Welfare Reform Act Essay
There are both positive and negative implications of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 on Medicaid. A negative implication is that even though most of the people on welfare and Medicaid are able-bodied people who could be self-sufficient if they had to be, Medicaid and other social programs reinforce these people’s laziness and unwillingness to contribute to society. Welfare reform has only decreased handouts marginally.
A positive implication is that some effort was made to reduce the number of people who were dependent upon the state. The genetic implications of the welfare system and Medicaid in particular are terrifying to contemplate. The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 was a response to overwhelming public criticism by the working class on the entitlement programs which allowed non-contributing members of society easy and complete access to “FREE” health care, “FREE” housing and “FREE” education that a working person could never get.The working class continues to seethe in anger that our hard earned money is stolen by a corrupt government and redistributed to people too lazy to get a job, or to people who are not US citizens and who do not pay into the system. The Welfare Reform Act did NOT cause existing Medicaid beneficiaries to lose necessary coverage. We can see now that the Welfare Reform Act was only marginally effective in reducing welfare fraud and increasing personal responsibility. Sadly, the Welfare Reform Act has not been successful in meeting its intended goals.
Since the system was already and still is giving benefits to those who did not and do not even need them, the system was already, and still is broken. I contend that no one lost any necessary coverage after this bill passed. Welfare reform did good things to caseloads as one source points out, “As noted, welfare caseloads are down since the early 1990s, with an increasingly rapid decrease since the passage of welfare reform.
Medicaid data reporting lags behind welfare reporting, making comparisons more difficult.However, Medicaid enrollment is also down, but less so than welfare. Using Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) data from 1995-96 (a period before PRWORA was enacted but instructive because so many states were already using federal waivers to administer welfare programs much like TANF), Marilyn Ellwood and Leighton Ku last year reported early evidence of these declines. They reported a 1.
8 percent overall reduction in the number of children and nondisabled adults in Medicaid during this period. This net change reflects a 7. percent reduction in AFDC-based Medicaid enrollment and a 5. 8 percent increase in noncash-related enrollment. They noted that “this net decline in Medicaid participation is noteworthy, since this is the first downturn in nearly a decade of steadily rising Medicaid participation rates.
” (http://www. nhpf. org/library/issue-briefs/IB732_WelfRef&Mcaid_2-26-99.
pdf) The problem still remains that when we give assistance both medical and pecuniary to insufficient genetic organisms they are likely to thrive and breed.Even worse, this assistance is given to able bodied people not yet genetically damaged from generations on the system. Even though welfare reform did not strip away needed services, a new welfare reform needs to be implemented that strips away ALL state funded services. I understand that some people need help, but it is not the government’s duty to provide that help. I read the constitution, the bill of rights and the federalist papers looking for where our founding fathers set up a welfare program.There is no such intent in these documents. Welfare begets fraud, laziness and facile dependence on the state.
Since each child is viewed as a “Raise” in capitalist terms, this is a reinforcer in behaviorist nomenclature, and the child making behavior continues again and again. The genetic/behavioral information that rendered the parents unwilling to work is then passed on to the children who, in the same “easy to get welfare” environment, also refuse to work.The system is way overburdened by this parasitic infestation caused by well-meaning but ill-conceived policies that have been proven not to work since the days of the madman FDR. The Welfare Reform Act was only slightly operational in decreasing welfare fraud and growing personal responsibility.
Since the entire idea of giving people money for doing nothing is flawed, the whole system must be dismantled. We still have fraud. There are still non-citizens on Medicaid. A lot more reforms need to be done. We need to dismantle all government funded social programs if we are to save this society from utter ruin.One source points out, “People are not made better off by a program that encourages them not to work–as AFDC indisputably did, given the decline in the rolls.
”(http://www. theatlantic. com/business/archive/2011/08/did-welfare-reform-work/244038/) The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 simply did not meet its intended goals. Because most welfare recipients are typically unfit to care for themselves due to a behaviorally ingrained disregard for wellness, they are also largely incapable of caring for their children.Disordered family practices, like poor workmanship on an auto assembly line, are passed down from parent to child as the parents assume, for better or worse, the task of shaping a successful human person from their infants.
In the absence of childbearing licenses, this poor lifestyle workmanship is part and parcel of the typical disdain for wellness, which in turn degrades the already poorly, genetically situated mind and body of the Welfarian. It is a behavioral/genetic, environmental/biological interaction which has proven inexorable even in the face of the massive social engineering project called the War on Poverty.This self-destructive lifestyle is manifested by most welfare recipients thus making the Medicaid beneficiaries the most costly patients a doctor treats. Cigarette smoking, uninhibited promiscuity, and a disregard for basic nutrition are just a few of the vices from which a great many socially dependent people suffer. Due to a tragic but undeniable propensity for substance abuse exhibited by most welfare recipients, as well as a pervasive lackadaisical attitude toward parenthood, the care and upbringing of the welfare child is almost always deficient.This brazen disregard for wellness also contributes to the genetic inferiority (as defined by a Darwinian model) of the welfare recipient. More Crack babies, F. A.
S. kids and low birth weight babies are born to the welfare class than any other socio-economic group. And since most Welfarians are uneducated and not too intelligent to begin with, they worsen the already poor health of their children by feeding them a high fat, low protein diet deficient in vitamins.Since junk food is cheaper than fresh meats, fruits and vegetables, the Welfarian will opt for eating, and feeding, junk food to her children in order to maintain her drug and/or alcohol dependency. This aberrant lifestyle causes doctor bills to rise, but since the Welfarian does not have to pay those bills, he or she has no incentive to live a healthy lifestyle. Welfare reform was a baby step in the right direction. It stopped some fraud.
It removed some able bodied people from the roles. Government assistance and Medicaid is just not working. Our country is