Rep. Jim Jordan and the Republican Study Committee want children to go hungry and they still hate women

Represenative Jim Jordan (OH-4), a cheap labor conservative and chair of the stealth Republican Study Committee, introduced “H.R. 1167, the Welfare Reform Act of 2011” to do to food stamp recipients what the GOP did to people on welfare back in the 1990’s – kick them to the curb if they don’t go to work. Too bad the program already has such a requirement. I can only think that Jordan and the rest of his Star Chamber want to have children go hungry and make family poverty worse.

Continue reading “Rep. Jim Jordan and the Republican Study Committee want children to go hungry and they still hate women”

What is the REAL nanny state?

The preamble of the US Constitution says: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” That means the government should act in the best interests of the people and in a way that betters our lives such as protecting our health, liberty, and property. Some conservatives like Senator Rand Paul complain about a “nanny state” restricting our freedom to eat as much as we want when we want, waste energy, and to be homophobic no matter that doing all that might encroach on other’s rights.

Recently Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said:

Sen. Rand Paul, in a tussle with an Energy Department official Thursday, complained about what he described as burdensome, “busybody” regulations that were forcing him to buy a bad bowl.

“Frankly, my toilets don’t work in my house. And I blame you and people like you who want to tell me what I can install in my house, what I can do. You restrict my choices,” Paul said.

The issue on the table was a 2007 law requiring a phase-in of energy efficient bulbs. Paul and others are trying to repeal portions of the law, arguing that it restricts the American consumer.

At a Thursday hearing on the issue, Paul — a freshman Republican who shares a libertarian streak with his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) — aimed his complaints at Kathleen Hogan, a deputy assistant at the Energy Department.

He began his remarks by asking Hogan if she was pro-choice. She replied that she was “pro-choice of bulbs.”

“The point is that most members of your administration probably would be frank and would be up front to characterize themselves as being pro-choice for abortion,” Paul said.

Toilets join light bulbs on Sen. Rand Paul’s list of necessities burdened by ‘busybody’ rules0

Setting aside the ridiculous point of comparing abortion to buying light bulbs, he isn’t the only cheap labor conservative to complain about government regulations that force you to change the behavior you are use to.

I understand Paul’s point about low flow toilets. Early models were clunky, but the current models are cutting edge and leave the old complaints behind.

I support the use of CFL or LED light bulbs over the old inefficient incandescent bulbs that haven’t really changed in over 100 years. I have several CFL bulbs and one of them I bought in 2003 and it is still working. I have not had to change a light bulb for more than 3 years now and I have seen a slight reduction in my electric bill. I plan on moving to the even better LED bulbs once the costs moderate a bit more.

What moron would want to spend money on old bulbs and give up savings on their electric bill? Sen Rand Paul I guess and other Luddites like him. Besides I would rather spend extra now for new technology and make that transition than be forced to do it later when we have to save energy either because oil is running out or some other nasty reason. I’m sure there will be someone who demands the right to pay $10 a gallon to gas up their old SUV that gets 5 miles to the gallon.

To me that is being stupid.

There is also complaints about the insurance mandate and other parts of the new health care reform law, belly aching about the First Lady’s efforts to curb child obesity, and the First Family speaking out against bullying.

They might have a point about the insurance mandate of the health care law over reaching by taxing people who don’t buy health insurance, but who would want to let insurance companies decide if life-saving procedures were cost-effective? Why do some people want to put profit over people? How is that moral?

At least if the government decided what was covered, those decisions wouldn’t be based on the bottom line. Just talk to people who spend hundred of thousands of dollars so they can have a few more weeks with their loved one. Compassionate people can’t and won’t put a price tag or profit over their loved one.

I don’t worry about rules and regulations meant to benefit the most people but I do worry, and find it ironic, that people like Senator Rand Paul thinks its okay to interfere in a woman’s health decisions while whining about the government doing that to us.

He would rather force women to have unwanted children, have the IRS police if tax dollars were used for abortions, yet doesn’t want to spend money to help take care of those children.

It seems when Democrats “overreach” they at least help the most people but when the GOP overreach they want to hurt the most people.

What is really a “nanny state”? One that tries to better the human condition or one that wants to be a selfish ass.

Ohio State Senator Tim Schaffer has no idea how public assistance system works

photo of Ohio State Senator Tim Schaffer (R-31)
Ohio State Senator Tim Schaffer (R-31)

I knew when low voter turn out helped sweep the GOP into office in Ohio this past November that we would then see some stupid ideas being introduced. For example, unemployment is 9% and instead of that being a priority the Ohio GOP instead have introduced six anti-abortion bills. The stupidity also led Ohio State Senator Tim Schaffer (R-31) to introduce a bill requiring a urine test as a requirement for state public assistance.

The Ohio Senate is considering the bill that would require anyone applying for heating, housing, medical or food assistance to submit a urine sample.

People who fail or refuse the test would not qualify for aid.

State Sen. Tim Schaffer says the bill will weed people out who abuse the system.

“What the legislation does is, it makes sure that when Ohio taxpayers are asked to provide human services to a family, that the money is being used to buy things for the family,” Schaffer said.

State Assistance May Require Drug Tests

I get a sad kick out of morons like Schaffer who don’t understand how public assistance works. They operate on false assumptions. Schaffer is wrong in his intent that “the money is used to buy things for the family…”

State assistance is rarely actual cash. Heating assistance is a voucher, food stamps are now debit cards, medical payments are made direct payments to the provider from the state. 

A friend pointed out too that a urine sample will usually not detect alcohol. NOR will it detect cocaine if they last used a week ago or more.

People on public assistance have to jump through so many hoops as it is. The false assumption of wide spread fraud personalized in the old Reagan era “welfare queen” smear just doesn’t exist since the welfare reform work in the mid 1990’s.

Tim Schaffer and those who have no current idea how the public assistance system works, need to take a test before they can introduce new laws about it.

Number on food stamps up nearly 6 million since 2009

One side effect of the recession is that more poor and working poor need help buying food for their families. What is troubling is that many people use that assistance to buy unhealthy crappy processed food instead of healthier raw food.

The actual paper stamps were phased out more than decade ago and replaced with a debit-card system, and the name of the 46-year-old program was changed 18 months ago to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). But most people still call them food stamps. And as of February, the latest data available, a record 39.7 million Americans were using them to put meals on the table, 13% of the population. Just a year ago, 33.8 million people were using food stamps.

Nearly 40 Million Now on Food Stamps

The one thing to note is this:

But most people on food stamps are no more food-savvy than the rest of the population. They often live where decent grocery stores with reasonably priced produce require transportation they don’t have. And because most do work in low-wage jobs – sometimes multiple jobs – they, like more affluent Americans – go for the processed food that cuts down on preparation. It’s less nutritious overall than the stuff that takes more time to cook. But because recipients have a tight food budget, they are more likely to choose high-fat, calorie-packed processed foods that are typically cheaper than healthier choices. Thus, as one study at Ohio State University has shown, using food stamps may contribute to the spread of an unhealthy obesity.

In addition to the actual money, the program should stress and help in using the money to purchase healthier food stock.