Carlson 1

Nicholas Carlson
Collin Hull
English 2010
10 March 2015

Government Regulation of Welfare

When it comes to the topic of receiving welfare we hear varying viewpoints.
What comes to the minds of many individuals and groups is that there is a problem that is
not being dealt with. When I think of welfare I think of people receiving help because
they are unable to get the necessary means to provide for themselves and their families.
Others view welfare as a system that is being taken advantage of causing a population of
lazy and entitled people. This is where the problem lies. The question arises then of why
are there so many different viewpoints? Shouldnt there be a uniform thought of a
regulated system? The problem with welfare is that people are taking advantage of the
system, those who receive welfare become dependent on it, and the system is not highly
monitored or regulated. To solve this problem a better system needs to be brought into
place, one that is not easily manipulated and taken over.

The Problem as it Stands

In the United State, welfare is commonplace in many homes. According to data
collected by the Census Bureau from the fourth quarter of 2012, the government agency
responsible for gathering statistics about the United States population and economy,
153,323,000 Americans receive federal assistance from one ore more programs. This
equals almost 50 percent of the population (Jeffrey, par. 4). We see that the outreach of

Carlson 2
government assistance is widespread. However, the problem arises when we find out that
this help is not meeting its intended purpose.
So what is the intended purpose of welfare? Welfare was designed to get one
back up from where they had fallen. It was a starting point that once one had stabilized,
they would return to work. The initial implementation was only a temporary fix.
Michael P. Auerbach, who holds a Bachelors and Masters degree and has both private
and public

WageEquivalentofWelfare,1995

in political Rank Jurisdiction

with this.
welfare as
which

systems

PretaxWageEquivalent HourlyWage
($)
($)

science and
economics, agrees

Hawaii

36,400

17.50

Alaska

32,200

15.48

Massachusetts

30,500

14.66

Connecticut

29,600

14.23

Districtof
Columbia

29,100

13.99

NewYork

27,300

13.13

NewJersey

26,500

12.74

RhodeIsland

26,100

12.55

California

24,100

11.59

Virginia

23,100

11.11

introduced 7

population 10

sector experience

He defines
a public policy in
programs are
to help a political
poor or disabled
reenter the

workforce and care for themselves (par. 3). This gives us a better understanding of the
problem. We see that people are receiving welfare, but once they become stabilized, they
continue to be on welfare. This is not fulfilling the intended purpose of government
assistance.
Those who view welfare as good disagree with its intended purpose. They
believe that you just cant make enough from working a typical job. This is entirely true.
This leads to people seeking another source of income as well as help. In a study done by
the Cato Institute, a public policy research organization, we learn about how little is made

Carlson 3
as well as why many may become dependent on welfare. It shows a table of what wages
would be equal to welfare in each state. Many of the states provide benefits that are
above todays minimum wage. It is no wonder why so many stay on welfare and either
become dependent on it and/or dont enter the workforce. However, in the conclusion of
this article it states that as long as the benefits are higher than a job that people will
choose welfare over work (Tanner, Moore, Hartman). Government is making it so that
there is an easier way to make it through life, but this is causing people to become
dependent on welfare. Thus, further regulation of the government welfare program is
needed to provide a better system that will fulfill the initial design of welfare.

Figure 1: Part of the table discussed by Tanner, Moore, and

Hartman showing the amount of welfare one can receive in a
state and the amount needed to earn per hour to receive the
same amount.

Figure 2: Those who work feel they are not being treated fairly. They believe that the system is being taken
advantage of.

The study done by the Cato Institute provides great insight to the problem.
Currently most entry-level jobs dont pay much and what they do pay is hardly enough to

Carlson 4
get by. There should be some form of help, but not to the extent of the help providing
more than a job and the work itself. All people should have to work in some form that
they are physically and mentally capable of doing. This is the point where sides start to
form. There are those who think that they are somewhat owed from the government this
help and become as the study said dependent on welfare. Then there are those who
think that this help could work if it was further regulated and monitored. Both sides of
this argument are valid viewpoints, however, the side of welfare being further regulated
has better support. Due to the facts of the system being taken advantage of and people
becoming dependent on it, the solution to the welfare crisis is to further regulate its uses.

