Fact: A single mom with one child gets at most $437.00 per month in cash. For each additional child it goes up about $89.00 per month. But if you have another child while on welfare, you don't get any additonal money for that child.
Any income from a job, child support or whatever comes off that amount. The amount hasn't changed since about 1964. (Thanks Bruce Hornsby for the song "That's Just the Way It Is", for reminding me that "they passed a law back in '64 to give those who need just a little more", or something like that.)
The most that mom and child can get for Food Stamps is about $250 dollars per month. You can't use Food Stamps to buy toilet paper, laundry soap, diapers, etc. just food.
Fact: The most amout of "welfare" dollars are spent on single women.
If you count money spent on Medicaid as welfare than this statement is true. But the money is not being spent on that single mom with kids. It's being spent on grandma in the nursing home. Nursing home costs average over $4,000 per month.
Hmm... $432 per month .... $4,000 per month.
Why isn't any one talking in Washington about all the seminars lawyers and financial planners are giving to teach people how to "protect their assets" and not have to pay for their nursing home costs with their own money. After all you earned that money so you should have every right to give it to your heirs and let the government (tax payers) pay for your medical care while your heirs go to Tahiti.
No, it's much easier to get people thinking about those women who keep having babies so they can get rich off of welfare than it is to admit that if we want to rein in some of our abuses in the welfare system we need to admit that medicaid is also welfare.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Saturday, January 23, 2010
But there are no poor people in our county.
The first time I heard that phrase was from an elderly woman in my church. I had asked if I could have some of the quilts that our church women make to send to mission programs over seas. "After all, I explained, "It's alot colder here than it is in Africa." She looked at me with a puzzled face. "But there are no poor people in our county. I've lived here all my life and I've never seen any" she replied.
I told her if that was the case than I and my fellow workers at Social Services would have been out of a job years ago. The truth of there being poor in our area slowly dawned on her and I've been getting quilts from the church on a regular basis for several years now.
The poor in the rural areas are not as visible as they are in the urban areas. You don't see people sleeping under highway overpasses. But, you say, there are no highway overpasses here. Yeah, yeah and you don't see people pushing shopping carts full of all their possessions or any "projects" like you do in the big city. So where are the rural poor?
Most of the poor in rural areas keep to themselves. Aside from going to the grocery store and the social service office you don't see them around much. They don't have their kids in sports or band programs (could it be they can't afford the cost of equipment or instruments?), they don't often attend parent/teacher conferences, you won't see them in the Rotary, Lions or Kiwanas. You may not realize that the gal down the street is a "poor" person and not just a strange loner type person.
I can guarantee that our kids know who the poor kids are in school. They are the ones who wear the same 2 shirts to school or have the bad haircuts.
I have a worker in my office who has lived in this county for all of her40+ years. She has a case load of about 190 households. When she was a new worker she would often comment to me that she thought she knew just about everyone in this town, but can't believe the number of people that she now has as clients that she never knew were out there.
We have one low income housing "project" that has about 50 townhomes and a trailer court that obviously does not require alot of money to live in, but the poor are much more spread out throughout the whole county.
Many of our most poor people don't live in our "big" city of 7,000, they are out in the isolated, old farm houses or in the smaller communities of 50-300 people. Rent is so much cheaper when the house is run down and there are no zoning laws to make the landlord have to bring a dwelling up to code. When you're poor, living 20 miles from town and have a car that barely moves, you don't get out too much.
I once delivered Christmas meals to some of the needy people in our town. I took my youngest son, who are about 8 at the time along with me.
He was shocked when we went to several houses that were within walking distance from our own house. "Mom," he said " these houses look like any of the other houses on the outside, but on the inside they are dumps. They are falling apart and there's no furniture. I never knew these people were poor."
Our county claims 21,000 residents. Our case load at the "welfare" office is over 1,600 households. A household could be one, two, or however many people happen to be in that family. I would bet that there are a lot of people in our county who would qualify for "welfare" but for their own reasons haven't applied.
So you think there are no poor people in our county? Think again.
