Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts

Saturday, December 30, 2017

Paul Ryan should be feeling good; seniors, those over 50, and the vulnerable should not

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, January 3, 2018

https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-ryan-must-be-feeling-good-not-so-for-seniors-and-the-vulnerab
le/

.”Paul Ryan, House Majority Leader,  must be feeling good: .His life long quest to become the iimplementor of the Ayn Rand school of political/economic philosophy is half way done with the passage of the tax reduction bill. For his next act he wants is to cut “entitlements”, the social safety net,  Medicare and Medicaid.


The  unpopular tax cut legislation passed and signed by President Trump in December  lopsidedly benefitted the rich and left the middle class with some small change and  with  future generations  paying the interest to bond  holders of  trillion more debt  the “reform” caused. While both houses of Congress are still in the hands of a compliant GOP, Ryan is going to make hay while his sun shines before the 2018 Congressional elections in November, where the House and possibly even the Senate GOP majority is at risk. In so doing, he is  also handing Democrats an issue which will only help them to appeal to usually GOP stalwarts, seniors and about to be seniors.

Ryan’s motivations have been attributed to his  long time love affair with Ayn Rand, a writer of a  1957 seminal book beloved by many a conservative,” Atlas Shrugged.”  Rand, a Russian immigrant, railed against Communist collectivism, and  believed the way for governmental fiscal well-being was based on Paul Ryan is retiring; he will not run again. He was always in pursuit of putting Ayn Rand's philosophy into practice, to prove his ideological hero philosophy worked in practice as well. Rand wrote her books as a response and critique of Russian's form of communism. The old USSR is dead and capitalism won, but capitalism in the US is not even close to Russian communism. It has morphed into a blend of capitalism with one of the most limited social safety nets in the world, but at least it has addressed some of the worst problems the poor and the less abled have faced.

Total laissez faire capitalism has had a result that fed the rich, but not the poor.It was the excesses of the industrial revolution that led to the philosophical rise of communism and the rise of the Soviet communists. Rand then took the extreme opposite tack in her revolt against communism which became the bible of so many of the conservative intellectuals of my early life. Ryan entered Congress with the goal of doing what he could to put Rand into practice via legislation and tax policy. While Catholic Ryan had rejected Rand’s aetheism, he shrugged his shoulders when a 2012 budget he had proposed cut the social safety net to the poor so drastically, the Catholic Bishops wrote …' deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility efforts must protect and not undermine the needs of poor and vulnerable people. (and his budget) ...fails this basic moral test.'” In 2014 he proposed even more dire cuts to the safety net..

However, instead of invoking the Rand philosophy as a reason to cut the safety net and retirees’ benefits, his rationale  now  is that the deficit (he helped enhance) is too  large. On December 6, on a radio talk show he is setting his sights on welfare and seniors and those about to be seniors.  “We're going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,.. Frankly, it's the health care entitlements that are the big drivers of our debt, so we spend more time on the health care entitlements “ Already the Children’s Health program has left 9 million kids in jeopardy of losing their insurance because  its renewal is still on the GOP chopping block. The tax reduction legislation he helped engineered could trgger $25 billion from Medicare next year.  Over ten years, thirteen million under retirement age  ($4 million next year) will find health insurance unaffordable.

My conservative friends love Ryan’s approach to cutting welfare. In their mythological world, “ those welfare queens are robbing good American taxpayers and ought to get a job. “ We already had welfare reform in the Bill Clinton era that addressed that “get a job”  issue. .. Who is left getting most of “welfare” now? Kids.   Put them to work ?  Here are some statistics for a reality check: Three-quarters of food stamp recipients are families with children. Of the nutrition programs for the poor (8.7 million recipients), 4.3 million are women with children, 2.2 million with infants. National school lunch programs: 30.5 million kids benefit. “  So what do you want to cut, Speaker Ryan?


http://time.com/5043838/republican-tax-bill-deficit-increase/


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/01/gop-eyes-post-tax-cut-changes-to-welfare-medicare-and-social-security/
.”http://fortune.com/2012/05/02/republicans-and-ayn-rand-a-love-hate-affair/  

https://khn.org/morning-breakout/chip-funding-measure-passes-through-committees-but-its-not-smooth-sailing-ahead-for-bill/
https://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ryanpoor.asp


