• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

TN bill that would cut 30% of Wellfare benefits for uninvolved parents stalled

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,640
8
81
I thought that Wellfare was supposed to be a "temporary" solution for people; yet most just live off it for years and years. I can't believe he's getting harassed over this. The stuff proposed just seems like common sense to me:

An 8-year-old followed Republican state Sen. Stacey Campfield around the Tennessee state Capitol in an effort to convince the lawmaker to drop a bill that would link children's academic performance to a family’s welfare benefits.

The Tennessean reports that Aamira Fetuga, 8, confronted Campfield while he was on his way to vote. She presented Campfield with a petition signed by people opposed to his bill. Approximately 60 other protestors were also in attendance.

The child asked, "Why do you want to cut benefits for people?” while on a Capitol escalator. Campfield responded that "as long as the parent shows up to school and goes to two parent-teacher conferences ... they're exempt." News cameras followed as the girl continued to ask questions. Campfield was heard to say, "I love it when people use children as props."

The lawmaker did end up withdrawing the bill, which was on shaky ground already. On the Senate floor, he asked to have the bill examined by a committee over the summer. The Tennessean reports that Campfield's move spared him "from potential defeat and some of his fellow Republicans from casting politically dicey votes."

The bill would have cut up to 30 percent of assistance to needy families whose children fail a grade in school unless the parents attended an eight-hour parenting class, met twice with teachers, enrolled the student in summer school or arranged for the child to receive tutoring.

Campfield had argued that the bill's aim was to inspire parents to play a larger role in the education of their children, but opponents argued that the bill would have added yet another burden to families with financial difficulties. "The Daily Show's" Jon Stewart joked that Campfield was apparently trying to “turn Tennessee education into the actual 'Hunger Games.' "

Campfield told reporters that the bill's withdraw doesn't mean it is dead.

"This may be a slight detour, but honestly I think this could hopefully make it even better."
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/girl-follows-lawmaker-around-tenn-capitol-until-drops-205014334.html
 
Last edited:

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
I thought that Wellfare was supposed to be a "temporary" solution for people;
I almost fell out of my chair from laughing.

Yes, welfare is supposed to be temporary. But for a certain group of people, it is a way of life.
 

Lanyap

Elite Member
Dec 23, 2000
6,781
599
126
Any type of welfare reform must be squashed immediately! No exceptions.
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
Anyone know of a data source as to how long people are actually on welfare? For example, I am looking for something like the average length of welfare received per case, and something like 20% receive welfare for 4-5 years, 25% 3-4 years, .etc.

Something along these lines would help with the argument as to whether welfare is no longer just a handup but a handout.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Welfare shouldn't exist in the first place but this bill is a step in the right direction because welfare does cost the taxpayer a lot of money. This bill must pass to send a message to those on welfare.

Shame on the parents for using a child like this. They have zero shame and respect for this.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Well if you can't expect people to feed their kids how can you expect them to care about their kids schooling?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,068
18,808
136
Any type of welfare reform must be squashed immediately! No exceptions.
Yeah, because this gravy train is already so sweet! The max benefit for someone with two kids in TN is $185 per month. Yeah, living on $185 a month is totally a way of life for people.

I don't understand the visceral need to punish welfare recipients that I see displayed sometimes.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
I thought that Wellfare was supposed to be a "temporary" solution for people; yet most just live off it for years and years. I can't believe he's getting harassed over this. The stuff proposed just seems like common sense to me:


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/girl-follows-lawmaker-around-tenn-capitol-until-drops-205014334.html
It was. We had a nice bipartisan welfare reform bill voted for by the majority of congress and signed by Clinton. Obama decided he didn’t like it.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
I am pro welfare. I do think it needs a major overhaul though.

as for the bill proposed i really don't have a problem with it.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Yeah, because this gravy train is already so sweet! The max benefit for someone with two kids in TN is $185 per month. Yeah, living on $185 a month is totally a way of life for people.

I don't understand the visceral need to punish welfare recipients that I see displayed sometimes.
You don't see the need to punish people who repeatedly make poor life choices that make themselves charity case resulting in them using their bastard children to extort money from society?

And your "$185" does not include things like Medicaid, Food stamps, section, WIC, etc...
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
You don't see the need to punish people who repeatedly make poor life choices that make themselves charity case resulting in them using their bastard children to extort money from society?

And your "$185" does not include things like Medicaid, Food stamps, section, WIC, etc...
medicaid? no big deal. if they don't have insurance they go to the "ER" and we pay anyway.

Food stamps? I can't see a family of 4 getting that much. Though i do wish they would limit what you could buy.

Section 8? some areas it's damn impossible to get on. even then they still have to pay a set amount. the section 8 apartments i know of you couldn't pay me to live in them anyway.

Wic is one program i actually am behind. you have to be pregnant, or have a young child. Then you are limited to what you can buy (milk, eggs, etc).
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
medicaid? no big deal. if they don't have insurance they go to the "ER" and we pay anyway.

Food stamps? I can't see a family of 4 getting that much. Though i do wish they would limit what you could buy.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/18SNAPavg$PP.htm

$132/person/month x4 = $524/month > $185/month :hmm:


Section 8? some areas it's damn impossible to get on. even then they still have to pay a set amount. the section 8 apartments i know of you couldn't pay me to live in them anyway.

Wic is one program i actually am behind. you have to be pregnant, or have a young child. Then you are limited to what you can buy (milk, eggs, etc).
WIC is an example of a program that pretty much only benefits people who don't deserve it.

"Hey I am pregnant and cannot even feed myself I should totally be having a child!" :hmm:
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,068
18,808
136
You don't see the need to punish people who repeatedly make poor life choices that make themselves charity case resulting in them using their bastard children to extort money from society?

