There is a bitter fight brewing in Congress over work requirements for welfare recipients.
President Biden labeled “wacko” the Republican proposal in the debt ceiling bill to require able-bodied childless beneficiaries to either work, obtain job training, or do volunteer work. Our great uniter claimed, “Republicans are cutting benefits for folks they don’t seem to care much about.”
The welfare industry chimed in, saying poor people have no transportation options and job training was not available in some areas. Welfare recipients will be thrown into abject poverty if required to work, because apparently, they are incapable of self-sufficiency.
Reform advocates countered that not working is a choice and most people, including low-income people, have more satisfying lives when working and providing for their families.
So which side is correct? They can’t both be, and the answer is important to get right for the future of our nation.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could run an experiment, mandating work requirements in welfare programs to see what happens? Good news – that’s already been done.
In the 1990s, the Newt Gingrich-led Congress passed, and President Clinton, after extensive urging, signed a comprehensive welfare reform bill. The law required able-bodied adults to work or be in a job training program to receive benefits. It also placed lifetime limits on welfare.
By the 1990s, the War on Poverty had been waged for three decades. Many Americans were becoming disillusioned as they saw that poverty was winning.
LBJ’s welfare programs to wipe out poverty had been horrendously expensive and yet poverty levels hadn’t been dented. Instead, millions of low-income Americans had adopted welfare as a way of life, to be passed on through generations.
When the reforms were implemented, welfare recipients weren’t cast into the streets, as Senator Ted Kennedy had predicted. In fact, it was a stunning policy success. Welfare caseloads declined by 60 percent. 70 percent of those leaving began working.
There’s more. Government savings were $100 billion in today’s dollars. Best of all, the child poverty rate plummeted every year from 1994 to 2000. For people leaving the welfare plantation, income increases soon easily exceeded welfare benefits. Moreover, people with jobs enjoyed healthier lives, better marriages, and vastly improved financial futures than those stuck on welfare.
So, welfare reformers declared victory and moved on, unfortunately leaving the same entrenched bureaucracy as before to manage the system. Before long, clients were again being evaluated for program eligibility, not work readiness. Workarounds were offered for those who preferred not to work.
As the bureaucracy oozed back into control, work mandates weakened. Many states quietly removed them altogether, as Arizona did for its Medicaid program.
With the onset of the COVID pandemic, the Biden administration took the opportunity to eviscerate work requirements altogether in federal welfare programs. Thankfully, grocery clerks, truck drivers and cops stayed on the job, but not teachers or welfare recipients.
Now that the pandemic has officially ended, work requirements still have not been reinstated as promised. In fact, Biden refuses to consider such a proposal in the debt ceiling negotiations.
The ending of the pandemic and work requirements have been a boon for the welfare industry. In response to COVID, Congress also increased the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) benefit amount and banned states from removing people who were no longer eligible from the Medicaid roles.
As a result, welfare has become more pervasive than ever. 40 million people are now receiving food stamps, even though it’s common knowledge that taxpayers are funding a lot of chips and soda. Medicaid enrollment has soared to 85 million, now that it has been expanded to include working age men above the poverty line.
There are up to 4 million employable adults not working while 10 million job openings are available. This is a great opportunity to get more Americans back to work, yet Democrats seem more interested in keeping Americans dependent on government than in reducing poverty.
We should absolutely have a working safety net, but not a welfare system that keeps Americans mired in poverty. Why not learn from our own history and return again to prioritizing work over welfare?
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has joined an effort to support President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign. The initiative cited Fontes as a key worker to mobilize the Latino and rural voters in Arizona.
Fontes was the odd man out in the voter turnout effort, named the “2024 Mobilization Project,” because the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association (DLGA) launched it. The press release announcing the voter turnout campaign effort characterized Fontes as a fellow lieutenant governor, lumping him in with lieutenant governors Garlin Gilchrist (Michigan), Peggy Flanagan (Minnesota), Sara Rodriguez (Wisconsin), and Austin Davis (Pennsylvania).