A reprint of a 4/12/14 Muftic Forum Blog

WHO SPEAKS FOR THE POOR

When Rep. Paul Ryan first proposed weakening the social safety net in a budget proposal in 20,12    ,the Catholic Bishops called it “immoral”.  That was even before Pope Francis reset priorities of the Catholic Church to care about the poor. Ryan’s newest budget passed by the House this month (and DOA in the Senate), reduces food stamps by $125 billion  and restricts access of the near poor to health care by repealing Obamacare and reducing Medicaid.If his first proposal was immoral, the 2014 version  is beyond immoral. Who is speaking for the poor these days?,

 Not The GOP, many of whom oppose even raising the minimum wage, so low now even full time workers live in poverty. Not Republicans who support laws making  it harder for the poor without affordable  and easy access to drivers’ licenses and birth certificates or convenient voting hours to raise their voices .Not the GOP House members including the GOP Colorado Representatives who voted for Ryan budget this month, that would have  cut  food stamps while cutting  taxes for the rich.

Growing  up in Oklahoma in the 1950’s, I  heard many  rationalize opposing government assistance  by blaming  the poor themselves,  opining African Americans  were lazy or undeserving.. Racist attitudes coloring opposition to  welfare still linger into recent times  per  a study of  many public opinion polls reviewed by Arizona State University.

Pres. Johnson’s  War on Poverty  and civil rights legislation were  the reaction  to the injustice and  fueled by the long hot summer riots of the late 1960’s . America learned that the poor could get attention even if they did not have a political voice. But there were also abuses as some gamed the  new welfare system .

 Reality check: Welfare reform in the 1990’s  put more  to work. Those left receiving  food stamps now, per the US Department of Agriculture, are mostly kids  (47 percent are under age 18)and elderly (8%). . Three-quarters of food stamp recipients are families with children.    
 The charity community is  doing what they can , but sometimes the food bank cupboard is bare..Hunger plagues 1 out of 5 kids who do not know where the next meal is coming from and government through school lunch programs and food stamps make up part of the  difference.  

Many of the states with the largest number of poor have  state houses dominated by the GOP yet whose budgets are the most dependent on federal money for social programs. They have  the greatest need and the least will to provide .Leaving   states to use their own resources with federal block grants masking diminished federal contributions to Medicaid, as Ryan’s budget does, would  further divide this country  between the have  and  have nots..

Even the Democratic Party has  focused priorities  on issues supporting the middle class.
The voice of the poor was further overwhelmed by recent Supreme Court decisions that  gave corporations the same right as individuals to contribute political campaigns (Citizen's United), and a recent decision (McCutcheon v FEC) that made it much easier for the wealthy to  spread their  influence around.

So who is left as the strongest voice for the poor? Some in the  faith community and Pope Francis and God bless them.

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Speaker Ryan is living his immoral dreams

Paul Ryan must be feeling good: he passed out of the House a budget that gave tax cuts to the rich while gutting Medicare and Medicaid. Speaker Ryan had another House victory: he passed from the House an Obamacare repeal/replace bill that left 30 million without affordable health insurance. His first dream to cut welfare that came to public attention was in 2012. Catholic bishops called the budget "immoral". From my blog and published column Aug. 29, 2012
" "The Catholic bishops passed judgment on the Ryan budget. Wrote the Bishops, …' deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility efforts must protect and not undermine the needs of poor and vulnerable people. The proposed cuts to programs in the budget reconciliation fail this basic moral test.'
Some believe drastic cuts to the safety net are, to the contrary, a moral act because we are doing recipients a favor by keeping them from being dependent on government. So who are they doing such a favor? Mostly kids and the elderly. It is not the adults such policies impact the most. It is the kids who benefit from “welfare.” Three-quarters of food stamp recipients are families with children. Of the nutrition programs for the poor (8.7 million recipients), 4.3 million are women with children, 2.2 million with infants. National school lunch programs: 30.5 million kids benefit. Children's health programs (CHIP) keep them healthy enough to go to school and Head Start gets them ready to enter first grade. Ryan would cut these programs deeply, guaranteeing they will not have good nutrition and early education needed, or to be prepared to qualify for jobs later"


Note: CHIP was not refunded in 2018 but attempts are being made to save it: https://khn.org/morning-breakout/chip-funding-measure-passes-through-committees-but-its-not-smooth-sailing-ahead-for-bill/

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/10/5/1704360/-House-passes-4-2-trillion-budget-sets-up-tax-cuts-for-the-rich-and-guts-Medicare-Medicaid?detail=facebook

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/354028-house-passes-budget-paving-way-for-tax-reform

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Why November went blue: Many saw life as it has become; not as it was 20 years ago.

