EDITORIAL: The cruelty of not cutting

How uncontrolled welfare spending perpetuates poverty

Question of the Day

Is it still considered bad form to talk politics during a social gathering?

View results

Democrats insist that every dollar in the $3.8 trillion annual budget is precious and well spent — all waste has been eliminated by sequestration. “The cupboard is bare,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said recently on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “There’s no more cuts to make. … We cannot have cuts just for the sake of cuts.” Republicans and the facts suggest otherwise.

Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee observe that the federal budget has grown by 22.6 percent since President Obama took office — from $3.1 trillion in fiscal 2009 to $3.8 trillion in fiscal 2013. An extra $700 billion here, an extra $1 trillion there, and soon you’re talking about real money. The national debt stands at $17.1 trillion. There’s nothing frugal about the government’s husbandry of the people’s money.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the committee’s top Republican, added up the figures and found that $3.7 trillion of the expenditure and the debt came from spending on welfare on Mr. Obama’s watch. The federal welfare money is doled out through 83 different welfare programs, including food stamps, free school breakfasts and lunches, public housing, energy subsidies for low-income Americans, Head Start and Pell Grants. It’s a sea of acronyms, subterfuge and redundancy. The list further includes Medicaid, whose rolls are ballooning under Obamacare.

These programs often overlap, and they all include “free” benefits, doled out to some who don’t pay anything into the system. For every individual program, there’s a federal fiefdom of administrators and staff dedicated to making sure the program constantly grows. Bureaucracies, like sharks, must keep moving and keep eating, or they die. Even without making a single cut, consolidating the programs to eliminate redundancy would save billions.

Beyond the $3.7 trillion in federal spending, the states pile on hundreds of billions of dollars on their own, much of it for the required contributions to become eligible for the federal money. “The exclusively federal share of spending on these federal programs is up 32 percent since 2008,” Mr. Sessions notes in his analysis of the figures, compiled from Office of Management and Budget data, “and now comprises 21 percent of federal outlays.”

Mr. Sessions observes that welfare spending has jumped 378 percent over the past three decades, using inflation-adjusted dollars. It hasn’t helped. The poor will always be with us, and as good citizens we have an obligation to help them, but reckless spending has only increased poverty by promoting wrong values.

The Cato Institute observed in a study in August that “because welfare benefits are tax-free, their dollar value was greater than the amount of take-home income a worker would receive from an entry-level job.” A hypothetical low-income mother of two who takes advantage of eight welfare programs would collect more on the dole than she would make at a minimum-wage job in 35 states. In 12 states and the District of Columbia, the welfare outlay is the equivalent of a job that pays $15 an hour or more. The system does not encourage financial independence.

There’s nothing compassionate or conservative about a welfare system that promotes and perpetuates dependency. It’s not good for the giver or the givee, and it’s not good for the federal budget, either.

blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks
You Might Also Like
  • Maureen McDonnell looks on as her husband, former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, made a statement on Tuesday after the couple was indicted on corruption charges. (associated press)

    PRUDEN: Where have the big-time grifters gone?

  • This photo taken Jan. 9, 2014,  shows New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie gesturing as he answers a question during a news conference  at the Statehouse in Trenton.  Christie will propose extending the public school calendar and lengthening the school day in a speech he hopes will help him rebound from an apparent political payback scheme orchestrated by key aides. The early front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination will make a case Tuesday Jan. 14, 2014, that children who spend more time in school graduate better prepared academically, according to excerpts of his State of the State address obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Mel Evans)

    BRUCE: Bombastic arrogance or humble determination? Chris Christie’s choice

  • ** FILE ** Secretary of State Hillary Rodham testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the deadly September attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

    PRUDEN: The question to haunt the West

  • Get Breaking Alerts