Posted on 03/16/2017 8:20:36 PM PDT by BackRoads775
At a news conference Thursday, Mick Mulvaney, President Trump’s budget chief, defended proposed cuts to the Meals on Wheels program, which provides food aid to needy senior citizens, by saying the program is one of many that is “just not showing any results.”
Meals on Wheels is a nonprofit group that receives funding from the federal government, state and local governments and private donors. “We serve more than 2.4 million seniors from 60 to 100+ years old each year,” the organization writes. “They are primarily older than 60 and because of physical limitations or financial reasons, have difficulty shopping for or preparing meals for themselves.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Part of the problem with government largess being used for charitable reasons is that eventually charity by individuals becomes moot as the government controls all the charity (welfare).
The administration speaker is wrong on how useful and helpful the Meals on Wheels program is.
However, the Federal amount it receives is not so much that it is necessary to sustain the program, and it can be more useful without any federal government strings that might come with federal aid.
It’s a good program deserving of support, but there is no need, financial or otherwise, for it to be a federally funded program.
Find the word “meals” in the Constitution for me.
Thanks in advance.
L
The program may have results, contrary to Mr. Mulvaney, but why must the Feds fund everything? State and local governments and philanthropists cannot take up the slack???
The national debt is $19.9 trillion and climbing. With unfunded liabilities counted, it is over $200 trillion. The federal government does not need to fund everything.
When the feds GIVE anything, they also TAKE control. Federal dollars always mean federal rules. "A COMMUNITY program run by volunteers" will always be more effective than any program run by Washington DC bureaucrats. It's always best for the feds to simply STAY OUT.
My parents volunteered for a number of years delivering Meals on Wheels. It was very effective. However, if they followed "federal rules", they would have to declare their time (six person-hours per day), and car expenses ($0.57 per mile), as well as other sundry expenses, and suddenly it would be no longer "cost effective". Let it stay in the community, and KEEP THE FEDS OUT.
+1.
Cut Federal Income Taxes and people will have the money to locally support Meals on Wheels thru donations or local taxes.
Get the Federal Government out of the Block Grant business. The Feds are engaged in Redistribution of Wealth thru the Block Grant programs.
“Maybe the funds given weren’t spent on the promises made.”....
Maybe those actual meals were delivered to a certain group who were not eligible as in “gibsmedats”.
Meals on Wheels should be denied to anyone who cannot prove citizenship. I also think legal permanent residents should not be eligible for any form of welfare.
The GOP is still the stupid party. Doesn't matter that Trump won. They always step on their own message -- in this case over PENNIES.
I think they mean that throwing money at the agency hasn’t shown any results. Money usually just increases costs by increasing overhead (i.e. hiring people).
Perhaps, families should contract with the state to schedule Meals on Wheels for their aged family members. They could pay an appropriate fee. Donations from charitable people and organizations could be accepted. Families who couldn’t afford to pay to feed their family members could volunteer their services, several hours per month. Only those with no family support and no income should receive free services.
I am a senior and contribute to many charities. I can volunteer time too. I don’t believe feeding me is the state’s problem. I, and my family, will take care of me. It used to be that way. Sadly, many have allowed the gov’t to assume their responsibilities.
Ditto to all.
MoW will survive without federal funding.
The government would simply do it worse at a vastly higher cost — a cost to unconnected tax payers instead of to folks voluntarily supporting it with their time & money.
“general welfare”, before became a dirty word, meant helping the weak and infirmed-at least in my book.
Yup. I’m pointing out how ridiculous most freepers are about government assistance. I think it goes back to the Protestant heresy of predestination that holds that poverty is an external sign of damnation.
“at least in my book.”
You need to read better books. I recommend The Federalist Papers.
L
I prefer The Holy Bible New Testament. Thanks.
“I prefer The Holy Bible New Testament.”
Good book. Now, please help me out. Where exactly did Jesus say it was okay to steal from people so you could buy meals for the poor? Because I missed that part in my Bible. Maybe I have a bad copy or something.
L
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.