Hawley backs bill aimed at curtailing public assistance being used for cigarettes and liquor

How bout drug testing for Welfare Receiptence(sic)?? It is required for job applicants before hiring.

Although, I understand why you'd want to do that, Tom, it would probably cost more to do it than what we would save. The way the state does anything, it would be a bureaucratic mess, plus ripe pickings for corruption and crony contracts. Hawley is doing this because of the very last sentence Howard wrote above. No altruism here, just opportunism. Yawn.....

Instead, let's drop the prohibition against all drugs, saving the state billions, which could reduce everyone's taxes and free up resources for those vulnerable families.

Hey Dave, I didn't fix that negative vote for a reason, to make a point. People don't like hearing the truth.

I said this in reply to something you posted before, but I'll repeat it again: Lies and deception is how the government is creating the zombie class of America. Freedom demands personal responsibility and self sufficiency. Ron Paul said that freedom is a tough sell, and he's right.

Many people love to be taken care of and have things given to them. The rest of us would rather feel the reward of successful struggle. Nothing has value if it's not earned. Public assistance is out of control. If people are actually needy, they need to be given food, some clothes and a dry bed. If people are able bodied, they should work for their keep.

I assumed the food stamps could not be used for cigarettes and alcohol allready..

Guess I'll be called cynical for this one, but, give 'em a week (maximum), and they'll know how to scam the new 'security' measures.

Remember when the (gov't) said, "buy a new energy-saving appliance" and we (the gov't) will send you a check for X-amt. of $$$??
All you had to do was buy the stove, refrigerator or whatever, have the appliance dealer fill out the gov't 'paperwork', and soon the check (taxpayers money) was in the mail, on its way to your house.
It didn't take the scammers long to figure out, there was nothing that said you couldn't return the appliance to the dealer.

I do remember Charlotte Appliance (in Rochester) reporting that they had umpteen returns after that program took hold. And, hundreds of 'poor, indigent people' had their 'free money'.

Cynical? Maybe! Wary? DEFINITELY!!

There are two programs that use the EBT card. SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, once known as food stamps, is the federal nutrition program that can be used at grocery stores, convenience stores, and some farmers' markets and co-op food programs. The funds must be used for food purchases. TAFDC is a cash assistance program. The cash assistance EBT does not have exclusions on types of purchases it may be used for.

Regardless of the amount of fraud associated with either program, I find it incredibly cynical to target the nation's poorest, pursuing the least well-off for fiscal abuses; while corporate America rakes in grants, tax deferrals, bailouts and exploits a bonanza of loopholes sucking at the public teat- without retribution.

Care to see welfare fraud? Drive out to the former Irondequoit Mall in Monroe County. http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2012/06/01/how-corporate-so…

As long as the EBT system remain the same, preventing fraud and abuse is impossible.

Yes, EBT cards serve as "food stamps" in the grocery store. They also give the holder a cash allotment. It can be used at any ATM to withdraw cash. I fail to understand how this legislation will prevent abuse.

I suggest that many people don't carry cash - other than maybe a few bucks. I use my debit or credit card for almost every purchase.

Why can't welfare recipients do the same with their EBT cards? That is the only way I can see that abuse can be controlled somewhat.

Another relatively unknown method of abuse: "Howard's Grocery Store" has a sale on brand name 2 liter pop. EBT holder goes in and buys a ton of the pop using the food stamp portion of his/her card thereby not spending any of the cash on the card. Said scumbag then goes to the corner store, sells the owner the pop at 50 cents on the dollar and has converted food stamps into cash to be spent any which way.

And their kids go hungry.

And yes, I support drug screening for recipients. Initially it may cost more than we save, but in the long run as the druggies are weeded out we will save.

Doing away with welfare would solve our illegal immigration problem. The jobs illegals take would be filled with those wanting to eat.

Doug, I don't typically get a lot of thumbs up. Don't worry about it. You are 100% right in my opinion. The welfare system is totally out of control and doing way more than it should. Other people on this thread have written about the fraud and scamming that career freeloaders commit, which of course is a problem. CM writes about corporate welfare, also a problem. Politicians won't touch that because they are in on it too. Both problems are inherent and predictable.

Both forms of welfare are bad and destroy the spirit of the free market and human endeavor. Taxes should not be seized and re-distributed for others to defraud. Private charities can help people better than government. I know it's unlikely to change anytime soon. But it is the truth, and whether others like it or not, I will continue to say it.

If you take our money on welfare, we should be allowed to set limits on what you can do with our money.

They can get free cell phones and now some can get free A/C units. Saying no to tobacco and alcohol, using our money is not that bad.

They should also stop the cards use at restaurants.

@Mark Potwora

The EBT card is used not for food stamp purchases only, but also has the welfare recipients cash allowance loaded on it as well.

This measure, though good hearted in nature, is a waste of legislation. It won't stop users of EBT to obtain their cash from any bank or CU ATM.