I told her if that was the case than I and my fellow workers at Social Services would have been out of a job years ago. The truth of there being poor in our area slowly dawned on her and I've been getting quilts from the church on a regular basis for several years now.
The poor in the rural areas are not as visible as they are in the urban areas. You don't see people sleeping under highway overpasses. But, you say, there are no highway overpasses here. Yeah, yeah and you don't see people pushing shopping carts full of all their possessions or any "projects" like you do in the big city. So where are the rural poor?
Most of the poor in rural areas keep to themselves. Aside from going to the grocery store and the social service office you don't see them around much. They don't have their kids in sports or band programs (could it be they can't afford the cost of equipment or instruments?), they don't often attend parent/teacher conferences, you won't see them in the Rotary, Lions or Kiwanas. You may not realize that the gal down the street is a "poor" person and not just a strange loner type person.
I can guarantee that our kids know who the poor kids are in school. They are the ones who wear the same 2 shirts to school or have the bad haircuts.
I have a worker in my office who has lived in this county for all of her40+ years. She has a case load of about 190 households. When she was a new worker she would often comment to me that she thought she knew just about everyone in this town, but can't believe the number of people that she now has as clients that she never knew were out there.
We have one low income housing "project" that has about 50 townhomes and a trailer court that obviously does not require alot of money to live in, but the poor are much more spread out throughout the whole county.
Many of our most poor people don't live in our "big" city of 7,000, they are out in the isolated, old farm houses or in the smaller communities of 50-300 people. Rent is so much cheaper when the house is run down and there are no zoning laws to make the landlord have to bring a dwelling up to code. When you're poor, living 20 miles from town and have a car that barely moves, you don't get out too much.
I once delivered Christmas meals to some of the needy people in our town. I took my youngest son, who are about 8 at the time along with me.
He was shocked when we went to several houses that were within walking distance from our own house. "Mom," he said " these houses look like any of the other houses on the outside, but on the inside they are dumps. They are falling apart and there's no furniture. I never knew these people were poor."
Our county claims 21,000 residents. Our case load at the "welfare" office is over 1,600 households. A household could be one, two, or however many people happen to be in that family. I would bet that there are a lot of people in our county who would qualify for "welfare" but for their own reasons haven't applied.
So you think there are no poor people in our county? Think again.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Another mind boggling day at the welfare office.
Sometimes I swear, the people who make up the rules for public assistance programs have no clue what impact those rules make for the people who adminster the programs.
It would be nice if I worked in a big city, with lots of workers where I could specialize in just one area like SNAP (food stamps), or TANF (the "welfare" program as most people think of welfare) or even just the Medicaid program. (Sigh)
But, alas,I don't, I work in a smaller community so I get to deal with all programs.
And of course each program has it's own rules and regulations, none of which have much in common with the rules and regulations of the other programs.
For example you are an average 18 year old "adult". You can vote, buy lottery tickets, be charged in criminal court as an adult and enjoy many of the other benefits of being " all grown up". But, if you're living with mommy and daddy we still need to consider their income to see if you qualify for Medicaid. (Unless you're married or otherwise emancipated.) However, if you're 18 and have a baby we don't have to look at their income if you apply for the cash through TANF whether you're married or not.
Once you turn 21 we no longer have to look at counting your parents income for Medicaid for you, but unless you're disabled or pregnant or a parent of a minor child yourself you're not eligible for Medicaid anyway. So big deal.
You could apply for SNAP (I really don't like that name) or Food Stamps as I will call it, but if you're under 22 and living with your parents we again have to look at your parents income to see if you're eligible. Even if you are married!
So, what if your mom is not living with your dad? What if she's living with her trophy husband? Or her latest boyfriend? Good News! We never have to look at his income to see if you're eligible for Cash or Medical, but if you guys all eat the same food together then guess what, yep, his income is counted for the Food Stamp program.
This is just one teensy, tiny area of the laws I have to deal with. I haven't even to touched on what happens if you, Miss 18 year old, are not only living with your parents, but they are nice enough to allow your loser boyfriend to move in with them.
