Welfare reforms in Michigan

State lawmakers have voted to limit cash assistance for
able-bodied welfare recipients to four years and to implement harsh penalties
for those who fail to comply with work or training requirements.

Here's my vote! YES!! I think (strongly) that this is something that is long overdue.
Now I'll be the first to admit- I do not know much about the welfare system. The thoughts and feelings I have are from firsthand experiences.

It all started when I started working at the drugstore part-time. This store happens to accept WIC and foodstamps. In Michigan, it is the Bridge Card.

I am shocked at the abuse in the welfare system. Very rarely do I see people that come in and come off as those that need assistance. And before you call me judgmental, let me state that I think the purpose of welfare is a good thing. People that truly need it should have it. It just so happens that the large number of people I see coming into the store and paying with their Bridge Card reflects abuse. In a very obvious way. VERY OBVIOUS.

Some examples. A frequent customer comes in with an authentic Louis Vuitton purse (which usually start around $500). She comes inside wearing brand name clothes- Tommy Hilfiger. She purchases a bunch of candy and pop, some microwaveable meals- pays with the Bridge Card. And it covers it. After that, she takes out a wad of cash and gets a couple packs of cigarettes. Then she leaves and drives away in her big Lincoln Navigator. (not a poor man's car...)
This is not an exaggeration. This happens frequently.
Now tell me, if she needs government money for her groceries so badly, then why is she carrying around a $500 purse, and driving a $40,000 car? I doubt they are both just gifts.

Another example. It was around Valentine's Day. Another well-dressed woman comes in buying a ton of pop and chips, some canned fruit and milk. She throws some candy on the counter for her kids' school party. Her foodstamps didn't cover it all. The candy was the remaining balance. She caused a scene. She huffed and puffed and made a big deal going through her purse for money. Then she said loudly, "guess I hafta use my own money for the candy!" Every ounce of me wanted to shout- welcome to the real world! We pay for our own things!

One of the things that gets to me the most is that the majority of the customers I see paying via Foodstamps, buy cigarettes. I think that should disqualify. I know many will call me wrong for that, but hey, it's my opinion. Cigarettes are ridiculously expensive. They spend at least $20/week on tobacco. That's some good grocery money. Why should Uncle Sam pay for their food when they have all this money to waste on cigarettes? It isn't right. Not to mention all the health disadvantages associated with it.

And why does foodstamps cover pop/soda? There is no health benefit to drinking the stuff. I like it- but I pay for it. It should only be decent foods covered. Not chips, junk food, and soda/pop beverages. Nope. That all contributes to the cycle of bad health, which in many cases means further reliance of Medicare/Medicaid.

My last example- I promise. :)
A customer came in and was buying some instant scratch off lotto tickets. She also made a purchase of food paying with the Bridge Card. (don't remember the food item) She was talking to another employee with whom she is friends. She was talking about her last job, which ended a few months ago. She was saying she still hasn't gotten another one. And read this correctly- she didn't want to get another job because then her welfare would no longer come. And she'd have to work again. Those words came out of her own mouth. She was commenting on the enjoyment of mooching off the government. I was sure my face was red from boiling blood.

You know, it's not like we all don't struggle. Most of us do. But to go and abuse the system like this- amazing. Brilliantly amazing. Wrong. Unfair. Stealing.

I like this from the article:

The House legislation would set up a three-strike policy for
failing to comply with work and training requirements. The first offense would
mean 30 days without cash assistance, 90 days for a second offense and a
lifetime ban for a third offense.
The sanctions in the Senate bills are
slightly less harsh: 30 days without cash assistance for a first offense, 60
days for second offense and two years for a third offense.

And then this:

Rep. Michael Murphy, D-Lansing, criticized the harsh
penalties.
"Where's the justice? We're talking about the most vulnerable in
our state," he said. "I find this very appalling. I don't believe a word from
any of you that this is going to improve the lives of people that we're talking
about."

The most vulnerable in the state? They are only doing more to trap themselves! They aren't even doing what they can do without the government to improve their situations!
SOME are making efforts. But from what I have seen, I am convinced there are very few playing by the rules. Our welfare system is so screwed up.