Proposal
The main problem with welfare is it that it is not monitored well and is regulated
poorly. Therefore, the system needs to be further regulated due to its continued abuse and
its intended purpose not being met. There are various ways to go about this, but the best
way would be to reform the program as a whole and return its roots.
Lets look at an example of a program that is having a hard time. In an article by
Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute, who focuses on health care reform and social
welfare policy, he discusses the failure of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP), the problems it has, and its need for reform.
SNAP is a deeply troubled program. It has high administrative costs and
significant levels of fraud and abuse. The programs work requirements
are weak and frequently evaded at the state level. The program
increasingly breeds greater dependence on government. It has little bang
for the buck

Carlson 5
(Tanner, par. 4)
The problems are major as stated by Tanner. There is fraud, abuse, a cause of
dependence on the government, and there are weak work requirements. With these
problems known, we can know what needs to be changed.
One of the major problems that is always brought up when people talk about
welfare is that it is being taken advantage of. Many see people staying on this
government help for longer than its intended use. This is the case with Christine Roselle,
a graduate of Providence College majoring in political science, who shares her
experience as a cashier at Wal-Mart.
I understand that sometimes, people are destitute. They need help, and
they accept help from the state in order to feed their families. This is fine.
It happens. Im not against temporary aid helping those who truly need it.
What I saw at Wal-Mart, however, was not temporary aidthats not how
welfare was intended, but sadly, it is what it has become. (Rousselle, par.
2)
She agrees that the intended purpose of welfare was to be temporary. However, what she
saw was not. Christine saw many other things such as government food stamps
supporting someones business and people buying extravagant food such as steak,
lobster, and giant birthday cakes (Rousselle).
This story supports that the system is being taken advantage of. It also supports
that the system needs further regulation. The proposed solution to this problem would be
to make welfare more monitored such as other programs. One such prom is Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC). WIC is a program ran by the U.S Department of

Carlson 6
Agriculture that provides nutritious foods for this category of people. Its mission is to
safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, and children up to age 5 who are at
nutrition risk by providing nutritious foods to supplement diets, information on healthy
eating, and referrals to health care (USDA website). The program provides this group
with milk, eggs, bread, fresh fruits and vegetables, and other foods to help promote a
healthy lifestyle.
The WIC program is a great idea. Having worked as a cashier for part of my life,
I see the importance of this regulation. People who receive help from WIC receive
checks that are good for specific items, including size and brands, and they are only
allowed what is on that check. Now of course I dont expect the government to go send
checks to everyone who receives welfare, but what can and cant be bought should be
regulated. Along with what can be bought, the assistance of welfare should be temporary,
as was the intended purpose of welfare. The government would allow people a certain
amount of time to receive help and once that time was up people would have to provide
for themselves. There would of course be exceptions to the rule such as physical and
mental conditions, but the point is that the system would be further regulated and would
be taken advantage of less.

Carlson 7
Figure 3: This is a typical check one who is on WIC would receive. Further government regulation and
monitoring would make it so the welfare system is as easily abused.

If this proposal was implemented there would be a change in the work ethic of the
United States. We would return to the days when welfare was first in place and the fix
would be temporary, as intended. With further regulation of welfare we would have a
system that would be taken advantage of less and make it so people dont become
dependent on it. Also it would provide jobs due the increased regulation, which would
benefit the economy. Overall, with further regulation of government assistance there
would a true, beneficial system that would provide help and assistance to those in need.

Carlson 8

Works Cited
Auerbach, Michael P. Welfare. Research Starters Sociology (Online Edition) (2009):
Research Starters. Web. 10. Feb. 2015
Jeffrey, Terence. "The 35.4 Percent: 109,631,000 on Welfare." 20 Aug. 2014. CNS
News. Web. 10 Feb. 2015.
Rousselle, Christine. "My Time at Walmart: Why We Need Serious Welfare Reform." .
N.p., 13 Dec 2011. Web. 10 Mar 2015.

Tanner, Michael. SNAP Failure: The Food Stamp Program Needs Reform (2013): 1.
Cato Institue. Web.

Tanner, Michael, Stephen Moore, and David Hartman. "The Work Versus Welfare
Trade-Off: An Analysis of the Total Level of Welfare Benefits by State." 19 Sept.
1995. Cato Institute. Web. 10 Feb. 2015.

"Women, Infants and Children (WIC)." About WIC-WIC's Mission. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.

Images

Carlson 9

Get Back To Work. Digital image. Soda Head. 11 July 2013. Web.
The Work Versus Welfare Trade-Off: An Analysis of the Total Level of Welfare Benefits
by State. 1995. By Michael Tanner, Stephen Moore, and David Hartman

WIC Check. Digital image. California WIC. Web.