YIKES - how soon til I can retire?
It would be nice if I worked in a big city, with lots of workers where I could specialize in just one area like SNAP (food stamps), or TANF (the "welfare" program as most people think of welfare) or even just the Medicaid program. (Sigh)
But, alas,I don't, I work in a smaller community so I get to deal with all programs.
And of course each program has it's own rules and regulations, none of which have much in common with the rules and regulations of the other programs.
For example you are an average 18 year old "adult". You can vote, buy lottery tickets, be charged in criminal court as an adult and enjoy many of the other benefits of being " all grown up". But, if you're living with mommy and daddy we still need to consider their income to see if you qualify for Medicaid. (Unless you're married or otherwise emancipated.) However, if you're 18 and have a baby we don't have to look at their income if you apply for the cash through TANF whether you're married or not.
Once you turn 21 we no longer have to look at counting your parents income for Medicaid for you, but unless you're disabled or pregnant or a parent of a minor child yourself you're not eligible for Medicaid anyway. So big deal.
You could apply for SNAP (I really don't like that name) or Food Stamps as I will call it, but if you're under 22 and living with your parents we again have to look at your parents income to see if you're eligible. Even if you are married!
So, what if your mom is not living with your dad? What if she's living with her trophy husband? Or her latest boyfriend? Good News! We never have to look at his income to see if you're eligible for Cash or Medical, but if you guys all eat the same food together then guess what, yep, his income is counted for the Food Stamp program.
This is just one teensy, tiny area of the laws I have to deal with. I haven't even to touched on what happens if you, Miss 18 year old, are not only living with your parents, but they are nice enough to allow your loser boyfriend to move in with them.
YIKES - how soon til I can retire?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
So you think we don't need Health Care reform...
Sharon is 56 years old. Her husband got laid off from his job and lost the insurance that was available through his work. He didn't choose the COBRA option, rather he decided to look for greener pastures on many levels and presented Sharon with divorce papers. He left her the house, with the remaining years of mortgage payments, but not much else for the all years she spent as a homemaker caring for him and the kids.
So here she is, 56 years old, no job skills, no work history and living in a town of less than 7,000. Not much opportunity, and NO INCOME!!! She starts working through the program that helps seniors find jobs and lands a 3/4 time job for $10.00 per hour! Pretty good for this area of the state. She even has the option to buy into the company insurance program. Sounds pretty good huh? Hmmm. Let's see. 30 hours per week x $10.00 = $300.00 per week. Paid bi-weekly that comes to about $1,296.00 per month. But that's gross income and who ever sees gross income? Minus taxes, medicare, FICA let's say she's taking home $1000.00 per month.
The health insurance through her employer costs $250.00. Not bad.
Her mortgage payment is $500.00 per month. Utilities run $200.00 per month (much more in winter cause it gets really cold here). Her car is paid for thank goodness, but there's still gas, upkeep and insurance. Let's say that's $75.00 per month. And then there's things like FOOD. Another $200 per month. Wait, even at $200 per month that's, um,
250 plus 500 plus 200 plus 75 plus 200 that's, whoa, $1,225.00! That's not going to work. Let's see, if she gives up her house she'd still have to rent someplace which would be at least the same as her mortgage payment. She already cut out the cable and internet and phone. (She just pays for minutes on a cell phone.) She could use the car less, but a town of 7,000 doesn't have a regular bus route and right now it's about 10 degrees outside. Fluffy, you're going to have to go. Look's like she can't afford to take "advantage" of the insurance offered through her employer. Too bad, cause it would be nice to be able to not skip her antidepressent meds, but maybe if she cuts down to once every other day she won't slip back into the mind numbing deadness of depression.
