Promoting Welfare: A Group Effort
As the self-appointed defenders of democracy, the lens of
governmental scrutiny typically falls upon those countries that either do not
provide for their people or those that simply ignore the needs of their
people. Naturally, the U.S. holds itself in a class above many of these third-world countries where millions live in poverty and hunger and have little to no
education, and no way to improve their lives due to government corruption and
insensitivity. And while it is important
to maintain the standards of the free world globally, it is just as important to
understand that we, as Americans, do not live outside of the realm of hunger,
poverty, illiteracy, and homelessness. In fact, millions, yes millions, of
Americans are sitting street side at this very moment with no home, no food,
and no hope of change. The reliance on welfare programs and the charity of
churches and non-profit organizations simply cannot curb the ever-growing
financial divide between the highest and lowest earners of our society. Therefore, the responsibility of maintaining
societal balance must include the everyday citizen working in conjunction with
government welfare programs and charitable organizations to end hunger and
poverty as we know it today.
The word welfare often carries a pejorative
implication. Those that seek the help of the government are somehow viewed as
dependents, lazy, unambitious, or drug addicts. It would shock many to learn
that a significant portion of the poverty-stricken are the elderly and
children. The United States is by no
means a robust welfare state. Capitalist by nature, our government tends to
fall on the side of minimalism in welfare, asserting that every citizen has the
ability to produce wealth to their own standard. “At the minimalist level, the
government is the provider of last resort, ensuring a basic safety net below
which no civilized nation would let its citizens fall.”[1]
This is not without reason. Many European countries that exhibit robust welfare
programs struggle to maintain financial balance, and in the past, such as when
President Johnson established robust programs to battle poverty, the United
States struggled with its budget as well. Another reason is that, historically,
the common citizen does not feel that it is their responsibility to assist
other citizens who have less.
“Acknowledging that one-fifth of the nation's population was
not benefiting from the prosperity of the times, in early 1964 Johnson
announced a war against poverty, which was a central part of his Great
Society.”[2]
This was met with controversy, as the community action plans, or CAPS, that
President Johnson proposed required a significant amount of government budget,
and many politicians, then and now, felt that it gave the federal government
too much oversight on a state level. There are grains of truth within these
rebuttals, such as the need for states to have more power to oversee their own growing
populations’ needs and the fact that raising taxes for welfare programs
typically strains voter relations with politicians. Johnson endured these
oppositions to pursue what he saw as nothing more than the moral obligation of
the United States government to its citizenry. He felt that the “war on poverty
[was] necessary to break the cycle of poverty; because the poor [had] been
deprived of opportunities such as a good education, it [was] likely that the
children of poor people will grow up to be poor as well.”[3]
In this ideal, Johnson strikes a
universal truth; cause and effect. To deny that those born with fewer
opportunities would inherit fewer opportunities is a logical argument and one
that affects politicians on every level as educated citizens are more inclined
to vote, find work, and become productive members of American society.
Before Johnson’s war on poverty, measures taken by President
Franklin Roosevelt sought to pull the United States working class out of the
mire of unemployment brought on by, The Great Depression. Through the
implementation of the New Deal, workers' unions strove for fair wages, and public
works projects created new jobs. These changes were met with controversy and
criticisms that President Johnson would become all too familiar with. Still, in
the years since its inception, interest groups, nonprofit organizations and
churches have all contributed to Johnson’s concept of a “Great Society”. “Since
the War on Poverty, antihunger and social justice campaigns in the United States
have shifted from a focus on welfare rights to a focus on hunger, then to
homelessness, and more recently to impoverished children and to the attempt to
establish the roles of individuals and communities—as well as government—in
alleviating hunger and poverty.”[4]
For centuries, churches and private organizations have served as advocates
for the poor and destitute. But, in a country of 350 million people, and a
booming world population of seven billion, it is simply not possible for these
institutions to curb this monstrous issue anymore. Some might like to believe
that poverty is an issue of the past, or perhaps one that does not affect them
personally, but that is simply untrue. “As a result of the 2008 economic
downturn, the U.S. unemployment rate reached as high as 10% with 15 million
people out of work in 2009. According to a 2010 poll released by Gallup and
FRAC, the number of individuals on food stamps was 38 million, or one out of
eight Americans; the data also revealed that one out of five Americans reported
that they did not have money to purchase needed food in the previous year.”[5]
This is evidence of an apparent truth: prosperity is not guaranteed.
If governments,
churches, and non-profit organizations cannot change the tide of poverty and
hunger alone, the responsibility falls onto the shoulders of the citizenry.
While increasing taxes for welfare programs can help marginalize the issue, it
will never erase it completely. The need for a unilateral effort that begins
with the government and extends down through organizations to the individual
layman is the only way to combat the growing issue of poverty. And while
attributing more control of welfare programs to the states may help to combat
specific poverty issues within a region, it will most certainly not change the
plight of all those affected. As the defender of democracy, and as the
reigning world power, the United States has an obligation to help those in need
whenever possible and to set a standard for the rest of the world. The United
States is not an office though. It is a collection of individuals, many of
which have much more than they need due to greed. Until we learn as citizens to
reach across the table alongside government and charitable organizations to
assist those in financial need, the crippling disease of poverty will continue
to spread throughout the United States, and the world.
Genovese, Michael A.
"Welfare State." Encyclopedia of American Government and Civics,
Second Edition. Facts On File, 2017. Accessed November 17, 2018.
online.infobase.com/Auth/Index?aid=&itemid=&articleId=168648.
Imig, Douglas. "Antihunger Coalitions." In Issues:
Understanding Controversy and Society, ABC-CLIO, 2018. Accessed November
16, 2018. https://issues2-abc-clio-com.db18.linccweb.org/Search/Display/1468537.
Kauffman, Jill. “Great
Society and the War on Poverty.” August 12, 2008. Issues & Controversies
in American History. Infobase Learning.
http://icah.infobaselearning.com/icahfullarticle.aspx?ID=107300 (accessed
November 16, 2018)
[1] Genovese, Michael A. "Welfare State." Encyclopedia
of American Government and Civics, Second Edition. Facts On File, 2017.
Accessed November 17, 2018.
online.infobase.com/Auth/Index?aid=&itemid=&articleId=168648.
[2] Kauffman, Jill. “Great Society and the War on Poverty.” August
12, 2008. Issues & Controversies in American History. Infobase
Learning. http://icah.infobaselearning.com/icahfullarticle.aspx?ID=107300
(accessed November 16, 2018).
[3]
Kauffman, Jill. “Great Society and the War on
Poverty.” August 12, 2008. Issues & Controversies in American History.
Infobase Learning. http://icah.infobaselearning.com/icahfullarticle.aspx?ID=107300
(accessed November 16, 2018).
[4]Imig, Douglas. "Antihunger Coalitions." In Issues:
Understanding Controversy and Society, ABC-CLIO, 2018. Accessed November
16, 2018. https://issues2-abc-clio-com.db18.linccweb.org/Search/Display/1468537.
[5]
Imig, Douglas. "Antihunger Coalitions."
In Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society, ABC-CLIO, 2018.
Accessed November 16, 2018. https://issues2-abc-clio-com.db18.linccweb.org/Search/Display/1468537.
Comments
Post a Comment