States are moving to once again require able-bodied adults to put in work hours in exchange for food stamps, after the requirements largely were suspended by the Obama administration.

The slow-moving reversal follows the administration pulling back on Clinton-era changes that required recipients to work for government welfare benefits. Signing the reform bill in 1996 alongside then-Speaker Newt Gingrich, then-President Bill Clinton said the goal was to make welfare “a second chance, not a way of life.”

But during the last recession, President Obama allowed states to suspend a requirement that able-bodied adults without children work at least 20 hours per week or participate in a training program to receive benefits for more than three months.

He allowed recipients to stay on food stamps indefinitely, arguing the three-month maximum was unfair with unemployment at 10 percent.

"Food stamp recipients didn't cause the financial crisis, Wall Street did," said Obama at this past January’s State of the Union address.

Unemployment today is half of what it was in 2009, yet last year more than 40 states did not require welfare recipients to work.

Kansas was one of the first states to reverse that in 2013.

"I believe most Americans and most Kansans think it's common sense," said Andrew Wiens of the Kansas Department for Children & Families. "These are able-bodied adults without dependents. They don't have children in the home. They're not elderly, they're not disabled. These folks should be working."

Since Kansas reinstated work rules, food stamp rolls
dropped by 20,000 and the incomes of those who left increased by 127 percent, Wiens said.

The state also imposed limits on how recipients could use their benefits after finding some enrollees used their welfare cash and food stamps cards on cruise ships.

"Those benefits should be used for necessities," Wiens said. "You can't use them at casinos, strip clubs, massage or tattoo parlors."

Maine followed the Kansas lead in 2014. In the first three months, the number of able-bodied adults without children on food stamps fell by almost 80 percent. It also cracked down on recipients using their welfare benefits out of state after finding hundreds of Maine residents used their EBT cash cards at or near Disney World.

Film at 11.... 😟

🌫

thats racist!!!

🤔



I don't know about that.... but it's prolly not a good idea right before election time..... 😟

to be racist?

ill have to ask the experts at blacklivesmatter*

(*except when they dont)

[in regards to #2]

[sarcasm]

States should also require a mandatory drug test if you're receiving welfare and free medical coverage.

true... true... 😟

I'd think a time limit, like unemployment has, would be better. Multigenerational welfare recipients driving new cars, going to Disney, and food stamping booze and tattoos is the merican way, but maybe today's merican way is jacked up.

Welfare outrage! [ram27bat]

I bet you still get to keep the Obama-phone & Obama-net tho... 😟

They should have mandatory drug tests for anyone running for public office.

true... true.... kinda like applying for most other jobs... 😟

It ain't rite, I own a shpo and got Dallas an Myrtle Beach on LOCK. Every Shpo got my back. I buy my ceegars wit stamps. Old cigars and Padron 1926.

hey, give me any drug and i'll test it for ya😂

YES WE CAN!!!

We are screwed when it comes to welfare. It is cheaper to keep people that won't work on welfare than it is to put them in jail. It's a lose lose situation.

to me it's the same as the individual mandate on obammy care. we don't have the balls to follow through and let people die or starve after giving them reasonable choices.

Risk pool 101.... if you are not going to allow the keeper of the pool to screen people from entering that pool at a later date just because they have now developed a payable issue they didn't have earlier your pool is useless and short lived. You can't play the lottery after the numbers are pulled. You must pay in hoping to never use it in order to spread risk and have resources available when needed. Some argue that is why the individual mandate is necessary. In reality there is another way. You have a short window of time to participate and contribute. Your choice. You don't need to. But if you don't and you develop d!ck cancer later you come up with the 10 million dollars to treat it up front or we let you die. We don't have the balls for that. Working in the insurance industry I learned folks want to pay a minimum premium and get maximum benefit.... and since they are paying a 2 cent premium that's not welfare or socialism... even though what they pay in in no way is aligned with what they expect to receive.


welfare same thing. let them die or starve. if you are bad ass enough propose it and pursue it.

****** cancer sounds expensive.. prolly cheaper to just lop them off .. 😟

That's part of the *** panel decisionmaking.

them? drafter has more than one d!ck?