I agree that there should be some way to root out fraudulent use of government assistance. It drives me crazy to see it happen. But I also agree that the government often takes things a step too far. While our leaders can’t seem to come to agreement or even propose legislation to stop the corruption and the free for them that is happening in the corporate world or the top 2% kingdom, they are always ready and seem to be able to pass legislation that affects the middle and working classes, and the poor. This is surely becoming a country that is not free, where the masses of unwealthy people must be monitored and then conform to the government’s and the elite’s ideal of what a person should be. Did it ever occur to anyone that perhaps the better way to keep people off of public assistance would be to demand a living wage ( a real living wage, not a fantasy living wage of $8./hr) or create jobs by monitoring the corporate world and then force them to conform to an American ideal of what a corporation should be and how they should contribute to the welfare of this country and it’s people. It’s much easier to attack and remove the rights of the powerless. There has to be some other way to stop abuse of public assistance. There must be plenty of ways to stop the abuse of government assistance in this digital age without resorting to the ever threatened right to privacy and the attack on freedom of the powerless.
In Massachusetts — where about 450,000 households
receive cash or food assistance — a bill introduced by state Rep. Daniel B.
Winslow (R-Norfolk) would set up a program requiring those seeking benefits to
disclose credit limits and assets such as homes and boats, as well as the kind
of car they drive. His reasoning is “If you have two cars and a snowmobile,
then you aren’t poor. If we do this, we will be able to preserve our limited
resources for those who are truly in need and weed out fraud, because we know there’s fraud and we’re not looking for it.” State Rep. Daniel K. Webster
(R-Pembroke) filed a budget amendment requiring the state to verify immigration status of those seeking public benefits. Webster made it clear that his proposal does not mean he dislikes poor people or immigrants, but “this is all unsustainable and the system is being abused.”This is rather shocking because I can’t recall any Republicans or Democrats
demanding that the CEO of Bank of America or JP Morgan disclose inventory of their vacation homes, private jets, and yachts before bailing them out in what
amounts to corporate welfare. Nor did they insist that these CEOs submit to
alcohol and drug screenings before receiving taxpayer money. No objections were made regarding the immigration status of the people running these companies or whether they happen to employ undocumented workers for cheap labor.
Jessica Fargen makes a really good point. Thanks Jessica!
Please share widely!
