Spending on general assistance, emergency financial help provided by towns, has increased significantly in recent years. This could mean the system is being abused, or it could mean that, in the face of the worst recession in generations, more people needed help. It would make sense to find out which is true. Maybe both are.
That’s what the majority of lawmakers voted to do. As part of a supplemental budget approved last week, they created a work group to study general assistance in Maine and report back recommendations later this year.
Lawmakers also reached a deal to cap general assistance at 270 days, or longer with an exemption, and reduced the reimbursement to service center communities from 90 percent to 85 percent.
That wasn’t enough for Gov. Paul LePage. In an unusual move, he used the line-item veto this weekend to reject the GA changes. They didn’t go far enough, he said.
“General assistance is a welfare program that, like most others, has gotten out of control,” the governor said in his veto letter. “The amounts vetoed will put this issue back on the table and the Legislature must summon the political courage to fix the program structurally. Hiding from our problems will not make them go away.”
The Legislature isn’t hiding from this problem, however, it just chose a different path than the governor.
GA is the most local and basic of welfare spending. People go to their town office and ask for help. By state law, the town cannot say no. That hasn’t stopped some for putting conditions on the help. Portland, for example, checks unemployment and bank information before declaring someone eligible for general assistance. Those seeking food assistance are provided vouchers, which must be returned with vendor receipts before payment is made. In Bangor and Portland, able-bodied applicants must participate in workfare programs.
Still, the programs have grown. In Portland, GA spending has gone from $4.1 million in 2008 to $6.8 million in 2011. It is reasonable to find out why.
That’s why the committee formed by the Legislature should be allowed to do its work. Then the governor and lawmakers can make an informed decision about how best to reform general assistance.
Gov. LePage has made it abundantly clear that he wants Maine’s welfare spending dramatically reduced. This is a reasonable goal, but using a blunt instrument — the line-item veto — to get there is not especially productive.
Here’s how Chris Hall — a business advocate, not a social service worker — put the situation in his weekly email to members of the Portland Regional Chamber of Commerce: “From a Portland perspective the bipartisan supplemental budget’s reduction of municipal general assistance forced structural change on the city’s programs, but did so in ways that gave officials time and opportunity to absorb cuts without the threat of increasing property taxes. The governor’s veto undoes that work and leaves the city’s taxpayers facing substantial tax increases, along with the prospect of increased homelessness in our region.”
Unless simply passing the tax buck down the line and increasing homeless are acceptable to lawmakers, the Legislature should overturn this veto and begin the needed work of finding better ways to improve general assistance.
>>>>
My Dad, has been a selectman, in a small coastal town for years. He told me that this is, the 1st year that the town ran out of money.
This is a town where everyone knows one another, so I believe there is little abusing the system. Times are hard, people put their hearts and pride in their hands.
Sometimes that’s true. There is no doubt the true need for services and benefits has grown, due to the recession and job losses. It’s happening everywhere in Maine.
Other times, the amount being spent by the town/city to administer the GA programs is ridiculous. Check out what happened when Windham started handling their GA needs in-house, instead of having PROP administer the program.
Windham is now handing out the same benefits, and saving $425K per year in the process. $425,000 !!! That’s a lot of money that can now be used for other municipal needs, or they can use part of it to fund more GA benefits.
http://www.themainewire.com/2012/02/town-windham-moves-general-assistance-in-house-cut-costs/
When Windham brought the program in-house, they went from paying out $450K per year to PROP, to spending $25K per year in-house for the same services.
If this is any example of the waste in other municipal GA programs, there’s little doubt the money needs to be better managed. Think how much could be saved and redirected, if the same kind of savings could be realized by moving all these services in-house in Maine cities and towns.
But you know there is somebody out there complaining because “Town Government” took over the program.
No doubt. However, it’s likely they have a vested interest in keeping the lucrative contracts with PROP.
Most GA programs in Maine are handled in-house. Windham has saved money by hiring a GA administer known for being dismissive, rude and critical of citizens that ask for help. Which is fine, as long as the town is ok with 75 year old ladies sitting in the cold because they’d rather go without heat than be verbally abused by a town employee.
Windham may have hired “a GA administer known for being dismissive, rude and critical of citizens that ask for help” but the article states that “By state law, the town cannot say no.”
Do you have an example of “75 year old ladies sitting in the cold because they’d rather go without heat than be verbally abused by a town employee.”? Or is this just hyperbole?