What Hawley should look at is legislation that will get people off of welfare and working. There are jobs out there, but too many recipients of public dole seem to think they're worth more than minimum wage, even with no marketable skills or experience.

Hey John, point of fact, you cant use the cards to purchase in restaurants, and even the places you can, (like subway or sub shops etc) it cant be used for hot foods. The only people that get authroization for that are the homless or those who are in living situations with no cooking facilities. Then it's only at very limited places within that county.

As for the cash part of ebt, I can see the point of this legislation where people are abusing this dispensing of cash at ATM's in liquor stores and strip clubs. But there is a much simpler way to curb this. Instead of legislation, use greed, tell ALL atm's they cannot collect transactions fees on snap/ebt cards and watch how many of those places cease providing services to those cards. Then they have to go to a regular bank atm.

I still think drug screening is a good idea for benefits as well. I'm waiting to see the results since Florida has put that into effect. There was supposed to be a mass exodus of recipients over this but I guess the numbers will tell in time. If it is so then it would be very interesting to see. Personally I dont think NY politicians will do this and lose their most easily manipulated voters...

Just my opinion though

For those who agree that abuse is a problem within the welfare system yet don't support cuts, drug testing, limitations, and other mandates; please explain how government convinces a generational segment of the population that working for 8 hours a day and paying your own way is actually PREFERABLE to doing nothing and getting your stuff for free.
This is as much a societal and moral problem as it is a government run amok problem.

Just an FYI, the blue debit goverment card with the Statue of Liberty on it can be and is used in restaurants of all kinds for any items they choose, no restrictions!

The great state of California recently did a audit on the use of their EBT cards. The results were shocking. They found that they were being used in AMT machines in casinos in Las Vegas, on cruise ships and one even turn up being used in Disneyland in Florida. Tell me that these people are living at a subsistence level.

I have a blue debit card with the statue of liberty on it and it is by no means welfare. On the rare occasion that I am lucky enough to receive child support, the money is loaded onto that card. That money if mine to spend and I will spend it however I choose, including at the liquor store or a strip club. My salary far outweighs anything that may go on this card. In fact, last year, my salary was about 100 times the child support received so I don't want to hear anyone complaining that I'm spending my child's child support money on a $20 bottle of wine.

Interesting comments. How about drug testing and similar restrictions on using taxpayer money on everyone who shops, not just the poor? Hawley and other members of the Legislature, teachers, police, librarians, etc? Everybody is happy to impose their own values on others, especially the marginalized.

You should really take an objective look at what you just wrote Beth

"so I don't want to hear anyone complaining that I'm spending my child's child support money on a $20 bottle of wine."

Regardless of your salary, and I am happy that yours is 100 times your child support, the fact remains that the child support money is your child's, not yours

" Hawley and other members of the Legislature, teachers, police, librarians, etc?'

The difference is that these people receive salaries for what they do, as opposed to funds that are meant to give a boost up Ken, and that is a huge difference, and BTW, Police, Teachers and Librarians are drug tested in many municipalities

That is ignorant Mark. My child has everything she needs that I generally pay for with my debit card paid for from my checking account (where my paycheck is deposited). What difference does it make if I buy the bottle of wine with my bank's debit card or the card that they put the child support on? I could withdraw the money from the child support card and put it into my bank account and it would all end up in the same place.

By the way, I really don't even drink wine but it's the point of the matter. The little child support that is put on "the blue debit government card with the Statue of Liberty on it" as Shannon called it can be spent as I please. I spend hundreds of dollars every week on my child putting a roof over her head, food, utilities, lessons, tutoring, medical bills, etc. which all comes out of my bank account. If I choose to use the few dollars that may go onto the child support debit card on something that is not considered for the child, what difference does that make? Am I supposed to try to divide her expenses from mine? I could see if we were really struggling and I was buying wine while she went without but that's not the case here. So Mark, until you see my personal finances, you don't need to worry about how my child support money is spent.

Beth,
I don't think anyone really cares what you do with money from child support. That comes from the childs father, right? That is not our tax money taken for us.

As for drug testing, why not? This is our money, being given to someone who the state has decided needs help. It is our money and reasonable restrictions should be in place. If some people who pay the taxes are required to be drug tested, why not the ones who get the money?

John - Mark seems to care what I do with it. You're right - it is not from taxpayer money at all. I think some people are under the impression that just because the card has the New York logo (and Statue of Liberty), that the money is derived from taxpayer dollars, which isn't the case at all.

Thanks Raymond for that clarification..I did not realize the amount of welfare programs out their offering different types of benefits...Mr.Hawley would better serve us all by reforming the whole welfare system..Mr.Hawleys sees no problem with sales tax breaks for mulitmillion dollars corporations to build retail shopping centers,but has a problem with welfare debit cards being used to buy beer..Both are wrong..Tax payer money used to build multimillion dollars stadiums for millionaire football and baseball player to play in..That is wrong..Reform the whole tax give away system....If you write off a business lunch that includes a few alcoholic drinks is that the same thing?

