• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Welfare Is Cool at 'Food Stamp Friday' Party

    Apparently government assistance is the hip new thing. As The Daily Caller reports, “A nightclub in Montgomery, Ala. is raising eyebrows by hosting a ‘Food Stamp Friday’ party on April 6 that seems to glamorize life on the federal government’s food assistance program.”

    According to the article, patrons who present their food stamp cards at the door will pay a $5 cover charge to get into the Rose Supper Club in North Montgomery. And, as the invitation—which “mimics an Electronic Benefit Transfer card”—advertises “there will be ‘free shots at the door.’”

    Glamorizing government dependence disrespects those who fund welfare programs: U.S. taxpayers. It also disrespects recipients by completely distorting what the goal of any welfare program should be: to help individuals achieve independence from government assistance.

    Since 2008, funding for food stamps has doubled from just under $40 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2008 to nearly $83 billion in President Obama’s latest FY 2013 budget. The number of Americans participating in the program has also increased dramatically over the last several years and today stands at approximately 46 million Americans, or about 15 percent of the population. While participation rates have gone up more rapidly during the recession, the food stamp program was already one of the fastest-growing welfare programs prior to the economic downturn.

    The food stamp program is just one of about 10 different federal food assistance programs and one of approximately 70 federal means-tested welfare programs funded by taxpayers—at a cost of nearly $1 trillion a year.

    However, while taxpayers have been funding growing welfare costs for nearly five decades, these programs have done little to promote personal responsibility. The food stamp program, along with every other government welfare program—aside from the one reformed in 1996, which restructured the largest cash assistance welfare program—has no sound work requirement for its participants. What made the 1996 welfare reform successful was its rigorous work requirement, which resulted in millions leaving welfare for jobs. (Unfortunately, the reforms have been severely weakened in recent years.) Similar requirements should be included for the food stamp program, as well as other government assistance programs.

    Receiving government assistance should not be the “in” thing to do. Rather, welfare should truly assist those in need by promoting work and self-reliance.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    22 Responses to Welfare Is Cool at 'Food Stamp Friday' Party

    1. SwagMastah says:

      so who is bringing the red solo cups?

    2. Dave Raymer says:

      On the upside, you have to admire the entrepreneurial spirit of the owners of the club.

    3. Stirling says:

      Welfare unfortunately is Liberal Utopia. Thus our "Food Stamp President" is just giving his base what they want.. Until we can "cut the cord" or tighten the requirements (as some states are doing) to limit the abuse and dependency those on it will continue to suck the system dry.

      A welfare check is nothing more then dependency and financial slavery to the government. A paycheck (for working) is accoutability and education to realize the wasteful spending of government, since you see just how much is taken from your paycheck. Liberals claim welfare is humane, but how is dependency humane? Dependency by definition is a form of slavery, which liberal claim to be against.

    4. Bobbie says:

      The title is hilarious! I'm still laughing hysterically!

      It is a shame when the disrespects of government welfare manipulates the public through tax paid advertising that people MAY qualify for those tax paying beggar benefits and unfortunate that people lower themselves to fall for it!

      'Just call this government toll free number and answer by submitting all personal information we'll just keep in our safe guard database forever when we deny you based on your skin color and not your loss of livelihoods we the government are in full control of taxing you out of…'

      The broad and open qualifications for government welfare only exemplifies little worth of the people government pretends to service in favor with complacency to the tremendous fraud involved.

      here's the government leadership taking care of us: "eating raw eggs in cookie dough could make you ill." who didn't find that out on their own that lasts for all of 10 minutes? Get these motherly insults out of our lives!

      For people to be unwilling to control matters within ones own ability allowing oneself to become dependent on government nurturing, builds "low self esteem." The President said so in his own words but forgot to add "government dependency also narrows the average minds ability to limiting the minds ability below the average."

      Government dependency and their crimes of violating the peoples' constitution exhibits the intent to create the dummied down Americans government leadership certainly isn't going to inspire open intellect, especially when they have the societal mindset where they want it!

      Strong leadership would make sure welfare isn't needed by restricting the costs of leadership through tax reduction so money earned can be spent by those that worked for it!

    5. Guy Manningham says:

      It used to be where people had too much pride to ever accept government assistance, unless it was dire straights and they couldn't feed their family. Even then, it was for a short period until they got on their feet. Now it's a lifestyle. People are proud of their ability to scam the system and get their freebies. The safety net has become training wheels, which never quite come off.

    6. political_proxy says:

      Yes, get food stampts to free up cash to go get drunk.

      Mandatory drug tests & job search documentation for all gov benefits (yes, all) should be the norm not some idealistic fantasy.

    7. Pete Houston says:

      Maybe adding some inconvenience into the whole things would also reduce the roles. Like you have to reapply every so many weeks as a reminder that this is a temporary program and not a benefit for life. I realize that some portion of our population has no shame in taking handouts and the realization that they are just plain worthless, but I don't see any reason to make it easy on them. The portion of that populace that just needs help from time to time will work to get off the roll and take back control of their life. I have never minded helping people that are working to help themselves. I just don't want them helping themselves to the government programs unless they have a real need.

