Freeloading on the Taxpayer's Dime

15 December 2003 | Andy Obermann

[AndyObermann]

Freeloading on the Taxpayer’s Dime By: Andy Obermann 14 December 2003

The other day I was at the grocery store doing some shopping. I patiently waited in line to purchase a few miscellaneous items. In front of me, a woman, no older than forty, was buying two sodas, two packs of gum, and a personal size bag of potato chips—trivial purchases, a snack perhaps. She proceeded to pull out what appeared to be a credit or debit card to pay for the goods. An unnecessary step for such a menial purchase, I thought. Much to my surprise, however, she was paying for these goods with her Food Stamp benefit card. It struck me as odd, very odd, but nothing was said of it and she moved on.

In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson passed the first national Food Stamp Act. In it, he outlined a plan to provide adequate nourishment for all American citizens as part of his “Great Society”. In 1976, President Jimmy Carter approved a revision of the law eliminating purchase requirements and simplifying eligibility standards. Thanks to these reductions the present day Food Stamp Program touted a massive 6.5 million recipients and a payout of more than half a billion dollars, approximately $566,569,725, to be exact.

Now, I don’t know or really want to understand what Carter was thinking, but I’d be willing to bet that soda and gum weren’t the types of food good ole’ LBJ had in mind. Aside from the fact that the Constitution affords government no power to enact such a program, one would think that at the very least, the way these monies are spent would be monitored. It’s likely that a significant portion of that half a billion could be used elsewhere if the reckless spending habits of recipients were scrutinized a bit more closely.

Normally, I’m against government intrusion in the lives of everyday people, but for this I’ll definitely make an exception. Why isn’t there some sort of provision in Welfare programs as to how these precious government funds can be spent? Is it really that intrusive to say, “Ok, since you’re getting taxpayer money from the government, we’re going to determine what you’re allowed to buy with it and monitor those purchases?”

An honest proposal would be to restrict Food Stamp purchases to the four basic food groups; grains, meats/poultry, dairy, fruits/vegetables. If this were violated, privileges would be revoked and stores in breech would be reprimanded. What’s wrong with that? Superfluous purchases such as chips and soda don’t provide adequate nourishment anyway, so why not?

A lot of you aren’t going to like this, but I’ll go one further, once a citizen has been on the program for an extended period of time, they should start losing some of the privileges that taxpayers receive. I don’t think that those who are on these programs indefinitely should be allowed to partake in voting. Maybe this would provide a little motivation to stop mooching off the hard-earned profits of others. Think about it, why should they have any say over how tax dollars are spent, when they foot none of the bill? Why should they be able to choose the leaders who shape America’s economic policies, when their earnings will not be used to fund these policies?

Now before all of you start berating me for being insensitive, let me qualify this theory. I’m not talking about citizens receiving disability and unemployment or families that legitimately go on these programs out of need. I’m referring to the chronic abusers—those who have been on these programs for years and years that have not attempted, and do not desire to get off. I’m talking about those who give our social Welfare programs a black eye: the freeloaders.

Look, if a family is in need, if the primary bread-winner has lost his or her job, or something terribly unexpected occurs, these programs can be of great assistance. There is no shame in needing or receiving help when one falls on tough times. That is why these programs were created; they are warranted for these urgent situations. They aren’t, however, meant as a long-term solution.

The government needs to take a serious look at the abuses these sorts of programs incur, and soon. If politicians don’t, perhaps the American taxpayer should look for leaders who will.

[RS]

Since all of these credit card purchases should show up on some list somewhere - can we force the discloser of these bills by a FOIA ?

A listing of the thousands of bags of Doretos and cases of Jolt Cola bought by our welfare food money might shake some folks up.

[babyface00]

You should know that the disenfranchisement of me WOULD be un-Constitutional. And NO ONE the H*** is going to tell me what to eat.

Disenfranchiesment? How can you say that while you're pointing a government gun in our face so you can (via the government) stick your hands into our collective pockets?

[fella]

"Is it really that intrusive to say, “Ok, since you’re getting taxpayer money from the government, we’re going to determine what you’re allowed to buy with it and monitor those purchases?” "

Our local public scools have been federalized by this same line of logic. And just look at the vast improvement in education scince 1950.

[Stephen Ritter]

"I would prefer that the federal government not be involved in it at all and the states themselves determine the benefit levels that will be provided."

I've got no problems with that.

"But I would firmly support the eligible food stuffs being very restricted in scope."

Once again, make that a decision for the individual states.

In my own case, I decided that 30 years of being a taxpayer entitled to get the occasional "treat". A good 95% of what we purchase are solid, nutritious foodstuffs. We made the decision to be good stewards of the taxpayer's money.

Being a conservative, I realize that the dominant view of the Food Stamp program among conservatives is of Welfare Wilma and her ten kids buying out the candy, cookie, and ice cream aisles in the local grocery. But I've also come to know other people, since the disaster of disability hit me. Most of these people are grateful for hand up, and have attitudes toward food purchases like mine. (They would also be grateful if the Feds would stop the wholesale desertion of America by industry ... jobs DO help, you know.)

Also, I've given speeches to welfare recipients on the local level, and encouraged them to purchase and eat wisely. I'm still a conservative, after all.