“In critical swing states, the incumbent Democratic Lieutenant Governor has a demonstrated history of organizing and turning out key areas and constituencies,” stated the press release. “Secretary Adrian Fontes served as the County Recorder of Maricopa County for two terms before his 2022 election to Secretary of State, where he received the most votes out of any non-federal statewide office. He will be key in mobilizing Latino and rural voters throughout Arizona.”
DLGA’s website also lists Fontes as the “lieutenant governor” for Arizona.
Sergio Arellano, executive director of Conserva Mi Voto, told AZ Free News that Fontes’ involvement in the DLGA reelection initiative was suspect.
“Secretary of State Fontes says that he has ‘seen firsthand how vital it is to protect our democratic processes, and defend our elections,’ but rather than focus on protecting those processes for Arizonans, he is spending time engaged in partisan pandering,” said Arellano. “I don’t believe that the chief elected official tasked with managing our elections should be assisting an individual candidate that will most likely be on the ballot. If his participation in the Biden campaign is not a breach of ethics, it certainly appears to be.”
Arellano was quoting Fontes directly from his press release statement, in which he claimed that Democratic states have been delivering for voters.
“As Secretary of State, I have seen firsthand how vital it is to protect our democratic processes, defend our elections, and ensure every single person in our country, no matter where they live, who they are, or where they’re from, has access to their version of the American dream,” said Fontes. “To do that, it is absolutely paramount that we all work together, hand-in-hand, to elect Democrats in 2024.”
Arellano challenged Fontes’ claim that states have done better under Democratic leadership. Arellano recalled the recent #freethetamale controversy, in which Gov. Katie Hobbs killed a bill expanding allowed homemade food sales. The bill would’ve especially impacted Hispanic communities, where homemade food like tamales are often sold by street vendors and make up a key part of family income.
“Secretary Fontes says ‘every single person in our country, no matter where they live, who they are, or where they’re from, has access to their version of the American dream.’ However, President Biden has created an American nightmare for the average Latino in this country in his brief time in office,” said Arellano. “From runaway inflation to onerous regulations, the Biden administration and the Democrats are crushing opportunity. We have seen it firsthand in Arizona with the recent veto by Governor Katie Hobbs of the ‘tamale bill.’”
In addition to reelecting Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, the DLGA said they planned to raise $15 million by 2026.
Arizona voters approved a constitutional amendment, Proposition 131, creating a lieutenant governorship last November; however, that position wouldn’t begin until January 2027. That leaves Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Wyoming the only states without lieutenant governors. Oregon’s secretary of state was also listed as a lieutenant governor on DLGA’s website, though Maine’s Senate president, who sits next in line for the governorship and is a Democrat, wasn’t listed.
DLGA issued its press release on Monday, a day before Biden formally announced his reelection bid.
The choice between President @JoeBiden and an extreme MAGA Republican could not be more clear. That's why Democratic LGs are teaming up to mobilize voters in 2024 https://t.co/LhXgE0OMHH
The president’s initial campaign theme was, “Let’s Finish the Job,” insisting that his administration was focused on preserving and expanding Americans’ freedoms.
Every generation has a moment where they have had to stand up for democracy. To stand up for their fundamental freedoms. I believe this is ours.
DLGA featuring Fontes, who isn’t a lieutenant governor, as a key player in mobilizing Latino votes aligns with the president’s formal reelection bid announcement. The campaign video included subtitles in only one other language than English: Spanish.
DLGA organized in August 2018.
Democratic lieutenant governors across the country form a new national organization committed to driving critical state issues and supporting candidates across the nation #DemLGs#DemFarmTeam
Three years and some change later, President Joe Biden signed Rep. Paul Gosar’s (R-AZ-09) bill to end the national COVID-19 emergency. Biden signed Gosar’s resolution, HJR 7, on Monday.
“The legislation drafted by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) passed the House 229-197 in February, with a handful of Democratic supporters, and then the Senate 68-23 last month with about half of the chamber’s Democrats voting in favor.”https://t.co/qKfifQSXxf
In addition to the national emergency that Gosar’s resolution terminated, there’s another declared emergency in play concerning COVID-19: the public health emergency declared in January 2020 by Health and Human Services (HHS), which impacts the ability of the federal government to use Title 42 for expedited illegal immigrant expulsion. The Biden administration said that it would end the public health emergency, which allows Title 42 to take place, on May 11.