    8. Brad S. says:

      One could only dream that this was really a "sting" operation to check eligibility of the individual that is so crass as to actually go to this event. I doubt it, but that would be justice. In Michigan, they are finally getting around to passing a law to reform the food stamp (Bridge card) program to be more asset based as opposed to being only income based. In the past 2 years, 2 BIG Lotto winners kept receiving food stamp assistance after winning large amounts of money. Their excuse on why they kept using their Bridge cards – "Well, I thought they would take it away, but they didn't, so I kept using it." Great logic. And they legally, didn't have to stop using it. Even though they had more than $800,000 each in assets, they technically had little or no income. I think they should take it a step futher and make Lotto winners winning more than a certain amount pay back all of their public assistance money before taking their winnings. If they were able to purchase Lotto tickets, that money came from somewhere (yes – us the taxpayer).

    9. David W. says:

      After much negative publicity on the local news channels, this promotion has been suspended.
      This was a promotion dreamed up by a local dj. The director of the foodstamp program got involved, and Alabama law prohibits the free shots at a night club.

    10. Is anyone really surprised at this? You all knew this was happening, is anyone outraged enough to
      berate and demand the local, state and federal governments STOP THIS CRAP NOW!!
      I don't see anything in the news about protests, rallys or marches.
      I guess not.

    11. Wes Cornell says:

      I think the blame needs to be put on "Community Organizers".

    12. O2BMe says:

      when people used to be in dire straits they were too proud to look to the government. they were aided by their family, neighbors and church. they could turn to them and not lose their pride because they know they would pay it back when they got back on their feet. socialism doesn't work because as more and more people turn to the government for their support, the taxpayers who support them begin to say why am I working so hard just to give my money to support those that won't work. Let the government support me too. Of course without the workers there are no taxes, without taxes the whole system fails.

    13. SwampBubba says:

      Sounds just like Alabama.

    14. Working for a living says:

      This is sickening. I have worked since the age of 14 and this work ethic was instilled in my kids. To believe YOU deserve a hand out to buy junk food, pop, energy drinks is just beyond me. If we as Americans don't stop this cycle we are all going to be doomed. Of course I would grow a garden and be able to survive. The welfare/food stamp card holders can starve for all I care.

    15. PKA says:

      I used to work for the local county government. Food Stamps, Medicaid, welfare on general- all of it is a good thing as long as it is used for its intended purposes, which is a safety net to get one back on their feet. However, despite the reforms of 1996, the system is still abused by many. I did not work in the actual areas where caseworkers interviewed clients but I saw and heard of many clients who drove up in nice cars, women carried designer handbags, sculpted nails, etc. I'd say that about half of the welfare recipients really need the help, the other are users, many with child after child and to that, I say that if you can't feed them, don't breed them. It's sickening.

    16. Dave says:

      Move the funding to the states and localities. The closer the funding is to the people the less junk they get away with. The states can then require appropriate give backs based on people's capabilities. Unemployed capable people must give back with appropriate work programs such as picking up the littering trash on the roads and streets in the locality. Our church helps the needy but only if they give back. Only ones who do not have to give back are the handicapped and the very elderly and even they give back when they can. Remember the signs in Yosemite "Do not feed the animals. They become dependant on being fed and lose their ability to fend for themselves"

    17. Tom Little says:

      If there is a " Golden Goose" we are killing it's spirit. There is no free lunch, but we have politicians who guarantee one. When the load exceeds the ability of those who carry it, the system will collapse. When there is no system left, what will we be able to believe in other than ourselves? Should we expedite the process…………….

    18. Tim Essenburg says:

      You may argue that "the goal of any welfare program should be … to help individuals achieve independence from government assistance," but "welfare" was never set up to do this.

      If it was, then it would have taken a long-term approach to moving a family/household from "dependence" to "independence." In the short run, lasting, quite possibly, 50 years, the goal would be to make sure any household had the resources for a housing, health care, educational system, and physical and psychological safety at the levels which the median income household has. The goal would be to generate sufficient human capital in the upcoming generation such that they would be able to be self-determined in a market system. Federal and State governments never had this in mind and still do not have this in mind.

      If fact, the current tax system allows many corporations and high income households to "stay on the dole." This too must change. I propose that corporate income tax be cut to zero and all profits (even when retained by the firms) be imputed to the shareholders according to the relative amounts of ownership that they have. It is, after all, the owners' income. The tax rate which should apply to this income would be the current Federal and State income tax rates. Capital gains tax rates would remain as is.

      We must wean off welfare (Social Security and Medicare) those households whose annual, adjusted gross income surpasses $40,000 after the purchase of private healthcare insurance. I get tired of our elected senators and representatives who run on a platform of cutting government expenditures, but refuse to touch the biggest entitlement programs of all.

      Finally, we must cut our military expenditures to the per capita level of 130% of the average spent by all high-income countries. That gives us a 30% edge.

      Implementing these three proposals: 1)impute corporate net income to shareholders, 2) means-test Social Security and Medicare, and 3) reduce military expenditures would go a long way to reducing all the partying which so many Americans do at the expense of balancing our budgets, reduce dependence on government welfare substantially, and place our nation on more solid financial footing.

    19. William Charowhas says:

      ALL, i.e., all welfare programs at the Fed level should be abolished. To begin with they are unconstitutional. The "general welfare" clause is not the individual welfare clause. It is outrageous that the taxpayers have put up with it so long.

    20. Jutta says:

      It might help to point out that MOST food stamp recipients are children, people with long term disabilities, and the working poor. Among the latter, count several hundred thousand members of the armed services who qualify because of low pay.

    21. stevenp98 says:

      I'm on food stamps,cause i lost my job,due to the dangers of the repressive teamster union and the government! GOD' WILLING I HOPE,PEOPLE IN CAPITOL HILL WILL GET IT TOGETHER SOON………

    22. Harry says:

      With Obama re-elected, Food stamp weekend is on the horizon.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.