First of all the article is wrong. Towns can and do regularly deny people GA. Secondly, it’s not hyberbole. If you know anyone in Windham that has applied for GA in the past year, ask them about their experience. Ask them if they felt as if they were treated like a human being.
Hopefully the lawmakers will stick to their guns and not let Lepage bully them.
Bullying is what he does best, and most.
It is not bullying for the executive officer to do what he perceives is his job. The governor’s job is not to rubber stamp whatever the legislature sends him.
Was Baldacci a bully when he vetoed bills passed by a majority Democratic legislature?
This bully nonsense is just liberal spin. Attack the person, not the message. It’s equivalent to the right calling everyone a socialist or communist.
It is not bullying to disagree with someone, even if you disagree strongly and say so in blunt terms. By using this constant “LePage is a bully” mantra, you are minimalizing the effects of true bullying, which are devastating to some individuals. I was bullied as a kid. It was much more than someone not agreeing with me, and it was not at all like someone saying I was behaving like a spoiled brat, or telling me to kiss their butt. It was people spreading deliberate lies about me, threatening to beat me up if they caught me alone somewhere, destroying my personal property, and on once occasion, actually punching me in the nose. Don’t insult me by trying to say LePage is a bully.
>>>>
He is acting like someone who has a firm belief set and stands by what he feels is right no matter what the consequences. I can understand why that would bother those of you who do not want change in Augusta.
It seems to me that the Democrats are acting like the children who don’t get their way. They call names, tell lies and refuse to offer constructive ideas. If I had a nickel for every Democrat who has written an editorial saying that, yes, spending needs to be cut, but not in this program or that program; or LePage wants to starve children and the elderly, I’d be well on my way to the 1%.
You say that I am attacking the person. No, I’m just pointing out that’s what LePage does — he attacks the person.
I was bullied as a kid, too, and I know what it is. I wasn’t just “punched in the nose once” as you describe, but I got attacked on the way to or from school almost every day for a couple of years, so you don’t have to explain bullying to me.
Of course LePage’s veto, by itself, is not bullying. But I’m not just talking about this one veto. His “Kiss my butt” and “Go to hell” and “I want to punch you” remarks, and his taking down and hiding (or maybe destroying) those murals in the dark of night, without discussion, are not just crudeness. They are the signs of a bully who always expects to get his own way on everything because he’s found that pushing people around works for him. Remember, verbal bullying is also bullying. Verbal abuse is a kind of real abuse.
Even when he’s “polite” by his standards he’s on the attack against anyone who opposes him. And yes, his line-item veto does hurt some of Maine’s most vulnerable people, and passes the costs on to local municipalities.
I know he had a rough-and-tumble childhood, but if he can’t grow up beyond his rudeness and crudeness he shouldn’t be governor.
I think you are painting a fanciful picture of LePage’s actions. When he told the NAACP in Maine to kiss his butt–the Maine NAACP was is no way intimidated and in no way felt threatened by that remark. LePage made an if…then statement: If they want to play the race card, then they can kiss my butt. And the meaning of that is he could care less.
LePage ordered the mural taken down, and it was done after business hours when there would not be an interruption of function in the building. It was not done “in the dark of night” in any sense, any more than the construction of the mural was done in the dark of night.
Bullying requires that a person feel intimidated by the verbal, or physical threat. President Obama was no way intimidated or threatened by LePage’s go to hell comment. LePage did not threaten to punch AJ. He merely said the guy made him feel like punching him. I don’t even remember if AJ even heard the comment himself.
I can understand you don’t care for his crude, public language. Personally, I don’t care about it. LePage speaks like I hear normal people speak on a daily basis.
You say his policies will hurt people. I say they won’t. Either way, his legal use of executive authority is not bullying. Amy Fried has a nice blog post on the line item veto…
So … where is the mural now?
You say, if I understand you correctly, that the person who gets bullied has a responsibility for feeling bullied or not, and even if the intention of the bully was to bully, it’s not really bullying unless the bullied person feels bullied.
Well, I disagree on that one. He sure quacks like a duck.
To your question–yes, in a sense. Bullying only works if someone who has greater power, or strength picks on someone who is relatively powerless or weak. If I was big and strong (instead of being shapely, beautiful, and just plain short) back in high school, that other girl never would have attempted to punch me. You can also have the group picking on the single person that sets up the power discrepancy.