There was also the emergency declared by former President Donald Trump via the Stafford Act. That declaration enabled Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) assistance for 75 percent federal matching on disaster-related costs, like law enforcement and state emergency operation centers.
An end to the national emergency per Gosar’s resolution would have lifted the pause on student loan repayments — however, the Biden administration announced its student loan forgiveness program last August to work around the end of the emergency. That program is being considered currently before the Supreme Court (SCOTUS). Repayments are scheduled to resume either 60 days after the SCOTUS ruling or after June 30.
The end of the national emergency also means federal agencies will return to regular protocols, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s COVID-19 mortgage forbearance program ceasing by the end of May.
The lift of the emergency will also tighten up rules on Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP programs, impacting eligibility, as well as waivers for alternative provider settings, or for forgoing application fees or criminal background checks. It will also cease the provision of free COVID-19 rapid tests, and allow states to cease COVID-19 data tracking.
Gosar’s resolution passed the Senate last month with bipartisan support, including both Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema. Only two Arizona representatives opposed the resolution during House consideration in February: Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ-07) and Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04).
My bill, H.J.Res.7, terminates the COVID-19 national emergency. It has passed the House & Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support and has been presented to Biden.
I call on the President to immediately sign H.J.Res.7 & terminate the COVID-19 national emergency declaration. pic.twitter.com/mBlkA58vrz
Leading up to Biden signing the resolution, some Democratic leaders expressed frustration with a perceived lack of communication from the White House. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI-08) reported that the Biden administration hasn’t communicated with House Democrats.
“The White House’s lack of communication with House Democrats has been frustrating,” said Kildee. “Going forward, we’re going to need greater clarity out of the administration. They’ve got to do better.”
Biden voiced opposition to the resolution leading up to and after the Senate’s passage of Gosar’s resolution. Despite his opposition, a White House spokesperson told media outlets that the president would sign the resolution.
“The President strongly opposes HJ Res 7, and the administration is planning to wind down the COVID national emergency and public health emergency on May 11,” said the spokesperson. “If this bill comes to his desk, however, he will sign it, and the administration will continue working with agencies to wind down the national emergency with as much notice as possible to Americans who could potentially be impacted.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A bill from Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ-09) to end the COVID-19 National Emergency Declaration passed the Senate on Wednesday.
The legislation now heads to President Joe Biden for his signature. The resolution, HJR 7, was first filed in January. It received bipartisan support: 68 senators voted for the resolution, with 23 against. Both Sens. Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema voted for it.
“Looking forward to Joe Biden signing this to finally end this national nightmare,” tweeted Gosar.
My Resolution ending the COVID-19 National Emergency Declaration has now passed the Senate.
Biden won’t veto the measure — meaning that the end of the emergency could come more quickly than anticipated. The Biden administration promised to end the emergency declaration on May 11.
The president’s goodwill on a Republican-led bill has some Democratic leaders frustrated. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI-08) told Fox News in a statement that the Biden administration hasn’t been communicating with House Democrats.
“The White House’s lack of communication with House Democrats has been frustrating,” said Kildee. “Going forward, we’re going to need greater clarity out of the administration. They’ve got to do better.”
Rep. Lloyd Doggett (R-TX-37) issued similar remarks, saying that Biden’s approval of the resolution was surprising. Doggett remarked that he desired more consistency from the administration.
Their confusion is understandable. Biden has consistently voiced opposition to the resolution, even in response to the Senate’s passage of it. However, a White House spokesperson informed outlets that the president would sign the resolution.
“The President strongly opposes HJ Res 7, and the administration is planning to wind down the COVID national emergency and public health emergency on May 11,” said a Biden spokesperson. “If this bill comes to his desk, however, he will sign it, and the administration will continue working with agencies to wind down the national emergency with as much notice as possible to Americans who could potentially be impacted.”
The House passed the resolution in February, 229-197. Gosar praised God at the time for its passage.
