The 1960s were a tumultuous time in American history. As a nation, we were in the thick of the Vietnam War which was causing our image abroad to be tarnished and our economy at home to wither. The Women's Rights movement was picking up steam and the Civil Rights Movement was shaking mountains. Capitalizing on civil unrest, Lydon B Johnson decided to institute wide-sweeping social programs in an effort to help blacks. In his first State of the Union address of 1964, LBJ launched the War on Poverty to "not only relieve the symptom of poverty, but to cure it and, above all, to prevent it."
The War on Poverty quickly merged with LBJ's "Great Society" and Congress was off to the races, passing spending bills in tandem with the President. Through collaboration, LBJ and Congress created 40 new programs ranging from loan assistance to food assistance. Most of these programs were birthed in the Economic Opportunity Act but four other laws were passed for the most major provisions to the War on Poverty. These separate laws created the Job Corps, Food Stamps, Medicare, and Medicaid.
The following graph shows government spending on poverty/ welfare programs in comparison to national poverty rates. A naive individual would assume that as government spending increases, poverty would decrease but the reality is different than this fiction.
The real results show that increased spending stopped impacting poverty rates in 1970, just 6 years after the War on Poverty began. Since then spending has only increased while poverty has remained relatively constant between 10-15%. Once again, when it comes to government, we see that theory and practice are the same in theory but not in practice.
However, even the claim that government spending was effective for 6 years can be called into question because poverty was already declining prior to 1964 (as expressed in the graph). With Medicare and Medicaid costing 25% percent of America's yearly spending, the question must be asked: Is there any merit to these programs? Do they really help every person they impact?
After analyzing the data, I would argue that these programs do not help people but rather make them dependant on the government to suit their needs. I do not believe these programs should be abolished but I do believe their budget should be decreased and the qualifications to receive aid should be tightened. Perhaps a timeline should be placed on assistance and once that period of time is reached you can no longer receive aid.
To do more reading on LBJ, the War on Poverty, and its impact today please see the links below:
https://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/health/fs149_medicare.pdf
https://www.statista.com/topics/1091/medicaid/
https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go
No comments:
Post a Comment