But, if you are suggesting I am saying it is the bullied person’s fault for feeling bullied–that is not what I meant to say at all.
The mural, last I heard, was in storage pending litigation decisions. Now those decisions have been made, we will see where the mural goes. Did you ever see the real mural in person?
It is bullying when he resorts to name calling and rants when he doesn’t get what he wants
This is not really a case of bullying, it is more a case of standing firm. Besides the Legislative branch pased it by a veto proof margin, so it will be passed.
By law they can’t say no huh? Tell that to the City of Brewer who told me no when my husband lost his job. They told me I couldn’t make more than $700 a month to get help. A month!! At that time, $700 a month would have paid my day care with very little left over. That doesn’t even cover rent most places. Yes there are some who abuse it but the income limits need to be updated.
They can absolutely say no to an applicant….for some of the reasons that poormaniac mention.
I’m not sure where that comes from – I’ve done GA for over 6 years – there is no law that says a person will get GA. Everyone has a right to apply – not everyone is eligible – there are guidelines we all have to follow. Yes $700.00 a month is very low; but you have to draw the line some place. GA is supposed to be for VERY BASIC needs and the “last stop on the highway”. GA was never meant to be a lifestyle…
Perhaps if Portland residents had to pay more for the GA, they would hold city officials more accountable for how much is spent, and we wouldn’t need another study group to see what is wrong with the system.
Perhaps if other towns besides Portland, L/A and Bangor were willing to allow homeless shelters, places like Portland would be more willing to tighten up GA spending.
I believ all those towns have homeless shelters. I know Bangor has 3.
Why don’t we stop coddling the single moms who can’t stop having children??? There is no accountability in this state.How about we try “You made your bed ,now lie in it’???
How ’bout we not forget basic biology, as in “it takes two to make a baby.” Start holding some of the deadbeat men accountable.
yup. that is exactly what they(the state) should be doing. It should be a suprise to no one the number of baby daddies out there who’s baby momma’s have the newest and best cell phones. and all the best clothes to go out to the VFW at least one night a week. is it like that in every case? no, but there is enough of it in Maine to make a person pretty mad.
You know , that was my reaction to the picture printed with this story. Notice the najority of the people in the waiting area behind this young mother are texting. I hope that they finish before they drive away with state aid !
>>>>
This picture was released with a different story either earlier this year or late last year.
Just name the father and have a paternity test done. Pretty simple. Two people made the baby two people can pay for the baby.
The vast majority of birth certificates DO have both parents listed, even those children who are born to parents that are not married at the time of birth. This does absolutely nothing as far as getting an absentee parent (it’s not always the fathers!) to actually PAY for child support. There needs to be a better system in place with stiffer penalties for those who CHOOSE to not provide support for the children they made… like TIME IN JAIL.
one after another after another. happens all the time. there should definately be a limit as to how much we the taxpayers have to take care of.
So let children starve because their Mom is irresponsible?
All the moms have to do is feed them till they are old enough for pre-school, k to 12. After that the tax payer will insure that they are fed at least 10 meals a week at school, plus the EBT card that is supposed to be feeding them 21 meals a week.
And WIC will provide cereal, milk, juice and peanut butter for the breakfast and lunch.
The CAPs have them go through a DHHS “eligibility wizard” to make sure they get everything they are entitled to. Everyone at all levels answers the phone with “may I help you?” in order to respect them. They are on the boards and when they are going to meetings,they are done at their convenience and sometimes are given mileage. No wonder they’re entitled and are not ready for the real world (they think people are being mean when they’re not coddled like this, when it is just business). I grew up with nothing except one loving relative, a capacity for work and faith. In some ways I’m glad I was forced to make it on my own.
I am a single mom. I divorced because my husband abused me. I get no financial help from him, or from my family. They decided “I made my bed….” although I certainly didn’t plan to raise a child alone. I dreamed of that happily ever after relationship, and worked hard to try to succeed. My former husband decided that he couldn’t keep his privates in his own home. Then he abused me when I complained.
I am one of the lucky ones in that I have a decent job, and although it is a “professional” job, with health insurance benefits, it doesn’t pay in the 100 K bracket, to be sure. (I worked my way through college.) With the cost of housing, gas, clothes, food, doctor appointments etc., I have been behind on bills. I’m sleepless many nights worrying about how to work it all out.