The other day I received an email from a follower of my blog. He is 47 years old, a consulting engineer. He wrote the following:

“As a current business owner for 17 years, the last four years have been extremely difficult. Our health insurance costs have gone up over 100 percent and we are healthy people. All other costs have increased drastically and business has decreased substantially.

“I don't mind helping people in need as all people need help in some point in their life. However, where do you draw the line? It seems that when we were young, if you got laid off from a job you went out and got another job. That doesn't happen today. People will milk the system until they are forced to get a job?

What do I not understand about your views? Please enlighten me.”

Here is the gist of my answer (edited for the column):

It appears you have a disconnect with what is going on in the lives of so many unlike you or you would not ask that question.

When we were young there were other jobs to be had. The past 10 years and the Great Recession changed much. Lay-offs, downsizing and long delays in finding another job have left gaps in income and unforeseen financial struggles. Medical care has become much more high tech and expensive. The major cause of bankruptcy is medical bills and most of those going bankrupt had health insurance, but inadequate insurance that did not cover co-pays and time away from work.

Life has changed since you started your business. The middle class' income has fallen (per a PEW Research study). College is no longer $10,000 a year ... $20,000 to $40,000 is not an unusual cost for an undergrad degree and advanced degrees are astronomical.

Examples of a family I have been following closely: two 40 year old-plus adults have pre-existing conditions, one a cancer survivor, and unless they worked for an employer who provided insurance, they could not afford health insurance now. Two have master's degrees; the other has a skill in demand and a college degree, too. One is going insurance naked because he is self-employed and he cannot afford the premiums. (Fact checkers agree: Increased insurance costs are not due to Obamacare and 97 percent of small business will not have to provide insurance).

For their children, loans are the only option for college. However, before Obama readjusted the pay back schedule, they were faced with huge debts they could not afford to pay back for years. Two 40-somethings have been in and out of a job since the Bush crash. Fortunately at least one at a time had employer-provided insurance. None of them has been on unemployment; none has resorted to food stamps or welfare. All hated to be unemployed, but all have been able to hold onto even their diminished status by hard work and running up credit cards. Now all are employed, though one underemployed still waits until 2014 when Obamacare kicks in.

However, they see hope in Obamacare so they can always afford health insurance regardless of their employment status. They already are experiencing help in sending their kids to college; and an improving economic situation. None is “milking the system until they are forced to get a job.” Even those on welfare are there temporarily; welfare reform is still in effect.. Those able to work are still required to find a job. (Even at the depth of the recession, average time on food stamps and unemployment was nine months, per government figures).

It is time to see life as it has become; not as it was. Others did and that is a major reason why November went blue.

For more, visit www.mufticforumblog.blogspot.com; www.mufticforumespanol.blogspot.com
Published in the Sky Hi Daily News today. 

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Romney's war on welfare

My column in the Sky Hi News today
The GOP is upending the war on poverty and has declared war on welfare.

Mitt Romney heated it up by choosing for his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan who had authored a budget proposal to unravel much of the safety net. Romney then ran ads claiming President Obama was “dismantling” welfare reform by abandoning work requirements. For this, www. politifact.com gave a rare “Pants on Fire” award to Mitt Romney, and www.Factcheck.org said the Romney ad “distorts the facts.” A letter had been issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in response to two Republican governors wanting more flexibility for their state to administer the program. HHS allowed them to do so but they still had to meet and exceed the work criteria required in the original law.

What Romney/Ryan are gutting is not welfare reform, but welfare itself. An Urban Institute analysis of Ryan's budget proposal found block grants would lead states to drop between 14 million and 27 million people from Medicaid by 2021 and cut reimbursements to health care providers by 31 percent. Up to 10 million people could lose nutrition assistance since $134 billion (including a 30 percent reduction of the food stamp program) would be cut from the program. At least 62 percent of Ryan's $5.3 trillion in nondefense budget cuts over 10 years come from programs that serve the poor, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. All of this is in the name of lowering the deficit and offsetting tax breaks to the wealthy. The irony is that the Congressional Budget Office determined Ryan's budget would increase the deficit, not decrease it.

Romney has reaffirmed he agrees with the Ryan budget. Remember when Romney said “I am not worried about the poor because they have a safety net” and “I have an absolute moral commitment to help every American help themselves?” In agreeing with Ryan, he OKs knocking holes the safety net and he does not seem to be worried. He is right about one point: Morality is an issue.

