Are the poor people in this country bleeding the welfare system dry, or are they just miniature Michael Richards with snow caps? The poverty rate in this nation is staggering and yet it seems that every time our nation makes headway into real welfare reform, the politicians scurry the other way. President Clinton, looking for campaign ideas, bravely supported the bill in it’s bipartisan form, and then courageously pulled out his official LBJ pen and vetoed the measure. One little problem, there was no ink in the pen so he settled for one of those complimentary gold pen with Air Force One inscribed on them.

Of course, the reason the administration said it could not support the measure was that it didn’t do enough to require individuals to work, and yet that requiring people to work a minimum of 20 hours a week was too mean-spirited. Mean -Spirited seems to be the term those in left field use when they run out of substance to fight with. It becomes so intellectually boring the mind starts to wander off.

The bipartisan approach to welfare was simple. In short the states would receive money in black grants to solve their welfare problems as they see fit. It boils down to the states know what’s better for their people than the federal government. It’s called the devolution of power. For instance, Wisconsin was recently sued by the Health Administration of Shalala Services. In order for states to carry out experimental reforms, welfare in this instance, the governor must apply for a federal waiver. Initially, Clinton decided to sign the waiver and let Wisconsin carry out its reforms. Now, after the GOP landslide of 1994, the administration said it didn’t mean to sign the waiver.

Advertisement

If there is one thing this administration has proven is that it supports large government. The term real reform is like speaking Spanish to a Canadian poodle. Clinton’s welfare proposal, ironically ignored by his majority party in his first two years, was 80 percent of what the Republicans and conservative Democrats are proposing now. The remaining 20 percent difference was because of differences like slowing the growth of Head Start funding and other training programs. To begin with, the man who helped LBJ create Head Start told the then-president that funding for the program could be cut by 30 percent and the program would run smoother.

Using the argument of training programs doesn’t work either. Bill Clinton wanted to use a system Anne Richards created in Texas for training people to work. Unfortunately, she proved once again that compassion and education don’t mix. In her program there were approximately 500 people enrolled. 100 of those were expected to graduate. Only 11 did. community and urban renewal are more of a solution to the welfare problem than centralized government interference.

Perhaps one of the greatest abuses of the welfare state is that illegal immigrants cross our borders, collect their check, and head back to the border. The fact that they illegally cross our borders illegal doesn’t mean lawful to get medical care and our tax money is just wrong. Some people in the Clinton White House have measured our compassion by what other nations like Poland and some Latin American nations have done. How can we measure compassion because of what third world nations are doing? They obviously aren’t doing to well!

It’s time the government wake up and get over the partisanship. The more conservative Democrats helped the GOP find common ground, and they passed a bill with real reform, incentives for people to work, and giving the states the ability find solutions. Clinton was a governor at one time. How he can turn his back on this kind of sweeping reform?

It’s time the government gets out of the way and devolves some of it’s abusive centralization. Over and over again, individual programs that bring about change are found in rural areas, not the federal government. The value of American life shouldn’t be based on what other nations are doing, or what seems like a good temporary solution for now to appease constituents. Real reform may find it’s beginnings at Taco Bell’s across the fruited plains, but we should be always remain positive! After all, how far away can that management position at Applebee’s be.

Mark Rahmlow is a SIUC sophomore majoring in political science and journalism.