I can’t imagine what it’s like for other single parents who are trying to make ends meet on crappy wages with no benefits.
Before you complain about women who “can’t stop having children”, perhaps you might consider that it takes 2 to make a child, one of whom has a penis, but who often does not have the nuts to be a decent father or husband.
Even with 2 wage earners, on Marden’s paychecks, it’s nearly impossible to keep afloat, since the cost of living has raced past the minimum wage rate.
The rate of increase is a consideration.
LePage is pushing this get people off welfare and into the work force too hard for it not to have a bigger agenda. What Paul are you making sure your corporate buddies can have people to hire at 58 cents an hour? Let’s put Paul on a limited income of say $18,600 a year and see how well he does making the budget stretch to pay all those monthly bills feed his family and pay for their college education. Spoiled rotten rich people have no clue what a trial life can be so let’s give him some first hand experience. No going into your past wealth accounts as you do this Paul. $18,500 a year and that’s it. No ifs ands or buts. You may report back to us by April 16, 2013 and let us know how fun that was.
Anger and envy won’t get you anything but a bad case of heartburn. You are wrong about the Governor’s intentions. He has also lived on far less than $18K per year.
The Governor may have lived on a lot less than 18k per year. He also did that when 10k would keep you comfortable. Those days are long gone. $4 per gal. gas. $3.90 per gal. #2 F/O, $2.50 loaf of bread, etc.
You voted for change and you got it. Congrats!
hamburger is almost 4.00 a pound, fish is prices are out of this world. Fresh veggie, except carrots are outrageous, canned fruit is over a dollar for a small can. Fresh fruit is more costly. When I was working, for under 10.00 a hour gas was under a 1.00 a gallon.
time have changed, but some don’t see that.
He hasd Peter Snowe supporting him a large part of his life. I would not call that being poor. No one supported me except me.
Naran You would have no clue whatsoever what it is like to have to put your pride aside to have to go into a town office and ask for help knowing full well they are going to reject you anyways. Knowing your children are hungry and trying to go to sleep is also something you would know nothing about. Your voice might be better lent to say some fancy social function rather then the concerns of people in need.
You have no idea what you’re talking about, with regard to me. You are making false assumptions, and you are incorrect. I am not a rich person by anyone’s standards.
Maybe you think Kennebunk has no poor residents, but you are very wrong. We have poverty here, too. Nobody is immune to the recession, the housing collapse, the job losses, and the increase to every single cost of living there is today. Utilities, taxes, heating oil, groceries, insurance, car repairs, house repairs, every service or item one buys has increased tremendously. I have spent the last decade (and more) doing unpaid political work, simply because I know so many people in need, and I feel so badly for them all – particularly our elderly, who have no options when it comes to getting another job, or increasing their income.
Making assumptions that I am wealthy simply because of the town I live in isn’t productive, nor is it valid.
Yeah Naran, I’m sure your out there in those Kennebunk soup kitchens doling out lobster bisque gruel to the area unfortunates who might make less than 200k a year. I have a brother-in-law in Falmouth who is lamenting the same issues. What I have a hard time getting my head around is why any women would support the GOP. I mean, if you are intelligent and can read, why would anyone support an organization who treats them like second class citizens? Kinda like blacks supporting the KKK. As a women, with very few exceptions, why do you support a party who’se past, present and future agenda is mandating gender control by a few old men caught up in a 1950’s time warp? Please enlighten me.
I identify myself as a Republican and I am a woman. I am a fiscal conservative and consider myself fairly liberal socially. I served my country honorably during the first trip to the desert. I don’t feel it’s my business to tell anyone who they can and can’t love/marry, what they can do with their bodies (although I myself would never consider abortion), or how they should live. I think that the welfare program as it was originally designed was a great program but I think it needs to be overhauled to bring it up to the reality of the times (to include tighter rein on spending and job training for those that never seem to leave the welfare rolls). Don’t paint the GOP as a neat little box of people that all believe the way the liberal media paints the party. There are some of us that are more middle of the road out there…we may not be as vocal as the rest but trust me we are here and we vote our conscience and not necessarily party line. I’m sure that there are Democrats that feel the same way.