For clarification Beth, I don't care what you do with that money, it was how you phrased it.

Child support payments are not the issue at all with the proposal, that is why there are different color coded ebt cards in the first place. The issue is public assistance funding

Beth the issue isn't child support. BTW is suppose to be use in the maintenance and upbringing of children, not in a liquor store. It is the EBT and SNAP cards which draw directly out of the tax base and have little or no control by government.

I understand that Tom. Someone else threw in a comment about the NYS debit cards with the statue of liberty on them and I pointed out that, at least mine, was not welfare and the money put on the card is not derived from taxpayer dollars.

And for your information, child support is placed in the "pot" with the rest of the family income and it is all spent on the family expenses which may occasionally be spent at a liquor store. I don't think I've been in a liquor store in years but the point remains the same. As long as my children are well cared for, I can spend the money in the "pot" anyway I choose. It may just as easily be spent on the electric bill or for groceries for the week. It's my choice which debit card I choose to use, not anyone else's.

I have to side with Beth on this.....unemployment as well as child support uses these cards which actually have a mastercard logo as well as a major bank....Chase I believe, on them where the snap/ebt cards are entirely different. As for Tom and Mark's arguments about Beth's example, plainly put as pointed out that money comes from the father, and his pocket not from us taxpayers. In most cases it is reimbursement from deadbeat dads and such. My wife recieved a few deposits on her card from her son's father in Texas even though her son is 25 now. Because he didnt make payments a few years back, so when he began working again they began collecting his payments that were in arrears. So you can look at that argument all you want but, the cards that Beth refers to are money earned, not money taken from taxpayers.

Wow, no one including me is complaining about how anyone spends their unemployment or child support money, That was never the issue, What I said was the example of how she spent her CHILD SUPPORT is irrelevant, perhaps I should have left part of my retort out {It's your child's money] That is.

The proposal has nothing to do with child support paid by a spouse, it has to do with WELFARE programs paid through the system.

The assertion by one poster that Steve HAwley should be looking elsewhere is lame too,

1) Steve Hawley DID NOT author the bill, he simply endorsed it

2) This is not something the State just dreamt up, failure to do this or something similar would take $120 million dollars out of the bank that was to be directed toward public assistance by the FEDERAL Government if the state does not act. NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with child support, tax breaks or any other program including child support collection run by the state. It has ALL to do with a FEDERAL MANDATE to curb WELFARE fraud, last I looked, child support was NOT welfare. And is NOT something that would be affected either way by state tax incentives for economic development or the IDA abyss in Irondequoit.

Seriously folks, taking money intended to be a boost to basic sustenance being used for tobacco, liquor or anything other than sustenance is not the same as putting child support money into the household kitty. Why should WELFARE CARDS have a cash ATM value at all?

Why have we come to the point where we are so emotional that we package WELFARE and CHILD SUPPORT payments made someone's former spouse into the same argument.

Public Assistance is FOOD, HOUSING, CLOTHING & HEALTHCARE PERIOD. Frankly, we would be far better off letting Catholic Charities or the United Way handling that assistance rather than government in the first place, even if the government subsidized those charities to a degree rather than a mountainous bureaucracy that is any case is prone to fraud.

I get it Mark! My initial comment was in response to Shannon's posting "the blue debit goverment (sic) card with the Statue of Liberty on it can be and is used in restaurants of all kinds for any items they choose, no restrictions!"

My response was why should there be restrictions on it? My money my problems. Not your money not your problem.

Beth I understand where you are coming from, And as for my statement about restrictions, those are specifically targeted toward WELFARE recipients NOT child support recipients Sorry for the misunderstanding both by you toward my point and I toward your you position.

Thanks Mark. I need a bottle of wine after all that:)

For that Comment Beth, I wish I could give you 30 thumbs up

"Frankly, we would be far better off letting Catholic Charities or the United Way handling that assistance rather than government in the first place, even if the government subsidized those charities to a degree rather than a mountainous bureaucracy that is any case is prone to fraud."

That is absolutely correct, in my humble opinion Mark. That is also the very same reason I could not support drug testing, what a friggin' mess that would turn into. I understand peoples' anger and frustration with the generations of freeloaders, but more government never fixes big government problems. Less government across the board and privatizing the delivery of assistance programs (along with many other government functions) will cure it.

Government can't do that Jeff. I believe, personally that the majority of people want to support themselves and contribute to the society they live in. So many just don't know any better, or can't see any hope. That surely is a societal problem. Government has indeed run amok, downsizing government and freeing up the ability for folks to figure out better ways to earn a living, will show more folks the way. I heard that the Dept of Social Services or whatever it's called actually employs people to find those who are struggling and show them how much better life can be. It's commendable that we want to help people get out of poverty and have medical care, but again it has run absolutely amok. Biggest glaring difference between libertarians and socialists is one believes in people, the other does not.

Sounds like these people are so desperate that they think gambling amounts to their only way out of the hole.

http://www.jerrybrown.org/record/healthcare