So here she is, 56 years old, no job skills, no work history and living in a town of less than 7,000. Not much opportunity, and NO INCOME!!! She starts working through the program that helps seniors find jobs and lands a 3/4 time job for $10.00 per hour! Pretty good for this area of the state. She even has the option to buy into the company insurance program. Sounds pretty good huh? Hmmm. Let's see. 30 hours per week x $10.00 = $300.00 per week. Paid bi-weekly that comes to about $1,296.00 per month. But that's gross income and who ever sees gross income? Minus taxes, medicare, FICA let's say she's taking home $1000.00 per month.
The health insurance through her employer costs $250.00. Not bad.
Her mortgage payment is $500.00 per month. Utilities run $200.00 per month (much more in winter cause it gets really cold here). Her car is paid for thank goodness, but there's still gas, upkeep and insurance. Let's say that's $75.00 per month. And then there's things like FOOD. Another $200 per month. Wait, even at $200 per month that's, um,
250 plus 500 plus 200 plus 75 plus 200 that's, whoa, $1,225.00! That's not going to work. Let's see, if she gives up her house she'd still have to rent someplace which would be at least the same as her mortgage payment. She already cut out the cable and internet and phone. (She just pays for minutes on a cell phone.) She could use the car less, but a town of 7,000 doesn't have a regular bus route and right now it's about 10 degrees outside. Fluffy, you're going to have to go. Look's like she can't afford to take "advantage" of the insurance offered through her employer. Too bad, cause it would be nice to be able to not skip her antidepressent meds, but maybe if she cuts down to once every other day she won't slip back into the mind numbing deadness of depression.
Monday, January 18, 2010
A voice in the wilderness
I can't seem to find out anything personal on this blog, so I guess it's safe to continue.
Poverty doesn't just happen in the urban areas or the mountains of Appalachia. It's in the areas that one female politician said is the "real America."
Without giving too much away, let's just say that my "welfare" work takes place in a county of a little over 20,000 people and a town of about 7,000. We are the biggest town in our county. The next biggest town is about 1,500. We have several smaller towns ranging from a population of 4 all the way up to 500.
We have 2 towns over 15,000 people each about 30 miles away in different counties, a city of over 50,000 about 45 miles away (different county) and a metropolis of over 1 million about 80 miles away (also a different county).
I mention these boring stats because the state government in the metropolis often makes laws regarding public assistance programs that look great and may even make sense to white, middleclass urbanites, but have a determental effect in the more rural areas.
Case in point: Emma is on the Medicaid program (the government paid health "insurance" for people in poverty) (yes, we do have the government involved in health care already). She is 80 years old and lives by herself. She can't drive so she relies on an Aging program that provides volunteer drivers to take people to and from medical appointments. Medicaid will reimburse the Aging program so many cents per mile for this service, which they in turn pass on to their volunteers. Some legislator at the state or maybe the feds, I don't really know or care which, has decided that it's a "cost savings" to only pay for "loaded" miles. All the other policy makers agree. After all, in the mega city it's only a couple blocks or miles from the volunteer's starting point to the "patient's "house so what's the big deal if they don't get reimbursed for those few miles.
Emma meanwhile lives on the farmstead 20 miles from the town the nearest volunteer driver lives in. Oh sure, there is another town closer to Emma, but with a population of 90 there's hasn't been anyone who is jumping at the chance to drive sick people to their appointments. So Fred, who has been a volunteer driver for years must drive 20 miles to pick Emma up. From there they go 45 mile (farther away from Fred's starting point) to the nearest specialist. The specialist decides Emma needs to be admitted to the hospital next to his clinic for further tests. Fred now has to travel 65 miles back to his home. So for all Fred's time and gas he will get reimbursed for the 45 miles that Emma was in the car with him, but not for the 20 miles to pick her up or the 65 miles back from the hospital. Fred decides that it's not worth the wear and tear on his car, the cleaning up after Emma had an accident or the near miss with the deer. Another rural volunteer driver is lost to the wisdom of the urban lawmaker.
Poverty doesn't just happen in the urban areas or the mountains of Appalachia. It's in the areas that one female politician said is the "real America."
Without giving too much away, let's just say that my "welfare" work takes place in a county of a little over 20,000 people and a town of about 7,000. We are the biggest town in our county. The next biggest town is about 1,500. We have several smaller towns ranging from a population of 4 all the way up to 500.