I like your comment! There are so many people on here that are so rigid to either end of the spectrum that it’s ridiculous. This is such a complex issue…of course it’s right to help the poor but the State has been spending money they don’t have. The same people who hate Lepage for cutting services would hate him if he raised their taxes to pay for it. Of course there are legitimate people in need…but even the picture above that shows an anxious young woman in the foreground shows some fairly young able-bodied people (one napping) in the background and I think that’s indicative of the issue. There are some HONEST people who need help but there are also many who feel entitled to handouts. It’s taken decades for it to come this far and it certainly won’t be fixed overnight!
When you don’t have the money to help those in need, you don’t cut taxes to those with the highest income!
Yes, I understand that, Pondlady. But if people are in need because they can’t find a decent job that will support them and then the State taxes the heck out of the people who provide those jobs so they decide to do business in a state that is more business-friendly…that doesn’t help the poor much either. So that’s what I mean when I say there’s no easy answers.
Unfortunately……it appears you middle of the roaders are becoming extinct.
So you aren’t wealthy, just ignorant?
You may not be wealthy,but it certainly appears you don’t care about the poor.
The GOP won’t be happy until people are dying in the streets. Every legislative action the current governor’s administration takes is meant to deprive those who are in need. The Lepage administration is avidly supported by the GOP controlled legislature. The only way to avoid this is to vote out all GOP candidates.
Total, unadulterated compost contents. You are completely off the mark.
Cleverly worded and yet, you are wrong.
Just wait until November my friend. The GOP radicals are going to get dropped like a bad habit at the voting booth.
Actually, it’s been interesting to note the number of times when the Republican-controlled legislature did NOT give the governor what he wants. He has vetoed several bills passed by the Republicans. His recent use of the line-item veto was prompted by the fact that the budget the Republicans passed doesn’t please him. LePage has recently been more critical of his fellow Republicans in the legislature, saying that they are not what they claim to be — the implication being that they are not “real” Republicans because they don’t always do what he wants. I’m frankly surprised that some of our Republican state representatives and state senators have shown so much independence.
Mostly all I’ve seen coming from you is concern on how to close down the programs that help people in need and how fast it can be done. Excuse me if I misinterpreted that.
You are definitely misinterpreting what I write. There are some programs I think need reformation, along with eliminating the fraud, waste and abuse. DHHS is a prime example, since Maine’s budgets cannot support funding endless benefits for people who could be working. However, I fully support Maine having charitable programs for those in true need.
Unfortunately, there are many, many other programs needing reform, but the ones getting the cuts are the ones aimed at the poor, elderly, and disabled. I’d love to see reforms of the bloated programs at other levels- padded military spending, for example, (in some cases- such as paying non-bid contracts worth millions to political cronies- I do support our military families getting decent paychecks for all they do-)
Targeting the middle class and poor, and scapegoating them for the financial ills of the country, is all too similar to the scapegoating of the Jews in 1930’s Germany. Divide and conquer, pit neighbor against neighbor while the ones controlling the puppet strings laugh all the way to the bank.
Did anyone pay attention in high school history class?
The State of Maine has very little to do with the military budget.
Can’t you see that the sad economy in Maine and throughout the country has a great deal to do with the ridiculous expenditures at a national level? Of course failed trickle-down economics, (well, of course the policies were successful for those wealthy who benefited), widening the income gap, taxpayer bailouts of irresponsible corporations, and multi-billion dollar military attacks on other countries have something to do with the issues facing individual states.
Again, scapegoating the poor for the financial ills of the country is just an attempt to divide and conquer. It’s obvious that the method has been successful; just read the comment posts here.
Yes, the problems of the country is predominantly the fault of the Federal government, it has been so since the war of Northern agression. No I do not believe in slavery but were the slaves really worse off than the poor of the industrialized North?
The willingness to become involved with wars that were not our business has gone on since WW1, and maybe earlier. So military spending is too high.
Since the depression of the 30’s the social spending in this country has gotten out of hand. Yes, every increase of social spending was done with the best of intentions, but be honest with yourself the social safety net has become a way of life for far too many people.
Our Federal governments tax code has become mostly a vehicle for social manipulation, which it should never been.
I do not scapegoat the poor, I will blame the poor that are poor because they are lazy, greedy, and so forth for some of our economic problems but …
As to devide and conquer I think it has been working at least since the very early 1900’s progressive movement.
“War of Northern Aggression?” Wow. Talk about revisionist (and dead wrong) history.
There was no Constitutional justification for the “Civil War”. The Confederate states had the right to leave the union and the union had no business instigating the war.
The institution of slavery was on its way out, the cost of keeping slaves was becoming more expensive than hiring “free” people in the North.
I know that people here will argue with me but there is no way to know who is right, that is my theory.
I cannot find anywhere a definitive answer of the cause of the civil war. Exactly why is nowhere. Why do you suppose that is?
Okay, when the State of South Carolina opened fire on the Federal troops stationed at Fort Sumter, because the President of the United States was sending food by ship to the fort, the Federal government was the aggressor? Your logic is incredibly twisted. Your history is dead wrong. And your intrepretation of the Constitution — that states have the right to leave the Union, shows a naive and flawed reading. John C. Calhoun said that states can nullify Federal laws — no court in the land supports that idea today. Likewise, it is not “We, the States of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union” who established the Constitution.
But aren’t you the one who said that Social Security is unconstitutional? I suggest you start a branch in the United States of the British Monster Raving Looney Party.
Please go check out the website http://www.cbo.gov to see how our federal income tax is spent. More is spent on welfare, medicare, medicaid and social security than on military spending. When congress couldn’t get their act together and pass a budget automatic spending cuts kicked in for the military…they didn’t eliminate ships, planes and the wars…they are kicking military service members out…basically pink slipping them and sending them on their merry way.
How about we start with cutting programs that provide corporate welfare to thosewho are not need. For example, $450,000 a year tax break for Walmart in the city of Waterville!
I hope the Legislature finds the courage to stand its ground and vote to override LePage’s veto. LePage is well aware this state doesn’t have enough jobs to go around for all job seekers. Yet he declared war on recipients of aid. I hope all those people are registered voters and remember who added to their misfortunes in these tough times.
Remember November.
Part of the reason we are in the mess we’re in now is because those of us that work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
My experiences with GA and welfare in general, including subsidized housing has shown me that fraud and waste are rampant. I have offered jobs to those receiving TANF and section 8 housing. Haven’t had any takers yet. Oh and before anyone accuses me differently, it was for more that minimum wage and certainly over .58 an hour.
Wait 66readerwriter, The Koch brothers might want to buy our power plants and put us all to work for 58 cents an hour. Hang tight we might have enough work for everyone. Paul has been working hard to impress those boys. I just know anyday now he’s gonna get their attention. Hold on as long as you can, eat rocks until you can work for nothing and buy lots of groceries with all that moola you’re gonna make. I hear rocks make you feel less hungry when you’re starving. (Excuse the heavy sarcasm) I can share my stone soup with you if you like….
What you don’t seem to understand is that Gov. LePage is trying to do the exact opposite of what you think he’s trying to do. Someday, I hope you accept that fact.
LePage and the GOP demonize the unemployed and people with low paying jobs the do not have benefits.
With the exception of family members they put on the state payroll, of course.
They want to Mardenize Maine’s economy back to the Middle Ages.
The New GOP Feudalism.
yessah
Pay people to be single moms and you get more. Pay people to sit on a couch and wait for a check, you get more such people. What did these people do before Maine was a welfare state? I believe family and friends where looked to first for help.
>>>>
Johnson had his “War on Poverty”; LePage has his “War on the Poor.”
Despite the billions spent on the war on poverty since the Johnson administration the poverty rate remains unchanged.
Well, then, sir/madam, spend more!! Right?
Yeah, the poverty pimps would love that. For example the million dollars that get skimmed off the top for LIHEAP by the poverty pimps just for writing the checks. Remember that those skimming that $1,000,000 off of the top do not purchase, store, or deliver any oil, they just write the checks. And that’s just what gets skimmed off in Maine. No telling how much more gets skimmed off in Washington before it even gets here.
Yes, I’m sure the poverty pimps would love it if we spent more.
Incorrect. The Johnson Administration cut poverty in half. As we continue to cut aroud the edges of the programs, the povertyrate baselines or starts to increase. If your contention is that the Johnson Administration failed at cutting poverty, your are 100% flat wrong.
Not even close to half. The poverty rate went from 13 to 11% under Johnson and has continued to bounce around from 9 to 12 % ever since.
This is the inherent problem with entitlement programs. They grow and grow, and most (thankfully, not all) politicians lack the fortitude to rein them in.
Well done, Governor.
Boo hoo, BDN.
Yea and the economy and job losses and lack of employment have absolutely nothing to do with the increased numbers of people on assistance…
Maine’s unemployment rate was 7.1% last time I checked. While not good, it is better than the country as a whole. Historically, Maine has had a high unemployment rate due to the seasonality of many businesses that operate here. I doubt that the recession has had enough of an impact on GA applications to account for the increases we are seeing. The results of the study will be interesting.
Just an FYI to all who are lamenting the use of cell phones… I know many people, poor and not, who are ditching their landline phones because using a cell phone is not only more practical for them, but it’s CHEAPER. I don’t understand why that’s a bad thing, unless you are under the mistaken notion that it’s still 1985 and only the very rich should be able to afford a cell phone. You can get a pre-paid cell phone plan that includes unlimited calls, and unlimited texts AND INTERNET for $45/month. My basic landline phone costs more than that per month. So the problem with poor people saving money on their phone bills would be what again…..?
And….if you get Mainecare you can get on for free — that’s right FREE! I guess its one of those basic rights. To bad I still have my landline for 23.00 a month (no long distance-outside Maine) because I have to make choices about how much our family can afford. At least the land line is available for all family members whereas a cell phone would be in the possession of only one family member.
There must be someone placing comments on this board who owns a business and is angry about people seeking help.. Well here is your chance to help out a little. In the picture there seems to be alot of people in need of a job. Employing one of these people would go a long way into solving the problem.
I support Gov. LePage’s position. These people are elected into their positions, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what’s going on…that’s part of their job, part of what they are elected to do. What other job can you have where you consistently fail to do what your supposed to do and yet still get paid? Instead of dealing with issues brought before them they form a committee and sit and wait to read the committee’s report. How about forming a committee to look into how come the elected reps hardly ever do their jobs? How many times has there been an article in the paper about DHHS financial irresponsibility?(just one example) This one issue alone goes back well before Gov. LePage ever thought about running for Governor. Yet we keep electing incompetent people who continually fail to discharge their duties…and you and I pay for it; then complain about it; then pay for it some more. I don’t see any reason to criticize Gov. LePage for doing what he is supposed to do. If you want to criticize someone, criticize the legislature for failing to do their job. You will only get results when you demand them. Otherwise all you will see is one committee after another with no real results or fixes for the issues.
“Unless simply passing the tax buck down the line and increasing homeless are acceptable to lawmakers, the Legislature should overturn this veto and begin the needed work of finding better ways to improve general assistance.” Nice scare tactic, so how come the legislature hasn’t been doing the work of finding better ways to improve general assistance? Instead they take a vacation, then if they recall just to deal with this, guess who is going to pay dearly for their attendance in Augusta to do their job? You and I. This issue didn’t just pop up overnight, it has been known, the legislature has had time to get to work on this, they chose not to. And now people want to throw this back on the Gov. It isn’t his job to fix this, it’s his job to make sure the legislature does their job.
LePage’s only weapon was to use the line item veto and send this back to the legislature to get it right. The BDN says this reduction in welfare is a reasonable goal. It is the legislature which is playing games. Quit blaming the governor. He is holding their feet to the fire. Try to write something constructive instead of yellow journalism. Haven’t we progressed from those days?
If people need a hand up then they should receive it…but, to have another child when you are relying on others to help you with your current inability to provide for the child or children you have is just plain ignorant. I realize that having children is a right and a decision that any woman can make but come on — care and provide for the ones you already have. Being 24 years old and having another child before being able to be settled is screaming that you are taking advantage of the “system” as broken as it is.
How do you know she had the child while relying on others? Maybe her circumstances changed after her children were born, like divorce, domestic violence, child’s father died , or any other factor resulting in her becoming a single parent. Pretty big assumptions based on the caption of a picture.
LePage is a disaster. Well, come November he is going to receive a very serious wake-up call when we clean his party out of Augusta, and then him two years later. He won’t be able to run for dog catcher.
If that happens I will be gone too and leave these messes for you to clean up.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. – John Kenneth Gilbraith ( Canadian-American economist.)
Hey tough!!! You want heat water and rent paid get a JOB and do not have kids before you can afford to care for them. This is getting so far out of hand now what is not provided to these people. When I turned 18 the only thing on my mind was leaving home and working to be on my own. Now kids do not even try in school as they know the dole is there for them to live off of.