Welfare War
The United States of America... the land of the free and the home of
the
tax-stricken. The country that is known as "the last superpower in
the
world" that developed the deadliest weapon on earth, sent the first
person to
the moon, and was the birthplace of the most powerful man in the
world, Bill
Gates, has forty million people (which include ten million
children) without
basic healthcare coverage. (Packet, pg.58) Although this
"supernation"
boasts of the "American dream," where the poor become rich
overnight, the
typical American citizen does not have a "super" lifestyle.
Based on the
average income of Americans, "one in every five U.S. nonelderly
households are
poor, one in four young households are poor, and over half of
all households
headed be a lone parent are poor." (Packet, pg.1) Though the
United States has
tried to mimic the welfare systems of that of Europe, the
bureaucratic "red
tape" and the conflicts that reside between the legislature
and executive
branches of the government have hindered the progress towards
an effective
welfare reform policy. In order to understand the progressions
towards refining
the wounded welfare system of the United States, one must
first know what
welfare means. The welfare state is "a state which takes the
prime role in
ensuring the provision of a minimum standard of living for
citizens."
(Professor VonDoepp) The two goals of the welfare state is that of
1. security
against socio-economic deprivation (especially with the current
Capitalistic
system which families base their entire lifestyle on the outcome
of the economy)
Broye 2 2. equality against the still present racial
tension and economical
barriers that reside in society. Many critics of
welfare programs across the
world have argued whether the U.S. is really a
welfare state because of the
limited role played by the government to
maintain a minimum standard of living.
In Europe’s case, just the
opposite can be said for their welfare programs.
European states such as
Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom"provide higher minimum
standards of income support than are available in the
U.S." (Packet,
pg.1) Only seven percent of households in Western Europe have
incomes that
are below the national median, compared to the United States where
the
poverty percentile is double. The only positive aspect that the U.S. has
to
show for their efforts in the current welfare system is the provision of
free
public education, which is higher than in Europe. (Packet, pg.16) In the
U.S.
the welfare system before the 1996 bipartisan revision, had far more
gaping
holes in the "social safety net" than that of the European states.
Many
skeptics believe that the 1996 Welfare Reform Bill will cause even more
harm to
the citizens of the U.S. Peter Edelmaun, the former assistant
secretary for
planning and evaluation at the Department of Health and Human
Services, resigned
after having worked over 30 years after he read the
reformation that was to take
place from the Welfare Reform Bill. "The bill
will move 20 million people,
including 1.1 million children, into poverty,
and forcing 11 million families
(10 percent of all American family
households) under the poverty line which was
last estimated at $13,793 for a
family of three. (Atlantic Monthly & Packet,
pg. 46) While many European
states including Sweden, Germany, the United
Kingdom, France, and the
Netherlands provide healthcare Broye 3 centers,
suitable housing,
health/recreational spas, and regulate wage differentials and
offering
generous social assistance to the jobless, the United States recently
passed
a bill to narrow the eligibility for disabled children which will result
in
the removal of 100,000 to 200,000 of the children who currently receive
SSI.
Senator Edward Kennedy, who voted against the bill, described it
best by saying
it was "legislative child abuse." (Atlantic Monthly) Even
though the world
sees that the United States needs to broaden their "safety
net" for its
citizens, political strife continues to shorten welfare’s reach
to those who
are in need. The most serious cut to arise from the political
blood bath to
create the Welfare Reform Bill is the limiting of food stamps
to three months
out of every three years for unemployed adults under the age
of fifty who do not
care for any siblings. (Atlantic Monthly) Instead of
cutting down the cow (the
food provided by the government), why not cut the
cash cow that many of our
legislative and executive officials enjoy having on
a regular basis? The news
gets better for welfare recipients. There is now a
five year cap on welfare aid
to all recipients, a cap of $16.4 billion
annually for funding, with no new
funding for jobs and work training, and the
states have been given absolute
power of decree to do as they wish with their
appointed sums of welfare revenue.
Was it not the goal of the welfare
system to prevent an uprising in case of
economic turmoil and instill
peace-of-mind that there would be preventive
measures in place in the
instance of an unforeseen tragedy? In the case of the
new reform bill passed
by Congress and the President, welfare will most likely
cause upheaval
instead of preventing it. If this were Broye 4 so, then the
United States
must ask whether malnutrition, abuse against children, and deeper
poverty
among its citizens is in the best interest for the sake of "reform."
In
1871, Otto von Bismark created the first social welfare insurance known
to
the world to help prevent cultural uprisings in Germany. One reason for
our
present-day welfare systems that span around the world is in part to
the
socialist labor movement, which grew only as a reaction to aristocratic
power.
(Packet, pg.17) Industrialization was at the threshold of a new
century, and
socialistic ideals began to manifest themselves into the values
of Europe’s
citizens. The threat of a capitalistic resistance towards
socialization bringing
disastrous economical effects and interest in
regulation of industry instead of
ownership, led to the progression of the
current welfare state system. (Packet,
pg. 12) One speculation as to why
welfare programs have done well in European
states, unlike that of the U.S.,
is because of the "royal absolutism."
European bureaucracies had long
been seen as a legitimate power in governmental
rule, so no one opposed the
reformation to a welfare system when endorsed by the
aristocrats. "The
general principles of the welfare state are as universally
accepted and
politically invulnerable in Europe as social security is to the
elderly."
(Packet, pg.17) Besides the uniquely different histories that
brought Europe
and the United States to develop social-economic welfare
programs, the
relative size in population per state is a determining factor
stated by one
hypothesis. The higher neglect of the American welfare system
could be traced
to the spatial obstacles readily visible in the U.S. Many
political and
social theorists refute this theory on the basis, and not to be
taken out of
context, that "size doesn’t matter." In fact, many theorists
believe that
because the U.S. is so tightly- Broye 5 knitted in respect to
people per
square mile (an average of 55 people per square mile), they should be
able to
procure a feasible way of handling the dilemma concerning welfare
reform.
(Packet, pg.2) The closer you are to a community, the more likelihood
of
sharing similar interests and goals. Another explanation for America’s
welfare
woes is that of appeasement. America has been respectively given the
name"melting pot" for the diverse population it holds within its
borders.
European states do not have to contend to the desires of a
largely diverse
population as greatly because most citizens of Europe have
heavy ties to their
homeland and do not often part from their birthplace. In
order to appease the
majority of the population in America, compromises must
be reached.
Unfortunatley, compromise can (and often does) lead to the
exclusion of
necessary elements to create a sound reform or economical
benefit to the
country’s welfare. The crucial component that could greatly
benefit the United
States welfare program is what Europe learned long
ago: cooperation,
consideration, and the belief that no one must be denied
the right for the basic
needs to sustain life as we know
it.
Bibliography
Peter Edelmaun, "The Worst Thing Bill Clinton Has
Done," Atlantic
Monthly, March 1996. Robert Heilbroner, "Benign Neglect
in the United
States," in Transaction, October 1970, Vol.7 #12. (Packet)
John Kautsky,
"Contexts of Conservatism, Liberalism, and Socialism," in
Society, March
April 1996, Vol. 33#3. (Packet) Katherine McFate, "First
World Poverty," in
Focus, November 1991, Vol. 19#11. (Packet) "Mr. Blair
Goes to Washington,"
in The Economist Volume 346, Feb. 7, 1998 pp. 15-16.
(Packet)