1 - 2
In response to:

A Modest Proposal

sclaypool Wrote: Oct 15, 2012 2:04 PM
No more,no less? Why? California's Health and Human Services Department has 13 departments in areas like aging, nutrition support, child welfare services, public health, etc. costing the state over $50 billion a year. The department referenced here is TANF, or "CalWORKS" as it is called in California. Total state and local expenditures for CalWORKS is less than $2 billion, with matching federal funds. For whatever reason, Health and Human services has elected to spend a larger proportion of it's total budget on a program whose purpose is to assist people in returning to the workforce. They could, I suppose, reduce the number of participants, which would probably result in an increase in other welfare programs.
In response to:

A Modest Proposal

sclaypool Wrote: Oct 13, 2012 4:59 PM
Shades of Meg Whitman and her misleading campaign rhetoric: "California has one-eighth of the nation's population but one-third of its welfare recipients." Them is some scary numbers. Specious, but scary. According to the US Census Bureau, California has about twelve percent of the nation's population AND about twelve percent of the nation's welfare COST. While technically correct, the "one third of welfare recipients" refers to ONE program within California's welfare system which is responsible for less than 4% of the total welfare budget. California's welfare spending is higher than average, but at least eight other states have higher per capita welfare costs than California.
1 - 2