What do you call one who is unable to feed, clothe or house him or herself without a benefactor? Well, I would call them children.
We bring children into this world, which unlike some in the animal kingdom, can literally do nothing for themselves. We as parents happily (hopefully) provide for all their needs and at least some of their wants – although I know some parents who provide virtually all their kids’ wants. Those we classify as spoiled brats. For the most part they are.
When children are young it is a relatively routine task to care for them. They don’t need anything particularly special and they demand little beyond the basics. They say please and are thankful for what they receive.
It’s when they get to be teenagers they try to stretch the boundaries and that’s when parenting becomes more difficult. Parents hate to say no their children, but good ones understand that the job is to raise good responsible kids who then grow to be good responsible adults.
Part of being good, responsible kids or adults is abiding by certain rules. This is where the tried and true statement, “As long as you are living in this house, or under my roof, you must abide by our rules,” comes from.
Kids are no different than many adults in this regard. They, as human nature dictates, begin to take things for granted – as if they are entitled. We, as the rule-makers must occasionally remind them of who is in charge and also who is providing for their needs and wants – who is “paying the bills.”
And this is what irks us taxpayers the most about adults who have evidently not learned the lesson of who is “paying the bills.” All too many on welfare sadly fall into this category. Long gone are the days when those who need financial assistance are actually thankful to receive it.
Sadly this predicament is not all the recipients’ fault. After all, words mean things. Words like subsistence for the poor morphed into welfare and are now entitlements. So how can someone possibly be denied what they are “entitled” to?
Today’s welfare system has gotten so out of hand and has become so costly that States can no longer afford to hand out money like it was candy. So some States are attempting to reign in the entitlements by establishing new rules.
One such State is West Virginia, whose governor is a democrat, just instituted a new welfare law. Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, just this past Wednesday, “signed a bill into law that will mandate drug tests for some of the state’s poor residents who apply for welfare benefits.”
The law stipulates that those who fail a drug test can continue to receive benefits as long as they enroll in a drug rehab program and begin job training. Fail a second test and the welfare recipients lose benefits for up to a year. A third failed test means a lifetime ban. They join 10 other states which have instituted similar rules.
As one would expect, some leftists groups are not happy with the new law. The ACLU (surprise) is claiming the new law is unconstitutional and “welfare recipients are no more likely to use illegal drugs than the general population.” This may be true, but the “general population” isn’t living off taxpayer largess.
No doubt a lawsuit will be filed against the State as was done in Florida, “which drug tested every applicant to its welfare program, was tossed out by the courts as unconstitutional.” Naturally anything that may help the taxpayer is “unconstitutional.”
Democrat, Republican or other – who cares – they should be applauded. The Governor and legislature are doing the right thing by the taxpayers of West Virginia and despite the best efforts of leftist activists, are also doing the right thing for the recipients themselves in trying to get them off welfare. Should that not be the ultimate goal?