Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course you are. Because it fits what you want to be the narrative. I, on the other hand, because I know more than the square root of **** about block grants, what they're used for, how they're given, what the qualifications are, etc., suspect the CBPP is using misleading figures and interpretations to push an agenda. You definitely are.
OK...I bow to your..undemonstrated, yet snarky referenced expertise.
I really have no narrative..except that this seems to be wrong...and you have offered no numbers, stats, or anything other than your word..to prove differently about the TANF grants in question.
In a phrase..prove that the chart I posted is wrong.
GOP alternatives will.be sure to devastate the poor.
California Democrats do everything they can to devastate the poor.
There has never been a political organization in the history of America to devastate the poor more than the California Democratic party.
If Republicans devastate the poor, then why do so many working-class and middle-class vote Republican.
I worry that California Democrats will use the block grant for pensions or for union wage increases.
The thing about the block grant on a per-capita basis is that it rewards states with low health-care costs like Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa and South Dakota.
A day in the hospital costs over 3,300 dollars in California but 1,200 dollars in South Dakota.
South Dakota because it has very low health care costs because of reasonable wages for health care workers, lack of illegal immigration and they are more efficient will come out way ahead.
California with it's gold-plated compensation packages that are excessive, millions of illegal immigrants and poorly run hospitals will come out way behind.
Many Republican states will come way, way, way ahead under this proposal. Billions more dollars straight to the states to craft an excellent health care system.
States like New York and California will have massive cuts because they are inefficient, the unions dictate what goes on the hospitals and they have millions of illegals of which many in poor health overwhelmingly the system.
Odd..i found them to be quite to the point..with proofs attached.
We are talking about TANF here..not any of the other things you referenced--but as a cautionary note..other grants can be abused as well, but it seems...that TANF is ripe for the picking...as you can see by the charts..with 10 states using less than 10% of the monies for cash grants to the poor.
But that chart just reflects how much states used the block grants on "money assistance" and nothing else.
Personally I think that's a good idea not to just hand them cash and then hope they spend it wisely.
Better the money goes into programs to help them and their kids long term like Head Start, child care, refundable tax credits, etc.
The subsequent charts show the breakdown for the other various programs.
Illinois, for example, spends a lot more than others on child care for the poor so they can go to work.
Texas, for example, spends a lot of money on Head Start/pre-K and child welfare services.
You have to look at all the charts and not just one and determine that the state is not using the money for the poor.
So this is one analysis of reporting/financial data by one organization. The chart, of course, has a visceral impact, but only 4 states spend more than 50%...are all states stealing...just some more than others? Maybe. Maybe the spending is fine under the conditions presented by the Federal Government and just doesn't fit the definitions and narrative the authors of this study chose to use, it's hard to tell.
But that chart just reflects how much states used the block grants on "money assistance" and nothing else.
Personally I think that's a good idea not to just hand them cash and then hope they spend it wisely.
Better the money goes into programs to help them and their kids long term like Head Start, child care, refundable tax credits, etc.
The subsequent charts show the breakdown for the other various programs.
Illinois, for example, spends a lot more than others on child care for the poor so they can go to work.
Texas, for example, spends a lot of money on Head Start/pre-K and child welfare services.
You have to look at all the charts and not just one and determine that the state is not using the money for the poor.
I agree...and I'm not against that at all...but you can also find many States that put significant portion of that money into their general funds...after that, there is little to no accountability.
My point is not that everyone abuses the block grants..my point is that the system is open to abuse, that some do abuse it..and that trusting the States..many of which have political axes to grind--is a bad idea.
Read the report before posting. OP posted one single chart showing how much "money assistance" states give out, not how much of the block grant goes towards the poor.
There are charts for every program funded by block grants. There are 9 areas the money can be used towards. OP posted one single area and decided that certains states were keeping the rest of the money.
So this is one analysis of reporting/financial data by one organization. The chart, of course, has a visceral impact, but only 4 states spend more than 50%...are all states stealing...just some more than others? Maybe. Maybe the spending is fine under the conditions presented by the Federal Government and just doesn't fit the definitions and narrative the authors of this study chose to use, it's hard to tell.
I agree..more of a warning light, right?
Topical right now with the proposal that health care monies be disbursed in the block grant format.
I agree...and I'm not against that at all...but you can also find many States that put significant portion of that money into their general funds...after that, there is little to no accountability.
My point is not that everyone abuses the block grants..my point is that the system is open to abuse, that some do abuse it..and that trusting the States..many of which have political axes to grind--is a bad idea.
Each state has to report to HHS quarterly how the money is being spent.
You consider that "little to no accountability" ?
That report says nothing about states' general funds so can you please provide sources for your statement that "many put significant portion into their general funds" ?
Read the report before posting. OP posted one single chart showing how much "money assistance" states give out, not how much of the block grant goes towards the poor.
There are charts for every program funded by block grants. There are 9 areas the money can be used towards. OP posted one single area and decided that certains states were keeping the rest of the money.
Very misleading post.
I posted the entire study..read it..and come to your own conclusions.
I should never have posted that chart..I see..since intellectually lazy people will just look at that..and go with it. My bad..and I apologize.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