And your "$185" does not include things like Medicaid, Food stamps, section, WIC, etc...
And this bill has nothing to do with any of those programs.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
160
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I made a comment in another thread - *increase* welfare payments by a couple hundred a month. But, if the student misses 20 or more days of school (I'll add, without a major underlying condition that causes others with that condition to miss that much school), that additional benefit is lost. Else, if the student meets some level of standard on some standardized test (not proctored by that student's teacher, not graded by that student's teacher, too much financial incentive to cheat), then the family gets extra money.

That seems it would help destroy generational welfare. Sure, it would cost more up front. But, years from now, when those kids have become productive members of society, they'll be paying taxes, instead of receiving welfare benefits.

Perhaps I'd seem too radical, but that whole disability thing - Stephen Hawking works. Certainly someone could find something productive for a lot of "permanently disabled" individuals to do. I know a guy with a knee injury (shot) and PTSD after Vietnam. That guy works harder around his small farm than anyone I know. Yet, he's "unable to work" at a job.
 
Last edited:

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
And this bill has nothing to do with any of those programs.
What is your point?

Yeah, living on $185 a month is totally a way of life for people.
Clearly this statement isn't really true. The family is getting much more than $185 in government aid. And most of those benefits would be untouched by this bill.

The real government benefits that would be cut to a parent who didn't both to care about their child's education would clearly be much less than 30%. And yet you are still throwing a fit.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
What is your point?



Clearly this statement isn't really true. The family is getting much more than $185 in government aid. And most of those benefits would be untouched by this bill.

The real government benefits that would be cut to a parent who didn't both to care about their child's education would clearly be much less than 30%. And yet you are still throwing a fit.
True. This bill isn't perfect but its still a good idea. Welfare must be cut and people must learn to be independent rather than relying on government and stealing from hard working and productive members of society.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
I made a comment in another thread - *increase* welfare payments by a couple hundred a month. But, if the student misses 20 or more days of school (I'll add, without a major underlying condition that causes others with that condition to miss that much school), that additional benefit is lost. Else, if the student meets some level of standard on some standardized test (not proctored by that student's teacher, not graded by that student's teacher, too much financial incentive to cheat), then the family gets extra money.

That seems it would help destroy generational welfare. Sure, it would cost more up front. But, years from now, when those kids have become productive members of society, they'll be paying taxes, instead of receiving welfare benefits.

Perhaps I'd seem too radical, but that whole disability thing - Stephen Hawking works. Certainly someone could find something productive for a lot of "permanently disabled" individuals to do. I know a guy with a knee injury (shot) and PTSD after Vietnam. That guy works harder around his small farm than anyone I know. Yet, he's "unable to work" at a job.
I love your idea on welfare. but i think 20 days is far to many.

As for the "disabled" part I disagree. Sure hawking can work, so can many many others with disabilities. BUT you can't say just because X can work then everyone else can!

I have worked with some disabled for a while. Some really can't get a real job. some things really make life hard. From memory issues, joint issues etc. working a 8 hour day just ain't going to happen.

I will say they really need to redo SSDI. I have seen what you describe FAR to much. someone can't "work" yet turns around and does something like you describe. they work on a farm or ranch. Or they are on a basketball, softball team etc.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
WIC is an example of a program that pretty much only benefits people who don't deserve it.

"Hey I am pregnant and cannot even feed myself I should totally be having a child!" :hmm:
yes it is and i'm ok with that.

The adult is not getting anything really extra. Everything Wic buys directly helps the baby. You are really limited to what you can buy with Wic and there is a time limit on how long you can be on it.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
yes it is and i'm ok with that.

The adult is not getting anything really extra. Everything Wic buys directly helps the baby. You are really limited to what you can buy with Wic and there is a time limit on how long you can be on it.
Not true:

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides Federal grants to States for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic

A fetus is not a baby :D

Non-breasting feed postpartum women: No DIRECT benefit to the baby. Oh, and it is sexist to boot. I guess fathers don't deserve to eat.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,068
18,808
136
What is your point?



Clearly this statement isn't really true. The family is getting much more than $185 in government aid. And most of those benefits would be untouched by this bill.

The real government benefits that would be cut to a parent who didn't both to care about their child's education would clearly be much less than 30%. And yet you are still throwing a fit.
As others pointed out, those other programs are for the child.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
actually guys can get Wic for the child also.
As others pointed out, those other programs are for the child.
What part of "and non-breastfeeding postpartum women" is unclear to you?

This is not "for the child". And it is clearly sexist.

EDIT: And if the child's own parent doesn't think the child has any value why should the rest of society?

Maybe it is time for liberals to stop using children as vessels of extortion to bailout women's poor life choices
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,068
18,808
136
What part of "and non-breastfeeding postpartum women" is unclear to you?

This is not "for the child". And it is clearly sexist.

EDIT: And if the child's own parent doesn't think the child has any value why should the rest of society?

Maybe it is time for liberals to stop using children as vessels of extortion to bailout women's poor life choices
Oh look, you're raging against women again. No thanks.

Go ask your Canadian girlfriend what she thinks about the issue.
 

I Saw OJ

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
4,925
1
76
What part of "and non-breastfeeding postpartum women" is unclear to you?

This is not "for the child". And it is clearly sexist.

EDIT: And if the child's own parent doesn't think the child has any value why should the rest of society?

Maybe it is time for liberals to stop using children as vessels of extortion to bailout women's poor life choices
You realize that infant formula is available to women (and fathers) who arent breastfeeding through the WIC program, right?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY