extensions, to change the law, to get it declared unconstitutional, voluntary signup or not.

And, really, you end up where I was proposing after 18 months of govt assistance anyway. Maybe one year would be better than 18 months though. I just saw a study that showed most people on assistance give up looking for a job after about 6 months.


77 posted on 06/23/2011 11:09:44 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Maybe one year would be better than 18 months though

I originally thought about a year,but most training courses take at least one year to complete.

I just saw a study that showed most people on assistance give up looking for a job after about 6 months.

The additional six months would allow for job placement,securing suitable transportation and child care....just a safety cushion to eliminate excuses of not having enough time to find a ride,child care or a job.
At the end of all of that,if a person can't get it together,they're on their own. They cannot rely on govt assistance for anything whatsoever. When signing the contract,they would be agreeing that they understand that.

That's when your charity-handout plan kicks in.
78 posted on 06/23/2011 11:35:31 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
Sorry about your sister. RIP

That's very kind of you...thank you.

it is not productive to speak of ‘reform’

It absolutely is productive to get people off their butts and get to work,and a contract to do so is one possible solution. To say "just kick them off the program" is,basically,what I am proposing-but in a more positive way that benefits everyone-the free market,you,me,and future generations that would just assume that everyone else should pay their way for them because they've grown up on welfare.

Look at it this way:Right now,the federal government is running the welfare circus. They just dole out check after check,year in and year out,no oversight,no checks and balances,everybody that wants a check gets one,have all the kids you want,we don't care,the taxpayer's paying for it.In other words,the federal government doing what they do best,which is nothing. A person can be on assistance forever-no impetus to find a job,just sit back and collect a check,for years on end.Billions and billions of your tax dollars going down the drain forever with no end in sight.
On the other hand,my proposal would cut the length of time a person can receive benefits to 18 months,not allowing for any more assistance ever after that time period;would enforce compliance with the contract by closely monitoring recipients through regular home visits;would foster an atmosphere of positive growth through training and job placement;and may eventually help to end welfare as we know it today.Think:not a hand-out,but a hand up.
79 posted on 06/23/2011 11:49:13 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: All

Bottom line: Unless and until we push for more oversight on the recipients of these entitlement programs,and take the federal government out of them and remand them to the state and/or county governments,all of us will continue to be the real victims of welfare,disability payouts and other big government programs so vulnerable to fraud and waste.


80 posted on 06/23/2011 11:53:23 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson