Tag Archive for: welfare

Is Somali Welfare Fraud Endemic?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Just weeks after a bombshell report exposed billions of dollars of welfare fraud committed by Somali immigrants in deep-blue Minnesota, a new study is sounding the alarm on Somali overreliance on taxpayer-funded benefits.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), nearly 90% of Somali households with children in Minnesota receive welfare benefits. Over 80% of Somali immigrant households overall receive some form of welfare, including 54% on food stamps and nearly three-quarters (73%) on Medicaid, while 78% of Somali immigrant households who have been in the U.S. over 10 years receive welfare, compared to only 21% of native-born households.

Additionally, the CIS study found that while less than 20% of native-born adults live “in or near poverty,” over two-thirds (66.1%) of Somali immigrant adults live “in or near poverty,” as do over 80% of Somali immigrant children. Only 5% of native-born working-age adults hold no high school diploma, compared to over one third (39%) of Somali immigrant working-age adults, and while less than one percent (0.7%) of native-born working-age adults were categorized as speaking English “less than very well,” nearly 60% of Somali immigrant working-age adults fell into the category, as did nearly half (49%) of Somali immigrant working-age adults who have been in the U.S. at least 10 years.

“Among the strongest predictors of poverty are low education and lack of English-language ability,” wrote the study’s author, CIS Resident Scholar Jason Richwine. “Somali immigrants experience both of these problems at dramatically higher rates than native Minnesotans. Virtually all native Minnesotans speak English very well, for example, but 58.2 percent of working-age Somalis do not. Meanwhile, 39 percent of working-age Somalis have no high school diploma, compared to just 5 percent of natives,” he continued. “The U.S. has an extensive welfare system targeted at low-income families. Somalis in Minnesota are therefore likely to be major consumers of means-tested anti-poverty benefits…”

“Recently, some Somalis in Minnesota have been implicated in welfare fraud,” Richwine observed. “Over $1 billion has been reported stolen so far, but the scandal goes beyond money,” he added. “Minnesota’s social services have roots in the Scandinavian model, which assumes that civic-minded residents will treat aid as a safety net, not as money free for the taking. With fraud cases like these, it cannot be surprising when researchers find that culture clashes tend to degrade social trust,” Richwine pointed out. “That said, Somali welfare use would still be high even without fraud. Any population with poverty rates as high as theirs will legally qualify for extensive means-tested aid, either directly for themselves or indirectly through their U.S.-born dependents” (emphasis in original).

“The way to reduce immigrant consumption of welfare is not simply to crack down on fraud, but to reduce the number of new arrivals who have the low earnings power characteristic of Somalis,” Richwine suggested. “One of the main critiques of post-1965 immigration to the U.S. is that it has worsened the problems of poverty, school dropout, and welfare dependency. Allowing in immigrants who struggle with these problems adds to the social burden and makes helping impoverished Americans more difficult.”

The CIS report comes on the heels of an investigation by Christopher F. Rufo and Ryan Thorpe, published in City Journal, detailing widespread fraud and abuse of Minnesota’s “generous” welfare system by the state’s relatively large Somali population. Of the over $1 billion stolen through fraud schemes, several million dollars wound up being given to the Somalia-based terrorist group Al-Shabaab. “Our investigation shows what happens when a tribal mindset meets a bleeding-heart bureaucracy, when imported clan loyalties collide with a political class too timid to offend, and when accusations of racism are cynically deployed to shield criminal behavior,” Rufo and Thorpe wrote. “The predictable result is graft, with taxpayers left to foot the bill.”

According to the City Journal report, Somali immigrants in Minnesota set up fake businesses and organizations in order to collect welfare payments from housing, medical, and education programs. One Somali-run organization, the Feeding Our Future nonprofit, defrauded the Federal Child Nutrition Program of over $250 million, falsifying meal counts, doctoring attendance records, and fabricating invoices. Another Somali group would falsify autism diagnoses for Somali children in order to rob Minnesota’s Early Intensive Developmental and Behavioral Intervention program of over $14 million. In the end, one in 16 Somali children in Minnesota was diagnosed (mostly fraudulently) with autism, rising to more than triple the state average. “What we see are schemes stacked upon schemes, draining resources meant for those in need. It feels never-ending,” said then-Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota Joe Thompson. “I have spent my career as a fraud prosecutor, and the depth of the fraud in Minnesota takes my breath away.”

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the fraud has not been relegated to Minnesota. Maine also hosts a relatively sizable Somali population and, according to an immigration nonprofit whistleblower, Somali immigrants have been defrauding the government there, too. Christopher Bernardini, former program coordinator of Gateway Community Services until April of this year, reported this week that Gateway Community Services, which describes itself as a “trusted resource for immigrant, refugee, and asylee communities across Greater Portland and Lewiston-Auburn” and largely serves Somali immigrants, charged taxpayers for field staff visits to low-income and disabled clients. Only those visits never occurred, Bernardini alleged.

“I just couldn’t fathom it — I thought we were helping people; I thought this was all on the up-and-up. I have a passion for helping people, and I thought that we were doing the right thing this whole time,” Bernardini said, adding that he was disheartened “when I saw how they were swindling people, when I had clients calling me to tell me their staff hadn’t shown up and I was told to bill those hours anyway. It just got worse and worse, until I started really putting up a stink.”

Gateway Community Services was founded by Abdullah Ali, a Somali immigrant who acts as the organization’s CEO and ran for president of the Somali state of Jubaland. According to the Maine Wire, Ali also raised funds for the Jubaland-Somali army, a Somali paramilitary organization.

In comments to The Washington Stand, CIS Director of Policy Studies Jessica Vaughan asserted, “This exposure of the massive fraud perpetrated by Somali immigrants in Minnesota has been shocking to many Americans. There have been reports of similar problems in Maine, which also has taken in a disproportionate number of Somali and other African immigrants.” She continued, “These incidents reveal a significant threat to not only loss of taxpayer-funded resources meant to assist needy Americans, but also to the integrity of our immigration programs, to public governance, and potentially to our national security.”

“Much of the millions of dollars lost in this fraud can never be recovered, as the funds were spent on luxury lifestyles, campaign contributions, and even sent abroad,” Vaughan averred. “It sucked away funding that could have been used to help real people who are struggling to support their families, instead of phantom clients of the bogus NGOs created for the scheme.” She noted that state officials in Minnesota also “stymied” investigations into the fraud, accusing those reporting the fraud and demanding accountability of racism. “This borders on outright corruption, and could signal a real erosion of ethical standards that are the hallmark of a civil and democratic society.”

“It should go without saying that American taxpayers do not want their hard-earned tax dollars earmarked for local poverty programs to become cash cows for the exploits of Third World war lords,” Vaughan added. “This episode should cause Americans to think twice about allowing mass flows of largely un-vettable immigrants from unstable, hostile, and corrupt parts of the world to enter our country and establish ethnic enclaves where they are resistant to engaging with or assimilating into the host community,” she elucidated. “Our legal immigration programs need to be updated to reflect the realities of our modern world, and to focus on admitting only those immigrants who will be self-sufficient and contribute to our country.”

Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, told TWS, “Americans have lived the consequences of Milton Friedman’s warning that a country ‘cannot have open borders and a welfare state.’ It is why Americans voted for President Trump last year — to bring an end to the Biden administration’s madness.” She charged, “American taxpayers deserve to have all that stolen money clawed back.”

“In addition to the billions in welfare fraud discovered in Minnesota, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have investigated and uncovered significant immigration benefit fraud in the Minneapolis area, including marriage fraud, sponsor fraud, and fraudulent documentation,” Ries continued, noting that she “encountered Somali asylum fraud in immigration court” during her time in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. “Benefit fraud — whether it is welfare or immigration — makes an alien deportable. Every alien who has committed fraud should be deported.”

Multiple reports over the years have warned that Somali immigrants were likely to defraud U.S. government programs, including the immigration system itself. In November of 2008, shortly before then-President George W. Bush left office, the U.S. State Department confirmed that “refugees” from Somalia, Ethiopia, and Liberia were obtaining refugee status and residence in the U.S. fraudulently. The “P-3” refugee program, which allows refugees to seek refugee status for their spouses, unmarried children, and parents, began requiring DNA tests to ensure blood relation between refugees in the U.S. and dependents being brought into the country via the program. The State Department was “only able to confirm all claimed biological relationships in fewer than 20% of cases…” Between 2003 and 2008, when Bush halted the program due to widespread fraud and abuse, over 95% of refugees in the program came from Somalia, Ethiopia, and Liberia. The P-3 program was restarted in 2012 under then-President Barack Obama.

Former U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) legal advisor Charles Thaddeus Fillinger wrote a 30-page brief in 2018 characterizing the P-3 program as “the greatest refugee fraud crisis in modern times” and “possibly the biggest blunder in immigration history.” Although Fillinger admitted that the Obama-era restart improved screening in the program, he warned, “Left unresolved was the issue of thousands of fraudulent refugees who were admitted to the United States before the suspension. In contravention of clear principle, solid evidence, and direct experience, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continued to use the wrong screening strategy to process the pre-suspension P-3 caseload.” He continued, “Yesterday’s fraudulent refugees became today’s green card holders,

international travelers using refugee travel documents, and U.S. citizens.”

“There were other follow-on consequences,” Fillinger noted. “First, fraud of this magnitude multiplies the chances of terror. Second, significant numbers of human trafficking victims, mostly women and children, were not identified because of deficient screening. Third, legions of fraudulently-admitted refugees took full advantage of public assistance benefits.”

A more recent report, penned by Somali immigrant Ayaan Hirsi Ali, explained the widespread fraud as a product of Somali culture. “I grew up in a Somali clan-based society [where] [l]oyalty to kin was absolute. Loyalty to the nation was theoretical at best,” Ali wrote. “Anyone who knows Somali culture has long known where this would lead.” She continued:

“Amoral familism is a cultural blueprint. It assumes that resources are scarce, the world is dangerous, and survival depends on extracting maximum benefit for one’s own family. Nation-building makes no sense from that perspective. If a road is built, the question is not ‘How will this help the community?’ but ‘Which family will control access to it?’ If foreign aid arrives, the question is not how to distribute it fairly, but which family will claim control. This mindset explains why Somalia collapsed. It explains the dysfunction in Afghanistan, Haiti, and parts of North and West Africa. It explains why Minnesota now faces problems it can’t make sense of, let alone solve.”

President Donald Trump “grasps the central problem. The left does not. The moderate right refuses to,” Ali wrote. “If Minnesota wants a future that resembles Minnesota, it must make a choice. Assimilation or fracture. Cultural cohesion or cultural evasion.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Stephen Miller Says Somali Fraud Scandal Could Create Unprecedented Milestone In US History

Senate Fraud Hearing Displays How Trump Derangement Syndrome Blinds Dems to Deep Corruption in Federal Contracting

White House Posts Proof Ilhan Oma Married Her Brother

RELATED VIDEO: Somali Muslim Hasan Mohamed to ICE agents: ‘You’re gonna get popped next time I see you’

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

Partner with The Washington Stand to bring news from a biblical worldview to readers nationwide. From now until December 31, every gift will be doubled through our year-end Challenge Match.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Are Illegal Immigrants Using Taxpayer-Funded Benefits? Not Anymore.

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

In another move to tackle illegal immigration, President Donald Trump and his administration are ensuring that illegal immigrants cannot access taxpayer-funded programs. The White House announced Thursday that the Trump administration “is taking the biggest step in more than 30 years to protect taxpayer-funded benefits for American citizens — NOT illegal aliens.” The Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Education (DOE), Agriculture (USDA), and Labor (DOL) have all moved to ensure that illegal immigrants cannot take advantage of taxpayer-funded programs, which the White House estimates will save “roughly $40 billion in benefits for American citizens…”

HHS officially rescinded a Clinton-era policy which the agency says “improperly extended certain federal public benefits to illegal aliens.” The withdrawn 1998 policy was an agency interpretation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 that “improperly narrowed the scope of PRWORA, undercutting the law by allowing illegal aliens to access programs Congress intended only for the American people.” PRWORA barred noncitizens from receiving “federal public benefits,” which the 1998 HHS policy interpreted not to apply to a broad swath of its taxpayer-funded programs.

In a statement shared with The Washington Stand, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. said, “For too long, the government has diverted hardworking Americans’ tax dollars to incentivize illegal immigration.” Rescinding the 1998 policy, Kennedy said, “changes that — it restores integrity to federal social programs, enforces the rule of law, and protects vital resources for the American people.”

The DOE also reversed a Clinton-era policy in order to terminate “taxpayer subsidization of illegal aliens in career, technical, and adult education programs.” Like HHS, the DOE had previously issued its own agency interpretation of PRWORA, not classifying numerous taxpayer-funded programs as “federal public benefits” and subsequently allowing illegal immigrants to access government-funded career, technical, and adult postsecondary education programs. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement, “Postsecondary education programs funded by the federal government should benefit American citizens, not illegal aliens.” Due to the policy shift, she said that “hardworking American taxpayers will no longer foot the bill for illegal aliens to participate in our career, technical, or adult education programs or activities.”

The USDA has also moved to reinforce protections against illegal immigrants accessing taxpayer-funded programs, especially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as Food Stamps. “The generosity of the American taxpayer has long been abused by faulty interpretations of the 1996 welfare reform law,” said Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, referring to PRWORA. She insisted that “illegal aliens should not receive government dollars. This effort is one of many by the Department of Agriculture to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse of USDA’s programs and policies.”

Federal workforce development programs and related grants have also been shielded by the DOL. In order to benefit from programs funded by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, grantees and applicants must first verify that they have valid work authorization. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a statement, “By ensuring these programs serve their intended purpose, we’re protecting good-paying jobs for American workers and reaffirming this Administration’s commitment to securing our borders and ending illegal immigration.”

Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) research director Steven Camarota told TWS that legal loopholes — like those that the Trump administration is now closing — in public benefits have allowed illegal immigrants to burden American taxpayers for decades. “There are a number of reasons how and why illegal immigrants can access the welfare system, including the fact that they have U.S.-born children and they are actually eligible for some program” because of that, Camarota explained. He continued, “The bottom line is most illegal immigrant households have at least one worker, but they make extensive use of the social benefits, particularly food programs and Medicaid, because their low-average educational attainment means they generally earn low wages and qualify for programs.” Denoting legal loopholes in public benefits programs, he added, “I have no evidence that they are cheating or gaming the system, though they do seem to have extensive knowledge of the welfare system, given their use rates.”

“If we wish to avoid these costs, then enforcing the law and ensuring that as many illegal immigrants as possible go home is the only option,” Camarota insisted. He expounded, “It is virtually impossible to prevent this situation, partly because of the presence of U.S.-born children, partly because it’s impossible deny people emergency care, and partly because the United States is just not a country that’s going to stop people from receiving WIC or free school lunch or emergency medical care.” He clarified, “If the illegals remain, so will the cost.”

CIS director of Policy Studies Jessica Vaughan said in comments to TWS, “These steps are long overdue. Nearly 30 years ago, Congress decided that American taxpayers should not have to pay for welfare benefits and other services to illegal aliens.” Vaughan observed that numerous presidential administrations, starting with Clinton’s, “have chipped away at that law by creating loopholes to allow federal and state agencies to offer some of these benefits to illegal aliens.” She observed, “Now we are at the point where more than 60% of illegal alien households are accessing some form of welfare, which is an enormous cost for taxpayers, and which limits what is available to Americans who need them.”

“Taxpayers should not have to subsidize vocational or other post-secondary education for illegal aliens, who aren’t allowed to work in this country. Illegal workers displace American workers and cause their wages to go down,” Vaughan said. She emphasized, “We should not be encouraging illegal aliens to stay here to participate in taxpayer-funded training and education programs, when millions of Americans who would like to compete for better jobs should have these opportunities.”

Vaughan continued, “Similarly, illegal aliens should not receive taxpayer-funded child care or other non-emergency health and welfare programs. Access to these programs should be preserved for Americans and legal immigrants.” She explained, “Many American community leaders have learned the hard way in the last four years that generous social service programs like guaranteed access to shelter and health services are unsustainable with mass migration. Numerous studies have shown that this is because, on balance, illegal alien households contribute less in taxes than they receive in public benefits.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Criminal Illegal Alien Lina Maria Orovio-Hernandez received MORE THAN $400,000 in stolen federal benefits

CNN’s Dana Bash Tries to Corner Tom Homan on “Alligator Alcatraz” — Instantly Regrets It

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Less Work, More Welfare: How Immoral Policies Are Making Americans Poorer

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A new report shows that over the last four decades, poor Americans have become far more likely to receive their daily bread from welfare than work. This slide from self-reliance to government dependence serves as an economic barometer of American decline, fueled by perverse incentives created by morally challenged government policies.

The numbers paint a stark picture of American indolence. In 1979, Americans living in poverty earned 60% of their income from work. In 2021, the share had fallen to 25%. That analysis from the Congressional Budget Office shows the startling degree to which, in 42 years, Americans have moved steadily from a paycheck to a handout.

“Low-income Americans are receiving an ever-growing share of their financial resources from government transfers, not work,” said Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.), who requested the report, in a statement emailed to me. “To improve our nation’s welfare system, we must pursue policies that will lift more Americans out of poverty — including strengthening incentives to seek a job like tying benefits to commonsense work requirements. This will help more of our fellow Americans achieve independence and gainful employment. After all, a job is the best anti-poverty program that exists.”

Smith is to be commended for requesting this report and focusing on a policy solution. The report reveals that some of the great drivers of joblessness are political, some personal. But, as secular government analyses always do, this study ignores the moral components underlying increased welfare dependence.

The fact that more Americans have come to rely on welfare serves as an indictment of a nation that has forgotten the Apostle Paul’s admonition, “If any would not work, neither should he eat” (II Thessalonians 3:10). God gave Adam work to do in the Garden of Eden before the fall and, in the post-exilic world, He intended work to supply our daily needs (Genesis 2:15; Proverbs 6:6-11 and 12:11). Honest work, combined with frugal living, allows Christians to care for the needs of others (II Corinthians 8:13-15; I Timothy 5:3-16).

While some percentage of Americans lack the physical or mental ability to earn a living, the ever-growing number of Americans on welfare rolls far outstrips that of its incapacitated recipients. That proves Americans have lost sight of biblical importance of work: Work benefits our souls, improves the raw materials bestowed in God’s creation, enhances our God-given talents, allows us to provide for our own needs while serving others, and allows us to provide for those truly unable to participate in this ennobling cycle.

The Apostle Paul showed the excellence of work by working as a tentmaker in order to carry out his missionary work. St. Jerome — who translated the Bible into Latin, the language of the West — once asked a monk the same question idle Christians should ask themselves: “If apostles who had the right to live of the Gospel labored with their own hands that they might be chargeable to no man, and bestowed relief upon others whose carnal things they had a claim to reap as having sown unto them spiritual things; why do you not provide a supply to meet your needs?”

When followed, the biblical plan still works. Only 2.5% of Americans who work full-time fell below the poverty level, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Another study found only 1.7% of Canadians who worked full-time lived in poverty. In other words, work eliminates nearly 100% of all poverty.

Perhaps more importantly, this report serves as an indictment of family breakdown. “Of the four types of households examined, unmarried households with children had the highest percentage of people with money income below the poverty threshold,” found the report. That reinforces government statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, which reported, “Of people in families, those in married-couple families had the lowest poverty rate (5.2 percent), while those in female-householder families had the highest (23.6 percent).” Both homes led by single mothers and households with cohabiting partners had four times the poverty level of married couples.

On the other hand, traditional married families earned the most money, with a median income of $119,400 in 2023, compared to $59,470 in homes led by single mothers. Even in families where only one person works, single mothers were more than three times as likely to end up in poverty than married couples. In fact, single mothers earn just over $5,000 a year more than single men without children (and thus, without incentives to earn more).

Can it be a coincidence that the number of married households in America has fallen from 71% in 1971 to 47% in 2022? When mothers and fathers cannot take their place in God’s order, and children lack the example of a working father, society sets young people up for a life of government dependence and wasted potential. And our reduced GDP is the least consequential result.

America’s retreat from work serves as an indictment of our welfare system. After the Left’s purposeful throttling of President Donald Trump’s red-hot economy in the name of COVID-19, Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion spending spree gave workers collecting unemployment a $300 weekly bonus. That surplus gave approximately one in four workers more money than they could earn by working. One study showed that policy alone depressed employment by approximately 14%.

The report also shows the problems presented by counterproductive economic interventionist policies that destroy jobs and opportunity. Politicians promote tax-hikes that raise prices, massive spending that fuels inflation, and subsidies for unpopular products such as electric vehicles — all of which distort the market — for short-term political gain. For example, a minimum wage when raised too high prices out the poorest and neediest from the job market. The CBO estimated a proposed minimum wage hike would give workers an average of $50 a week — and throw 1.3 million people out of the workforce, reducing GDP by $9 billion.

The report also points an accusing finger at our nation’s immigration system. The recent H1-B visa debate provided a healthy spasm against a corporatist immigration system starving American families of good opportunities. During the last four years of the Biden-Harris administration, all net job growth has gone to immigrants. Between 2019 and late 2023, 2.9 million immigrants took U.S. jobs, while 183,000 American citizens left the job force. Mass immigration — illegal and legal — reduces wages, making a welfare check seem far more inviting than 40 hours of toil.

Finally, the report presses charges against American Christians. Why are churches not providing charity on a grander scale for those in need? Why have private citizens outsourced essential functions — like fulfilling Christ’s commandment to feed the hungry and clothe the naked — to the secular state? Government benefits lead to an attitude of entitlement and enable self-destructive pathologies. Secular programs cannot cure the problems secularism created.

Churches alone stand in the position to address the underlying issues that keep sidelined Americans out of the workforce — addiction, depression, lack of motivation, family commitments, lack of child care, etc. — and to elevate even seemingly mundane work to its true spiritual significance.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council,

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Analysts Report Biden’s ‘American Families Plan’ Would Put 21 Million More People On Welfare

/in , , , , , /by

“In a country where the sole employer is the State, opposition means death by slow starvation. The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced by a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.” ― Leon Trotsky

A dependent nation is an enslaved nation. What do you call someone taken care of by the government by the cradle to the grave? A slave.

This is the Democrat plot to destroy this nation. Individual rights and property rights, the basic pillars of our Constitutional republic, will be a thing of the past.

American Families Plan Would Put 21 Million More People On Welfare: Analysts

By: Ben Zeisloft, Daily Wire, July 1, 2021:

Analysts predict that President Biden’s American Families Plan would add 21 million Americans to federal benefit programs.

Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Hoover Institution fellows John F. Cogan and Daniel Heil unpacked their recent analysis, which discovered that the Biden administration’s $1.8 trillion omnibus bill would drastically expand the welfare state.

The federal government’s system of entitlements is the largest money-shuffling machine in human history, and President Biden intends to make it a lot bigger… For the first time in U.S. history — except possibly for the pandemic years 2020 and 2021, for which we don’t yet have data — more than half of working-age households would be on the entitlement rolls if the plan were enacted in its current form.

The academics note that families earning six figures would be eligible for generous handouts. Indeed, “most” of President Biden’s spending would benefit middle-income and upper-income households.

Two-parent households with two preschool-age children and incomes up to $130,000 would qualify for federal cash assistance for daycare. Single parents with two preschoolers and incomes up to $113,000 would qualify. And some families with incomes over $200,000 would be eligible for health-insurance subsidies. Other parts of the plan, such as paid leave and free community college, have no income limits at all.

Under the American Families Plan, 57% of all married-couple children would receive handouts, while over 80% of single-parent households would enter the entitlement rolls. Noting that the legislation has a number of “gimmicks” that hide the extent of its revenue proposals, the report forecasts that President Biden’s proposal would add $1 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade.

Other economists have expressed similar concerns with the American Families Plan. Analysts from the Penn Wharton Budget Model — a nonpartisan think tank at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School that examines the impacts of major legislation — concluded that the American Families Plan would slow long-term economic growth.

By increasing income taxes for wealthier Americans, introducing $2.3 trillion in federal expenditures, and spending with borrowed money, the legislation would slash output by 0.4% within the next three decades. The bill would also decrease the capital stock — the total amount of machinery, buildings, and other productive equipment in the American economy — by 1.2% over the same period.

In essence, long-term economic growth would be hindered by greater demand for federal debt financing, which would cause investors to direct money into loans for the government rather than ventures in the private sector. Such a phenomenon would restrict innovation and productivity, inhibiting American economic vitality for decades to come.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Help us fight the great fight.

And if you can, please contribute to Geller Report. YOU make the work possible.

Illegal Alien Children eating up Health and Human Service’s agency budgets

/in , , , , , , /by

You’ve probably all seen this news about the Department of Health and Services scrambling to re-direct money from other areas of the agency budget to take care of the largest number of ‘children’ (ever!) entering the U.S. illegally.

train-map

Where the wall needs to be…

I’m posting this so that as we move ahead in the coming days with news on the budget for FY17 and the Continuing Resolution, you have some background understanding of the dilemma the refugee program is in during the waning days of the Obama Administration.  The ‘kids’ (who are NOT refugees) are gobbling up limited funds putting their needs in direct competition with the refugees entering the US from all over the world. (In addition to depriving US citizens of other needed programs.)

For new readers, the Office of Refugee Resettlement is an agency at HHS which has been given the duty of taking care of the illegal alien kids.

Here is Jessica Vaughan at the Center for Immigration Studies:

An average of 255 illegal alien youths were taken into the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) every day this month, according to the latest figures the agency provided to Congress. This is the largest number of illegal alien children ever in the care of the federal government. To pay for it, the agency says it will need an additional one or two billion dollars for the next year – above and beyond the $1.2 billion spent in 2016 and proposed for 2017 – depending on how many more arrive. For now, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), where ORR resides, is diverting $167 million from other programs to cover the cost of services for these new illegal arrivals through December 9, when the current continuing resolution expires.

An email to congressional staff from Barbara Clark of the HHS legislative liaison office, dated November 28, 2016, stated:

Daily referrals of unaccompanied children averaged 247 over the last seven days, and 255 so far in November. For comparison, referrals averaged 185 per day in November of FY 2016 and 64 per day in November of FY 2015. As of November 27, 2016, the number of children in ORR care is approximately 11,200.

A separate email informed congressional offices of HHS Secretary Burwell’s intent to transfer money from other programs to ORR to pay for shelters, health care, schooling, recreation, and other services for the new illegal arrivals, who typically were brought to the border by smugglers paid by their parents, who often are living in the United States illegally.

Continue reading here and see which programs are being robbed to pay for the ‘kids.’

About the map: I was searching for a graph to show how many ‘kids’ (mostly Central American teenage boys, see here) had come in to the U.S. in the most recent years, but every graph I found only went to 2014. So what is up with that!  I figured the map would be a nice addition to the post instead.

By the way, this post is tagged ‘Unaccompanied minors’ because many years ago they were called that and that is how I first tagged the topic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats Express Solidarity with Islamic Extremists in Wake of Election by John Rossomando – IPT News

America’s Success Story: From Hamilton to Trump

First two months of FY2017, 98% of Syrians entering the U.S. are Muslims

Refugee Industry lobbyists want to talk to Trump transition team

UK: 96% of Muslims do not believe al Qaeda was behind 9/11 jihad attacks

Video: Christine Williams on the ignoring of the genocide of Christians in the Middle East

If Continuing Budget Resolution (as is) extends to late March, ORR will run out of money

Fun to watch the Left eat its own: ACLU sues Catholic Charities

How many more Ohio States before House Republicans move Rep. Babin’s bill?

Sweden took in 162,000 Muslim migrants in 2015 — 494 got jobs

/in , , , , , /by

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

margaret murders in sweden by a muslim

In lieu of the jizya, there is welfare. It is the duty of the Infidels to pay for the upkeep of Muslims, as that Qur’an verse makes clear. UK jhadist Anjem Choudary said in February 2013:

“We are on Jihad Seekers Allowance, We take the Jizya (protection money paid to Muslims by non-Muslims) which is ours anyway. The normal situation is to take money from the Kafir (non-Muslim), isn’t it? So this is normal situation. They give us the money. You work, give us the money. Allah Akbar, we take the money. Hopefully there is no one from the DSS (Department of Social Security) listening. Ah, but you see people will say you are not working. But the normal situation is for you to take money from the Kuffar (non-Muslim) So we take Jihad Seeker’s Allowance.”

Malmo Refugees Welcome Sweden

“Sweden Took 162k Refugees Last Year, 494 Got Jobs,” by Jacob Bojesson, Daily Caller, June 1, 2016 (thanks to Steve):

Just 494 out of the 162,000 refugees who applied for asylum in Sweden in 2015 have managed to get a job, according to government figures released Tuesday.

Refugees are eligible to work while their applications are pending as long as they can show a valid identification document and haven’t been rejected for asylum in the past. A majority of asylum seekers would qualify for a work permit, but the national migration office was only capable of issuing one to one-third due to the high demand.

“There was an incredible amount of people who applied for asylum in Sweden, and for us to be able to register everyone we had to disregard certain areas, and employment was one of them,” Lisa Bergstrand, officer at the Swedish immigration office, told Swedish public broadcaster SVT. “We do what we’ve been told to do.”

Getting migrants off welfare and into the job market has been a problem for most European countries during the ongoing refugee crisis.

Germany announced reforms to its labor laws in May to make it easier for migrants to enter the job market. Migrants are exempt from minimum wage regulations and thousands of  “one-euro jobs” —  in which refugees can work for low wages of between $1.13 and $2.80 per hour — have been created.

The center-left government in Sweden has proposed a reform to asylum laws to force migrants into the work force. If an applicant can’t support himself after three years in the country, they won’t be eligible for permanent residency if the reforms pass.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany To Strip Job Protection From Citizens To Make Room For Refugees

San Jose: Muslim chases, tackles Trump supporter after rally, then brags on Twitter

Terror scare on UK-bound flight after Muslim passenger screams “Allahu akbar” and “Boom”

New reforms give Muslim migrants with more than one wife extra benefits

/in , , , , , /by

Paying for something will only encourage more of it, and there will even be conversions to Islam by people who want to take advantage of this. Britain’s Islamization is proceeding nicely, and anyone who raises a dissenting voice is ruthlessly silenced, so all is well and all manner of thing shall be well.

“Wives With Benefits: Immigrants With More Than One Spouse Win EXTRA Payments Under New Reforms,” by Simon Kent, Breitbart, January 24, 2016:

Immigrants with many wives stand to make substantial financial gains under looming changes to Britain’s welfare system.

Polygamous marriages, which form a common thread in Islam, are recognised in Britain but only if they take place in countries where they are legal. Now a House of Commons library paper, published earlier this month, has highlighted a loophole that will allow additional wives coming to the UK to claim a full single person’s allowance while the husband and his first wife still receive their respective benefits.

At present additional wives receive reduced individual income support, meaning the husband and his first wife receive up to £114.85. Subsequent spouses living under the same roof receive a reduced allowance of about £40 each.

The foreshadowed changes mean some polygamous households may receive more under universal credit than under the present benefit and tax credit system. The paper said:

“The Government decided that the universal credit rules will not recognise additional partners in polygamous relationships,” the paper states.

“This could potentially result in some polygamous households receiving more under universal credit than under the current benefit and tax credit system.

“Treating second and subsequent partners in polygamous relationships as separate claimants could in some situations mean polygamous households receive more under universal credit than they do under the current rules for means-tested benefits and tax credits.

“This is because the amounts which may be paid in respect of additional spouses are lower than those which generally apply to single claimants.”

The news comes as universal credit (UC), introduced in April 2014, is applied to more Jobcentre areas, including Kent and Leicestershire, from tomorrow. More, including Cambridge and Hull, are set to introduce it before April this year.

UC is to replace all means-tested benefits and tax credits for families of working age and is gradually being introduced to new claimant groups and areas including those in polygamous unions.

This is not the first time that Islamic marriage traditions have been highlighted in the UK.

As Breitbart London reported, last year Britain’s first female sharia law judge stated that the “government cannot ask Muslims not to have more than one wife”.

That revelation came on the back of a report by the Times newspaper which claimed that Britain is experiencing a “surge” in Sharia marriages, as young British Muslims adopt a more hardline religious stance than their parents.

According to The Times:

“As many as 100,000 couples are living in such [sharia] marriages, which are not valid under UK law, experts said. Ministers have raised fears that women can be left without the right to a fair share of assets if the relationship ends, while others are forced to return to abusive “husbands”.

“A leading Islamic family lawyer warned that the increase in Sharia ceremonies among the 2.7 million-strong Muslim population in Britain was also behind a growth in ‘secret polygamy’.

“Probably a quarter of all couples I see involve polygamy issues,” Aina Khan told The Times. “There has been a huge rise in recent years because people can have a secret nikah [Islamic marriage] and no one will know about it.”

A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions told the Daily Express: “The previous system accommodated polygamous marriages but this Government has done away with it. Under new rules any additional partners who are unemployed have to claim benefits independently and will need to sign a claimant commitment, and look for work like anyone else. They will also not get benefits for housing costs if they are living together.”

It has been claimed that Muslim men are having up to 20 children each because of polygamy and the rise of “religiously-sanctioned gender discrimination” under Sharia Law.

Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer, has highlighted a series of “shocking” examples of the impact of Sharia law on Muslim women in Britain as she called for them to be given greater protection.

Bigamy in the UK is a crime under Section 57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 however in 2008, the Blair government gave the go-ahead for husbands with multiple wives to claim extra welfare benefits, so long as the weddings took place in countries where the arrangement is legal (as is permitted under Islamic law).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Palestinian media celebrates terror and murder

British Leftists lead violence as they aid Muslim migrants to invade Calais

Italy: Islamic State jihadi arrested; talked of “fastening belt to reach heaven”

VIDEO: Free Stuff for Syrian Muslims Coming to America!

/in , , , , , /by

This video was prepared by Liberty News Media about Syrian Muslims coming to America.

Steven Camarata, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies released a new analysis today.

As Americans continue to debate what to do about the humanitarian crisis in the Middle East, this analysis attempts to estimate the costs of resettling refugees from that region in the United States. Although we do not consider all costs, our best estimate is that in their first five years in the United States each refugee from the Middle East costs taxpayers $64,370 — 12 times what the UN estimates it costs to care for one refugee in neighboring Middle Eastern countries.

The cost of resettlement includes heavy welfare use by Middle Eastern refugees; 91 percent receive food stamps and 68 percent receive cash assistance.

Costs also include processing refugees, assistance given to new refugees, and aid to refugee-receiving communities. Given the high costs of resettling refugees in the United States, providing for them in neighboring countries in the Middle East may be a more cost-effective way to help them.

camarota-refugees-15-t1

Continue reading here.

Muslim refugees eligible for over $11,000 in social services benefits for years

/in , , , , , , /by

I just came across this handy breakdown of which social services refugees can access immediately upon arrival in the U.S.  Note that it does not show food stamps or subsidized housing (both available to refugees for years), or the cost of educating the children.

At the top you will see that each refugee gets $1850 as a one time payment from the U.S. Department of State (a family of 6 would receive $11,100). However, the contracting (non-profit) agency keeps about $750 of each refugee’s allotment for its own overhead.

But, that is not all the contractor receives, most get tens of thousands of federal dollars to run myriad other programs through their offices including English language lessons, employment counseling, and even are granted federal dollars to develop community gardens for their refugee clients.

See also:  Jeff Sessions remarks that 90% of Middle Eastern refugees on welfare, here.

All non-profit groups are required to file Form 990’s with the IRS and must make them available to anyone who asks.  You should not be told that you must do a Freedom of Information Act request to get their financials!

The diagram can be seen more clearly here in enlarged form: http://www.usccb.org/about/resettlement-services/upload/Refugee-Assistance-2.pdf

Screenshot (5)RELATED ARTICLES:

Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX): “We are crazy to be inviting the problems of the Middle East into the United States”

Syrian refugees being resettled in “safe” Baltimore

No discussion of refugee crisis at CNN debate; Carly leaves me cold

Florida: Kids Get School Supplies from Islamic Groups Associated with Terrorism

As the Family Goes So Goes the Nation

/in , , , , /by

My Dad used to tell me that a nation (particularly the United States) is only as strong as her families. He began telling me that when I was just a little boy attending kindergarten. Our Cleveland neighborhood where I grew up was at that time an ideal leafy enclave of close knit families and neighbors. It was comprised of a mixture of racial and ethnic backgrounds, where folks got along and crime was a non-issue.

None of us were wealthy monetarily. There were educators, (back then they were called teachers) dentists, postal workers, small business owners, nurses etc. One of my favorite neighbors were the Rebisses. They were an Italian family who lived one house over from ours. It was sometimes rather difficult to decide which I enjoyed more, hanging out with my buddy Mark or enjoying Mrs. Rebisses great Italian cooking whenever I was invited, or the times I invited myself. Ours was a neighborhood of many patriots who often flew their American flags, especially between Memorial Day and Thanksgiving.

One of my most pleasant memories of those wonder years was how many of our neighbors were actually close friends who enjoyed each others company throughout the year. A most cherished memory of the old neighborhood was how many families would connect their Christmas lights in archways over their driveways. It was a spectacular sight to see many of the homes joined through beautiful lights in the spirit of Christmas.

Even our Jewish neighbors would drop by and enjoy our Christmas gatherings. Likewise they would make sure we joined them for Seder dinners. Very moving. Our neighborhood was not physically spectacular. But it was clean, comfortable, safe and stable. My belief at the time was that was how the majority of Americans lived. Turns out I was right. At that time, the bulk of American fathers, both black and white were in the home. Dads and moms both ruled the home with principles with Christian underpinning. We children were taught to respect our elders and other symbols of authority like the police, appreciate our country and were expected to achieve our best in school and in life in general.

Were we perfect? No, but because we were taught to aim high morally, ethically, and spiritually. The spiritual part kicked in later. (smile)

But as time progressed something happened and what seemed good at first has turned out to not so good after all. In fact, many things occurred that brought about a series of horrendous shifts in the ongoing function of out republic. One of the major developments was the civil rights, or what my Dad called the bastardized rights movement across America.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. began his quest for the unalienable rights of all Americans to be to recognized and honored. He firmly believed in the completed family that included both Dad, Mom and the children. I have a sneaking suspicion the Dr. King would also be firmly against the ongoing slaughter of the most innocent amongst us, unborn babies. Unfortunately, the ideals Martin Luther King espoused were gradually refocused away from unalienable rights which came from God, toward civil or bastardized right that are granted by government. It was special interest groups, not sovereign individuals that to this day most benefit most from that arrangement. When you have civil or (as my Dad said) bastardized rights, then include America’s transition from a constitutionally limited republic into a mob rule democracy things are destined for decline. Mob rule democracy places the government granted rights of the mob above the unalienable rights from God.

Dad was concerned that the corrupted civil or bastardized rights movement would help open the door to overthrowing all of the factors that had helped maintain family and national stability. So gradually, activities that were once considered immoral or wrong were gradually granted special rights status under the civil rights genre. Abortion quickly comes to mind for example. Now, groups of Americans are pitted against one another and the rights of individuals. You had Blacks against the police, homosexuals against the teachings of God the church, women against men.

Many of these groups had been brainwashed into thinking they were a collection of victims.

Combine that with several decades of government school indoctrination of American students against all that is good especially concerning the United States of America and what eventually brewed was a Caldron of madness. In more recent times in cities across America, mobs of blacks have been either fighting one another or starting riots in places like Ferguson, Missouri. And Baltimore. On St. Patrick’s Day 2015 in Cleveland after the huge annual parade, a group of black males and females converged and started beating up white citizens and out of town visitors alike. To them it was entertainment. The obvious lack of regard for civility stems from the purposeful breakdown of the black family and disregard for fathers. Also there was a taught hatred of America and possibly God himself.

My fellow Americans, let us pray for the restoration of our One Nation under God and constitutional law. We can either choose life or choose death for America. I would that we choose life.

God Bless America and May America Bless god.

The Minimum Wage Poison Pill

/in , , , , , , /by

As we approach the 2014 General Election, with president Barack Obama set to occupy the White House for two more years, the stakes are higher than ever. As usual, Democrats across the country focus on phony issues, such as a Republican “War on Women,” the widening income gap between the rich and the non-rich, and bogus claims of being champions of the middle class.

In terms of domestic policy, they express support for the “middle class,” while doing everything in their power to turn America into a two-class society: the very rich… whose wealth they only wish to plunder… and the very poor, who, in return for an endless array of government handouts, will be expected to do nothing more than to pull the Democrat lever on Election Day.

In foreign affairs, they express outrage over the gruesome crimes of radical Islam… such as the recent beheading of an Oklahoma City woman by a radical Muslim co-worker… yet they oppose any and all effort at what they see as “racial profiling.” They find moral equivalency between the anti-Christian genocide of radical Islam throughout the Middle East, and the bombing of a Birmingham, Alabama abortion clinic in years past.

They express support for high quality public education, but the teachers unions… who own a controlling interest in the Democrat Party… dictate that Democrats oppose any and all voucher proposals, causing the greatest damage to the hopes of minority parents who want to see their children receive a quality education. They ignore the fact that throwing more money at public schools does nothing to increase the quality of a public school education. Instead, at the behest of the teachers unions, they demand that class sizes be reduced, that new school buildings be constructed, and that teacher salaries be increased… all the while regaling their low-information voter base with the cynical lie that Republicans want to “cut benefits to kids.”

They express a desire for the budget discipline of the 1990s… a direct result of Ronald Reagan’s “trickle down” economic policies and the election of a Republican Congress… and they support the notion of cutting the deficit in half, while supporting every new spending scheme hatched by liberal social planners. (In their 2000 platform, they announced that Democrats would entirely eliminate the public debt by the year 2012. Clearly, they had not heard of Barack Obama.)

While expressing a desire to curb the influence of lobbyists, they attempt to convince low-information voters that Republican administrations are dominated by lobbyists for business interests. Yet, no previous administration has been as heavily staffed and influenced by special interests as is the Obama administration. And while they express strong support for an electoral system that is “accessible, auditable, and accurate,” they insist that every attempt to curb vote fraud is nothing more than a Republican scheme to oppress the black vote.

On the healthcare front, they express a desire to provide healthcare insurance for 30-40 million uninsured, to improve the access to and quality of healthcare for all Americans, to substantially reduce the cost of healthcare for everyone, and to do it all without increasing the number of doctors, nurses, and hospitals. Like president Barack Obama, they see no contradictions in any of this. These are obviously people who would promise, with a straight face, that they could stuff 10 lb. of (excrement) into a 5 lb. Bag. All we need to do to make these magical things happen is to elect more Democrats to public office.

Democrats want to use the tax code to discourage the outflow of jobs overseas. Yet they have no problem with the fact that the United States has the highest corporate tax rate of any developed nation. They express a desire to cut taxes for every working family, including those who pay no federal or state income tax, but they exclude tax relief for the “millionaires” who are expected to provide good-paying jobs for the poor and the middle class.

And finally, while fast food workers go on strike demanding a $15.00 per hour minimum wage, a 107 percent increase, Democrats prescribe a poison pill for the U.S. economy with a proposed increase in the federal minimum wage standard from $7.25 cents per hour to $10.10 per hour a 39.3 percent increase. In doing so, they scoff at studies which show that, for each 10 percent increase in the minimum wage, 1-2 percent of jobs in the nation simply go away. For unskilled entry-lever workers, each 10 percent increase in the minimum wage results in a decrease of 4-5 percent in the number of entry-level jobs available… the jobs most often held by teens, the poor, and the unskilled.

According to a recent report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a majority of those who worked at minimum wage jobs in 2013 were 24 years old, or younger, while only 0.8 percent, less than one in a hundred, of those 24 years old, or older, work for a minimum wage.

Minimum wage increases are major job-killers. According to a 2014 report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, an increase in the minimum wage from the current $7.25 per hour to $10.10 per hour would reduce the total number of jobs available by approximately 500,000. For the most part, these are the jobs currently held by all those fast food workers who fill the streets, demanding a $15 per hour minimum wage. And if those who clamor for a $15 per hour minimum wage are anxious to learn what happens to a job market with a minimum wage of that magnitude, they won’t have to wait long. In early June 2014, the Seattle city council voted to increase the minimum wage in that city to $15 per hour, the highest in the nation.

A report by the National Restaurant Association (NRA) tells us that, of every dollar of revenue coming into restaurant cash registers, approximately 33 percent goes to salaries and wages. The remainder of that dollar of revenue goes to cover the cost of food and beverages, other costs of doing business, and a small net profit for the owner. According to NRA statistics, the profit margin of restaurants varies, depending on the size of the average check per patron. Those with average checks under $15 per person… e.g., McDonalds, Burger King, Taco Bell, etc… produce average profit margins of 3 percent, while those with checks of $15 to $24.99… e.g., The Olive Garden, Red Lobster, The Cheesecake Factory, etc… produce profit margins of roughly 3.5 percent, the highest in the industry.

According to a recent report by Gingrich Productions, a good measure of the impact of minimum wage laws can be found in the European experience. Among those countries with no minimum wage… Austria, Germany, Sweden, and Switzerland… the median unemployment rate is just 5.2 percent, while the median jobless rate stands at 11.1 percent in countries with minimum wage laws… more than twice that of those without minimum wage laws.

But there is a much larger issue than the question of whether we should have a statutory minimum wage of $10.10 or $15 per hour… an issue that Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are not anxious to talk about. I refer to the question that more and more minimum wage workers are asking themselves, which is, “Why should I work 40 hours a week at $10.10 per hour, when I can earn more by staying at home and living off the public dole?”

A 2013 Cato Institute study tells us that, in 33 states and the District of Columbia, welfare benefits pay more than the current $7.25 per hour, while in 13 states, welfare benefits pay more than $15 per hour. In Hawaii, for example, the pre-tax “salary” of stay-at-home welfare recipients is $60,590 per year, or $29.13 per hour when compared to a 40-hour work week, while in Washington, DC, the hourly rate for just staying at home is $24.43 per hour. At the lower end of the spectrum among states where sloth is more lucrative than honest toil, the hourly rate for stay-at-home welfare recipients in South Carolina is $10.53 per hour… 43 cents more than the $10.10 minimum wage proposed by Democrtats.

So what do we do to fix the problem?

Instead of catering cynically to the poorest of the poor as a political constituency, as Democrats do, we should be asking exactly how an individual in this, the land of opportunity and economic freedom, can still be working at a minimum wage job when he/she is 24 years old, or older. That circumstance can only be explained by pointing out that a great many people simply make very bad choices in their lives.

But Democrats are clearly more interested in purchasing a “nanny state” constituency than they are in doing what is necessary to really help people lift themselves out of poverty. As one writer, Charles M. Blow, has said, “Much of what happens in Washington occurs at the intersection of political advantage and earnest intentions.”

What is clear is that we cannot perpetuate a system in which it is more lucrative to take a welfare check than it is to earn an honest living. In order to throw off the bonds of that insanity our options are only two. First, one might ask, why not raise the minimum wage to $25 or $30 per hour so that those who work can earn more than those who don’t, or won’t? The answer is, a $25 or $30 minimum wage would literally wreck whatever is left of our fragile economy and price us completely out of world markets.

The one remaining option is to do what we did in the mid-90s when a Republican-controlled Congress forced a Democrat president, Bill Clinton, to sign what was called “welfare-to-work” legislation, requiring those on public assistance to also find honest employment. The country experienced real economic growth, balanced budgets, and a pay-down in the national debt.

The choice is ours. What was done in the 1990s can be done again. But in order to do that we must first have a president who understands at least a “smidgen” about the intricacies of the U.S. economy. That means that our first priority must be to rid ourselves of Barack Obama, sending him back to his Kenyan roots where he can actually learn a thing or two about micro-economics.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Wages and the Free Market, Part 1 — Dispelling labor market myths with theory and data

Wages and the Free Market, Part 2 — Innovation Is the Lifeblood of a Healthy Economy

Raise the Minimum Wage? A Socratic Dialogue

A Heartbreaking Unspoken Consequence of Obama

/in , , , , , /by

Decades of socialist/progressive indoctrination in our schools, media and culture, plus six years of Obama, has yielded a devastating unspoken consequence. It is the loss of who we use to be as Americans.

In his 1961 Inaugural Address, President John F. Kennedy said, “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Democrats have perverted Kennedy’s inspiring challenge. Their dispiriting goal is to have as many Americans as possible controlled by and dependent on government, even for life itself, which is at the root of Obamacare.

I mourn the loss of the independent self-reliant mindset which made our parents great; and the pride and dignity it generated within them. Welfare (government assistance) was a last resort and for the truly needy.

Today, far too many Americans see no shame in living on government assistance or scamming the system. The Left’s campaign led by the Obama Administration to instill an entitlement mindset in many has proven successful. The Administration even campaigned targeting minorities, discouraging their instinct to be self-reliant. Even worse, the Administration portrays getting on welfare as the honorable thing to do. Dear Lord, what kind of nation are we becoming?

An unprecedented 47 million Americans are on food stamps which is riddled with fraud. The Obama Administration has added over 10,000 new oppressive job-killing regulations. Consequently, 90 million are unemployed and on unemployment which is also riddled with fraud. Here’s another first for America, over 11 million are receiving disability benefits; riddled with fraud. Clearly, many believe working is for suckers when the government is handing out freebies.

In his War on Achievers, Obama used his bully pulpit to deflate business owners by saying, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.” Obama and his operatives use compassionate sounding terms such as “social justice” and “income inequality” to justify the government confiscating the earnings of achievers and redistributing it to non-achievers to win their votes. Despicable.

My heart aches for my America when character, excellence and hard work were rewarded, celebrated and respected.

At 9 or 10 years old, I worked part-time for my neighbor Mr Buddy Roy. I pulled the copper out of old motors for him to sell. I still remember the pride I felt making my own money.

In the early 1950s, blacks were allowed to take the entrance test for the Baltimore City Fire Dept. My dad applied and mom helped. My parents sought opportunity not handouts. Talk about a strong black woman, though compassionate and loving, mom could be a tough no nonsense person.

I remember my parents sitting at the kitchen table, a glass turned upside down between them with mom tapping on the glass with a spoon. She was simulating the different bell sounds which alerted the firefighters to various situations. She would yell at my dad, “No, that’s wrong, stupid! Listen and get it right!” Thanks to my drill sergeant mom, dad was among a hand full of blacks who became Baltimore City’s first black firefighters.

Being a pioneer is never easy. Dad endured humiliating work conditions and blatant racism. Still, dad relished the opportunity. Thanks to his Christian faith, dad won admiration and respect by fighting racism and hate with excellence. He won “Firefighter of the Year” two times.

That mindset of putting ones best foot forward and striving for loftier standards is what I fear we are rapidly losing as Americans. Apparently, character is no longer expected in our leaders. President Obama is caught repeatedly lying to the American people and the response is ho-hum, let’s move on.

The trend is to celebrate deadbeats, entitlement junkies, haters of achievers and assorted low life. For example. The Democrats and mainstream media loved the Occupy Wall Street mobs. People were assaulted and even raped at their angry mob gatherings. Severely infected with an entitlement mindset, Occupiers dumped feces in a public building demanding the government redistribute wealth to them.

Meanwhile, the Left continues their shameful relentless demonizing and slandering the Tea Party with unfounded allegations of racism. The Obama Administration has plotted to criminalize free speech (the Tea Party). Folks, we are talking decent hard-working Americans who are simply pushing back against Obama’s shock and awe assault on our freedoms, liberty and culture.

Tax cheat Democrat Rep. Charlie Rangel compared the Tea Party to Hamas terrorists. Either Mr Rangel is a loudmouth clueless idiot or a despicable evil human being. Leftists like Rangel who throw unfounded irresponsible “hate” grenades at millions of Americans should be called on it. Inciting racial division is extremely serious.

Amidst the unbelievably long list of scandals, crimes and misdemeanors of the Obama regime, the damage that this evil man and his minions have done to the internal make-up of many Americans is extremely disturbing and heartbreaking.

Please view me performing my song, “We Are Americans” which I wrote to remind us of who we use to be and I believe a majority still are as Americans. I have faith that the liberal’s, socialist’s and progressive’s toxic disease of entitlement thinking has not reached critical mass.

My fellow Americans, we are exceptional, a chosen people. We are Americans!