Only two Arizona congressmen voted against the resolution at the time: Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ-07) and Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04).
The Senate’s approval came just over three years after President Donald Trump initially declared the emergency, on March 13, 2020.
An end to the emergency means that relaxed rules on Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP programs will be tightened up — that includes waivers allowing providers to operate out of alternative settings, or forgo application fees or criminal background checks.
It also means that the student loan repayment pause would resume, if not for the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness program which is before the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) currently. Repayments are scheduled to resume either 60 days after the SCOTUS ruling or after June 30.
However, lifting the emergency wouldn’t impact Title 42 immigration policy according to White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Title 42 allows for the expedited expulsion of illegal immigrants under the interests of a public health emergency.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Joe Biden is facing a moral dilemma. Does he embrace politically unpopular reforms to Social Security and Medicare that will ensure their survival for future generations? Or does he, for short-term political gain, aggressively block any changes to these iconic retirement programs?
Democrats have worked hard and successfully to make Medicare and Social Security the “third rail” of American politics. Medicare and Social Security reform now have such a stink about them that Republican lawmakers shouted their outrage at allegations that they were threatening Social Security in President Biden’s State of the Union address.
The only current proposal, by Florida Sen. Rick Scott, would merely require periodically reviewing Social Security and other major programs to assure that they are functioning as intended…which happens to be virtually identical to a proposal advanced in 1975, and again in 1990, by a senator with the same name as the current president.
Demagogues on the left learned long ago that many seniors could be freaked out by baseless charges that “they’re trying to take away your Social Security” or “drive grandma over the cliff.”
Biden’s allegations that many Republicans “dream” of eliminating Social Security are deliberate lies. C’mon, man. We need to have an urgent, focused debate over Social Security and Medicare reform, but Biden has so toxified the issue that politicians seem frozen in place.
But there are reasons why we can’t allow these entitlements to be ruled out-of-bounds for serious debate and improvement. Social Security is a broken, outdated program that by 2034 will be unable to pay its promises. Medicare, according to its own trustees, will be insolvent by 2028.
The assumption has been that these programs, upon which so many seniors depend, will never be endangered. General tax revenues will come to the rescue. But the general fund is close to being tapped out.
America is an unbelievable $31 trillion in debt. Interest payments will soon exceed $1 trillion annually. We are already having trouble financing the basic functions of government, like the national defense.
Even the strongest line of credit in the world can be depleted eventually. If America goes bust, the chance to embrace the painful but necessary solutions available now will be gone.
The answer lies in understanding our history. Social Security was designed as a safety net for those who outlived their earning years. It was a government-administered insurance trust that all paid into to provide retirement income for those who needed it. Insurance 101.
But there was a fatal flaw in the program’s design. They neglected to protect it from the Swamp. The funds supposedly being held in trust were stolen (“borrowed”) so that government programs could grow without the inconvenience of raising taxes.
With nothing left in the trust fund for retirement benefits, Social Security was turned into a Ponzi scheme, where every dollar paid in went immediately out the door to fund current benefits. Like all Ponzi schemes, this one worked for a while.
In 1950, there were 16 workers to fund every retiree. Now there are less than three. By 2030, every Social Security recipient will be supported by just two workers.
We did our seniors no favor by forcing them to contribute to a “retirement fund” that was actually just another welfare program, thus depriving them of the substantial benefits of compound interest. Yet now Biden wants to pose as their champion.
“Let’s all agree to stand up for seniors,” he recently urged. Yet his brave agenda was to do…nothing. (This happens to also be the position of Donald Trump, another leader not there when most needed.)
Forget reform. All Social Security recipients recently got an unfunded benefit spike. Many Democrats want to put everyone on Medicare, the equivalent of loading more passengers onto a sinking ship. Brilliant!
This insanity must stop. In fact, it will stop because it’s unsustainable. There’s just the question of how much more misery we want to inflict on those who will inherit this hot mess.
There are plenty of promising solutions out there, which urgently need to be vetted and discussed. All roads to a prosperous future for America lead through Medicare and Social Security reform.
The worst option is to listen to President Biden and ignore the portents of disaster.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