The Catholic bishops passed judgment on the Ryan budget. Wrote the Bishops, “… deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility efforts must protect and not undermine the needs of poor and vulnerable people. The proposed cuts to programs in the budget reconciliation fail this basic moral test.”

Some believe drastic cuts to the safety net are, to the contrary, a moral act because we are doing recipients a favor by keeping them from being dependent on government. So who are they doing such a favor? Mostly kids and the elderly. It is not the adults such policies impact the most. It is the kids who benefit from “welfare.” Three-quarters of food stamp recipients are families with children. Of the nutrition programs for the poor (8.7 million recipients), 4.3 million are women with children, 2.2 million with infants. National school lunch programs: 30.5 million kids benefit. Children's health programs (CHIP) keep them healthy enough to go to school and Head Start gets them ready to enter first grade. Ryan would cut these programs deeply, guaranteeing they will not have good nutrition and early education needed, or to be prepared to qualify for jobs later

There are some practical considerations for those of us not on welfare. Coupled with Ryan/Romney's pledge to kill Obamacare that would give 27 million affordable health insurance and Ryan's cuts to Medicaid of 30 percent, a total of 41 to 60 million would be dumped on our emergency rooms for their health care. The hyper expense of ER medicine would be shifted onto the rest of us. Poor elderly who depend on Medicaid for nursing home care and Medicare supplement would be hardest hit, and their families, able or not, will feel the impact.  For more www.mufticforumespanol.blogspot.com

8/29/12
My column in the Sky Hi News today
The GOP is upending the war on poverty and has declared war on welfare.

Mitt Romney heated it up by choosing for his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan who had authored a budget proposal to unravel much of the safety net. Romney then ran ads claiming President Obama was “dismantling” welfare reform by abandoning work requirements. For this, www. politifact.com gave a rare “Pants on Fire” award to Mitt Romney, and www.Factcheck.org said the Romney ad “distorts the facts.” A letter had been issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in response to two Republican governors wanting more flexibility for their state to administer the program. HHS allowed them to do so but they still had to meet and exceed the work criteria required in the original law.

What Romney/Ryan are gutting is not welfare reform, but welfare itself. An Urban Institute analysis of Ryan's budget proposal found block grants would lead states to drop between 14 million and 27 million people from Medicaid by 2021 and cut reimbursements to health care providers by 31 percent. Up to 10 million people could lose nutrition assistance since $134 billion (including a 30 percent reduction of the food stamp program) would be cut from the program. At least 62 percent of Ryan's $5.3 trillion in nondefense budget cuts over 10 years come from programs that serve the poor, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. All of this is in the name of lowering the deficit and offsetting tax breaks to the wealthy. The irony is that the Congressional Budget Office determined Ryan's budget would increase the deficit, not decrease it.

Romney has reaffirmed he agrees with the Ryan budget. Remember when Romney said “I am not worried about the poor because they have a safety net” and “I have an absolute moral commitment to help every American help themselves?” In agreeing with Ryan, he OKs knocking holes the safety net and he does not seem to be worried. He is right about one point: Morality is an issue.

The Catholic bishops passed judgment on the Ryan budget. Wrote the Bishops, “… deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility efforts must protect and not undermine the needs of poor and vulnerable people. The proposed cuts to programs in the budget reconciliation fail this basic moral test.”

Some believe drastic cuts to the safety net are, to the contrary, a moral act because we are doing recipients a favor by keeping them from being dependent on government. So who are they doing such a favor? Mostly kids and the elderly. It is not the adults such policies impact the most. It is the kids who benefit from “welfare.” Three-quarters of food stamp recipients are families with children. Of the nutrition programs for the poor (8.7 million recipients), 4.3 million are women with children, 2.2 million with infants. National school lunch programs: 30.5 million kids benefit. Children's health programs (CHIP) keep them healthy enough to go to school and Head Start gets them ready to enter first grade. Ryan would cut these programs deeply, guaranteeing they will not have good nutrition and early education needed, or to be prepared to qualify for jobs later

There are some practical considerations for those of us not on welfare. Coupled with Ryan/Romney's pledge to kill Obamacare that would give 27 million affordable health insurance and Ryan's cuts to Medicaid of 30 percent, a total of 41 to 60 million would be dumped on our emergency rooms for their health care. The hyper expense of ER medicine would be shifted onto the rest of us. Poor elderly who depend on Medicaid for nursing home care and Medicare supplement would be hardest hit, and their families, able or not, will feel the impact.  For more www.mufticforumespanol.blogspot.com