Marcus Henry Marcus Henry

Is Welfare American?

In short yes. And no.

There was welfare at the founding of this great Nation. The founding fathers struggled with this idea since welfare is at odds with both a free market and a limited Government. However, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are fundamental rights upon which the nation was founded.

President Jefferson wrote that strict adherence to the law during times when that very adherence would imperil the nation would be tantamount to “sacrificing the ends to the means.” In other words, the Government relies upon laws to secure itself so that it may secure its people. If those laws would imperil the people then the laws must be foregone, not the people.

This creates a tension between the right to possess property and the right to acquire property. Your right to necessity and self-preservation supersedes my right to property. However, this supersession ends with necessity and self-preservation and does not extend to luxury.

There were indeed welfare houses in those early years. They provided the bare necessities and, in some circumstances, required those who received aid to work the land and facilities. There were even systems in place where the Government would pay private entities to care for the needy. Again, this was mere care, not to the point of luxury. The welfare system of the 18th century was installed to facilitate independence and work ethic.

Our welfare system today has far outpaced the welfare envisioned (and morally required) by our forefathers. Today, the impoverished are entitled to luxury. Those on welfare have entertainment, designer clothing, cars, and enough food to feed 5 times as many people as are present (I have been on welfare, I know what the struggle thereof entails). This is a system of dependence, not a system of independence.

Welfare is so good these days that there are people who refuse to work more than a few hours a week because if they did so, they would lose some of their welfare dollars. This hurts the person, hurts the welfare rolls, hurts the economy, and hurts the taxpayers. It is a loss for all.

There are, of course, situations where the recipient is unable to provide for himself. In such cases, I believe some luxury is par for the course since this citizen has no way to acquire such a thing without aid. However, this is not a common circumstance, and we should be legislating for the general welfare of the citizenry (as stated in the Constitution) rather than legislating for the specific welfare of specific, amorphous classes of citizen.

Further, the Federal Government has no business dealing with welfare. That is a matter left to the States and to the People as implied by the 9th and 10th Amendments of the US Constitution. There is no legitimate argument for a set of unelected bureaucrats in Washington DC setting rules for how Texas manages her impoverished. The climates are different, the resources are different, the economies are different, and the cultures are different.

Welfare is, indeed, American; however, the system we have today is bloated and detached from reality. The system today places too much power into the hands of people who live outside the community and breeds a brand of dependence that consumes entire bloodlines rather than uplifting the lowest of us all in their time of need that they may strengthen themselves and rise to the new challenges tomorrow brings. We are instituting political slavery through welfare. Welfare is deeply American, but the style we wear in our time is an abomination.

Read More