California contemplates ultimate reform - no welfare (WOW!)

McClatchy ^ | 6/8/09 | Cynthia Hubert

[Crazieman]

Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?

That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit.

County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento.

[Crazieman]

Wow, if California starts axing huge chunks of old leftist programs and then followed up with tax cuts...

Be still my heart. I could go home again.

[GnL]

Obama will bail out the CA welfare programs before anything ever gets cut. That is almost guaranteed.

[LouAvul]

It’s a bluff. The career welfare recipients (and they are considerable) would burn down the state.

[Tenacious 1]

That would be an awful lot of voters to kick out of the state. Where would they go?

[Kozak]

Wow. All of a sudden there will be PLENTY of people clamoring for those jobs “americans won’t do”......

[MaryFromMichigan]

A great idea that probably won't happen.

"County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs..."

Wonder what a liberal's idea of a "successful" social program is.

[Wolfie]

You might want to wait until the smoke clears. IF it clears, that is.

[Sgt_Schultze]

That would be welfare for actual Americans. They will still happily continue paying the services for illegals.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Be still my heart. I could go home again.

Yup...might even cause a mass exodus of illegals.

I'd consider moving back myself

[truthkeeper]

Forget it. Pigs would fly before this would happen.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Basically, the only way we are ever going to fix anything is if it collapses of its own weight.

Once again, California leads the way.

[The Anti-One]

Ha! Don’t count on going home just yet. What will California need with a welfare program when obombanation implements his federal welfare program that not only puts degenerates in Cadillacs, beach front property, clothes, and feeds them but it will also include giving them free “Health Care”?!

[junta]

Overpaid old white liberal union thugs versus a growing welfare class of young minorities, now there is a grudge match I would pay to see.

[mewzilla]

County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history...

Which begs the question: Successful at what...?

[Cheap_Hessian]

“Be still my heart. I could go home again.”

Yeah, same here!

[randog]

...one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance...

Two points:

1) How exactly does Mr. Wagstaff measure the success of a welfare program?

2) Mr. Wagstaff is eligible for retirement under Randog's Rule of Government Uselessness, No. 543: Any bureaucrat with more than five words in his title can be considered useless and ineffective and can be eliminated with little to no change in services provided. "Director of the Department of Human Assistance" qualifies.

[Army Air Corps]

Wonder what a liberal's idea of a "successful" social program is.

One that expands year after year after year...

[PGR88]

At the end of the day, protecting Unions and their benefits have a much higher priority than Welfare programs.

[randog]

Basically, the only way we are ever going to fix anything is if it collapses of its own weight.

Agreed.

[Zeddicus]

Wonder what a liberal's idea of a "successful" social program is.

That's easy. A "successful" social program is one which permantently sustains an ever-growing population of increasingly dependent subjects.

Liberals measure success by the number of people who are dependent upon the government. Conservatives measure success by the number of people who are not dependent upon the government.