We have 2 towns over 15,000 people each about 30 miles away in different counties, a city of over 50,000 about 45 miles away (different county) and a metropolis of over 1 million about 80 miles away (also a different county).
I mention these boring stats because the state government in the metropolis often makes laws regarding public assistance programs that look great and may even make sense to white, middleclass urbanites, but have a determental effect in the more rural areas.
Case in point: Emma is on the Medicaid program (the government paid health "insurance" for people in poverty) (yes, we do have the government involved in health care already). She is 80 years old and lives by herself. She can't drive so she relies on an Aging program that provides volunteer drivers to take people to and from medical appointments. Medicaid will reimburse the Aging program so many cents per mile for this service, which they in turn pass on to their volunteers. Some legislator at the state or maybe the feds, I don't really know or care which, has decided that it's a "cost savings" to only pay for "loaded" miles. All the other policy makers agree. After all, in the mega city it's only a couple blocks or miles from the volunteer's starting point to the "patient's "house so what's the big deal if they don't get reimbursed for those few miles.
Emma meanwhile lives on the farmstead 20 miles from the town the nearest volunteer driver lives in. Oh sure, there is another town closer to Emma, but with a population of 90 there's hasn't been anyone who is jumping at the chance to drive sick people to their appointments. So Fred, who has been a volunteer driver for years must drive 20 miles to pick Emma up. From there they go 45 mile (farther away from Fred's starting point) to the nearest specialist. The specialist decides Emma needs to be admitted to the hospital next to his clinic for further tests. Fred now has to travel 65 miles back to his home. So for all Fred's time and gas he will get reimbursed for the 45 miles that Emma was in the car with him, but not for the 20 miles to pick her up or the 65 miles back from the hospital. Fred decides that it's not worth the wear and tear on his car, the cleaning up after Emma had an accident or the near miss with the deer. Another rural volunteer driver is lost to the wisdom of the urban lawmaker.
A Voice from the trenches of the war on poverty
Okay, I admit I was inspired to do this after I watched Julie/Julia. Well, not write a blog exactly or learn French cooking, but to write down things that need to be heard. This seems like an easier way than writing the book I've been thinking about for years.
I've wanted to share what it is like being on the front lines of the war on poverty. For many years I have worked in a "welfare" office. I determine whether people can get public cash assistance (welfare), medicaid(not Medicare - that's through the Social Security office and has it's own story to tell) and food stamps (or SNAP) as it is cutely called now. I've seen the sad stories of people in need, I've seen people who work the system, I've see the druggies and the mentally ill, the elderly and the disabled. But I have also seen the way government programs don't seem to have a clue at times who they are trying to help or the reality of life in the poor lane. I'm hoping with this blog to get out some of the pent up frustration of working with a system that is bogged down in rules, restrictions and budgets that often work against the people they are trying to help.
This will be tricky because I don't want to breach any data privacy laws, so after I write this first post I will need to check if I have hidden my true identity behind something more substantial that a mask and a cape. So,
I will make this first (hopefully) post short. Here goes nothing!
I've wanted to share what it is like being on the front lines of the war on poverty. For many years I have worked in a "welfare" office. I determine whether people can get public cash assistance (welfare), medicaid(not Medicare - that's through the Social Security office and has it's own story to tell) and food stamps (or SNAP) as it is cutely called now. I've seen the sad stories of people in need, I've seen people who work the system, I've see the druggies and the mentally ill, the elderly and the disabled. But I have also seen the way government programs don't seem to have a clue at times who they are trying to help or the reality of life in the poor lane. I'm hoping with this blog to get out some of the pent up frustration of working with a system that is bogged down in rules, restrictions and budgets that often work against the people they are trying to help.
This will be tricky because I don't want to breach any data privacy laws, so after I write this first post I will need to check if I have hidden my true identity behind something more substantial that a mask and a cape. So,
I will make this first (hopefully) post short. Here goes nothing!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)