Man, do I find myself in unusual territory this morning!

[sistergoldenhair]

If my money is being taken from me in the name of feeding poor people, then I want the say as to what poor people eat.

It wasn't that long ago that people receiving aid picked up government approved foodstuffs at the welfare office.

[FeliciaCat]

I dont think you can buy candy or certain snack/junk foods as well....

[Maigrey]

Where I live, roughly 20% of the people are getting some form of assistance. The Welfare office is the busiest place in town, and along the bus routes of the city.

On any given day, the parking lot of the building housing the office is packed with cars, and many a time, people are in line outside waiting to get in there.

Alas, within this bulky of a system, there is fraud and corruption. I know (and have known) people who are on the programs who shouldn't be on it, and those who truly need it. But I also think that there should be a way to limit the items in question that can be purchsed, such as soda drinks, chips, candy, cookies, etc.

Secondly, many of the people who are buying the high dollar items with their taxpayer-given cards, are turning around and bartering they for illegal narcotics. This happened to my mom at the local store. I had to explain to her why we would not have used the crack-"lady"'s card and give her $$$. She was in shock! (And I knew about this from a previous article on FR!)

I think lastly that the goobermint people don't want to try and fix the system, because they get a kickback for getting all their friends on it when they shouldn't.

[wjcsux]

Bump for later read.

[Stephen Ritter]

"How can you say that while you're pointing a government gun in our face so you can (via the government) stick your hands into our collective pockets?"

I PAID INTO THE SYSTEM for thirty years as a taxpayer. I'm getting some of MY money back, not sticking my hand into your pocket (I don't know what my hand would get into, there). I estimate that I've paid over a quarter of a million dollars into the federal dole through taxation. Are YOU saying I don't have any right to get some back when I need it?

[Phantom Lord]

Man, do I find myself in unusual territory this morning!

Me in you are in pretty much total agreement.

[jrp]

Government needs to get out of the charity business and let the private sector handle it. Americans are the most generous people in the world. There is no reason (or constitutional authoriy) to forcibly extract money from citizens to fund a wasteful, inefficent, fraud-riddled government welfare machine. I certainly would contribute more to private charities if less of my paycheck was being vacuumed up by the government.

[wjcsux]

Read what Walter Williams says on this very subject this morning. http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams.html

[Protagoras]

Food is fungible.

[Maigrey]

Nothing wrong with that.

I have no problem with the people who truly need the assistance (the compassionate conservative) but I get infuriated at the people who are sitting on their collective (bleep) and demanding handouts.

For the people who can be educated, your efforts can be a benefit. But I tend to think (from experience) that most of the people who are in their situation have no concern for not wasting the money they receive, nor care to consume the things that would be healthy and benefitial.

Those who are ignorant can be taught. Those who remain stupid can't.

[Stephen Ritter]

"If my money is being taken from me in the name of feeding poor people, then I want the say as to what poor people eat"

Then vote for the right people, or run for office yourself and change the system. It's your right. Write letters to your local newspaper, get involved and exercise your blood-bought, Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms. This is what conservatism is all about.

But understand this: You - as a private citizen - will NEVER have the say as to what poor people eat. Grousing is your only option.

But if you get involved in your political system, you might have the opportunity to change things down the road.

[Protagoras]

I PAID INTO THE SYSTEM for thirty years as a taxpayer. I'm getting some of MY money back, not sticking my hand into your pocket (I don't know what my hand would get into, there). I estimate that I've paid over a quarter of a million dollars into the federal dole through taxation. Are YOU saying I don't have any right to get some back when I need it?

I see where you are coming from but it all depends on how you phrase it or look at it. Here's a different way, an unpleasant way for most;

The government took your money by threat of force. They stole your money.

Now you use that as an excuse to join the plunder in order to make your self whole. It's entirely human to feel that way, but it plays right into their hands. That's what they want.

[Stephen Ritter]

"I certainly would contribute more to private charities if less of my paycheck was being vacuumed up by the government."

That's the whole problem, isn't it? EVERYONE has to help this Republic realize that the ONLY legitimate, Constitutional functions of the Federal government are national defense, foreign policy, and the regulation of interstate commerce. If this happened, you would keep about 90% of your federal taxes overnight.

[Phantom Lord]

The argument shouldnt be "what poor people eat." They can eat whatever they damn want. The argument should be what can they purchase with tax payer money.

I am fairly confident that is what ampat means. He should have worded it that way though.

[sandydipper]

Abuse? An immigrant can bring relatives to the US - legally - if he/she can "provide" for the relative. That said - the relative arrives and the legal resident then declares he is unable to take care of the new arrival and the Social Security Admin. puts the new comer on the federal dole at over $700.00 a month. It's called SSI benifits??

[babyface00]

I PAID INTO THE SYSTEM

What are you smoking? The government isn't a bank or an investment. You were screwed for 30 years. I'm sorry about that, but deal with it. Anything you get now is coming out of everyone else's pockets, and since we're running both a deficit and a debt, from all of our children too.

YOU saying I don't have any right to get some back when I need it

In a word, YES. You have no, none, zero right to anyone else's money. (BTW, what you're asserting has a name - socialism) I'm sorry for your predicament, but frankly, its irrelevant.

I can't believe we're even having this conversation on a conservative forum.