The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Texacon on April 26, 2011, 10:36:29 AM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x962509
jpak (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 10:10 AM
Original message
(GOP) Bill would require welfare recipients to show residency proof (Maine)
http://www.pressherald.com/news/Bill-calls-for-citizens...
A legislative committee is taking up a bill requiring an applicant for state assistance to show proof of legal residency in the United States and in Maine for at least 90 days.
<snip>
Naples Republican Rep. Richard Cebra's bill says an applicant for state assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, the MaineCare program or the food stamp program must be a legal resident of the United States and a resident of Maine.
A separate bill before the committee imposes a 90-day residency requirement in order to receive MaineCare, the statewide food supplement program, TANF program and municipal general assistance.
<more>
Seems reasonable.
SoCalDem (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. I don't see this as unreasonable
If someone is asking for state aid, they ought to at least have legal residency there.. If 90 days is the legal definition of residency, then that's how long they should have lived there.
With funds diminishing, it's only sensible to try & make sure your own citizens have first crack at funds available.
I'm good with it. How about we establish this for voting?
jwirr (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. I don't either and I have been a recipient for years. By the way when
you go in to apply of welfare all kinds of programs are usually included in one application (food stamps, cash assistance and medical assistance) and the worker asks for a birth certificate or other proof of who you are. That certificate is then a permanent part of you file. I have lived in NE, IA and MN and it was required in all these states long before this became an issue.
How about we do this for voter registration?? Why not, you've been sucking off the tit of at LEAST 3 different states for YEARS. You had no problem providing ID to none of those states for free goods/services/money.
ejpoeta (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. i know where i live you have to show that you are a citizen or legal resident,
a resident and that you have no assets.
How does that work?
sinkingfeeling (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
5. I also don't see this a huge problem. I know a woman who applied for benefits in 3 separate states
and got them for a while!
To those who fear someone who just moved into a state will starve, there are emergency funds available until the official state programs begin.
Lousy Freeper Troll!
peace13 (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Go figure if the states can't have a database that is shared!
It is more than time that we protect our resources while serving the people in a fair and humane way!
You mean for voting .... right?
justabob (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
9. strange that they don't already
I know I had to bring in all kinds of residency info when I applied years ago. I don't see why this is an issue. You have to prove residency for all kinds of stuff, 90 days is not long. Colleges require a full year to establish residency for instate tuition. If Maine was requiring a year or more for social services help then some outrage might be justified, but 90 days doesn't seem so bad.
Hey .. I've got an idea ... why not do this to help clean up our voting rolls!
:thatsright:
These people are still idiots.
KC
-
Bobo must be asleep at the wheel--this thread is right up her street.
-
jwirr (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. I don't either and I have been a recipient for years. By the way when
you go in to apply of welfare all kinds of programs are usually included in one application (food stamps, cash assistance and medical assistance) and the worker asks for a birth certificate or other proof of who you are. That certificate is then a permanent part of you file. I have lived in NE, IA and MN and it was required in all these states long before this became an issue.
People used to be ashamed of this and only use it until they got back on their feet. Your DUmbass seems to think it's the government's responsibility to provide you with a living. Make me dictator for a year and all of you that don't want to work, would be kicked off the roles and allowed to starve to death.
-
ipaint (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
19. Yup and reagan knew a welfare queen.
One thing about conservatives, if you are advocating for the underclass they always personally know someone who abuses the system and use it as an argument against compassion in order to punish the majority of good people who happen to be poor too.
It's one of their most glaringly disgusting traits.
sinkingfeeling (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #19
31. So you think it's fine for somebody to take benefits that should go to people who really need them?
:cheersmate:
KC
-
In looking over all the posts over there it becomes apparent the real problem with this for our DUmmie friends is you are asking people who don't want to do anything to ... you know .... do something. It's not FAIR!
:bawl:
KC
-
I have lived in NE, IA and MN and it was required in all these states long before this became an issue.
Whenever DUmmies hear about a state with more lucrative welfare payouts, they fire up the Buick and cruise across the state line.
-
ipaint (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. A small minority of people cheat EVERY system.
Using that fact to punish the majority who don't through tighter restrictions, punishing rules and over the top regulations is classic right wing nuttery.
Are you willing to let the small number of "cheaters" keep those who truly are desperate for help homeless and starving?
The repub teabagger politicians in maine seem fine with that.
Au Contraire ipaint. Contrast and compare what you just typed with gun control legislation and the LEFTS ideals on why no one should be allowed to own a gun.
Who has the over the top regulations??
KC
-
Au Contraire ipaint. Contrast and compare what you just typed with gun control legislation and the LEFTS ideals on why no one should be allowed to own a gun.
Who has the over the top regulations??
KC
H5, and I'd like to add that nowhere in the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights is anyone guaranteed free money from the government--but they are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms.
-
People used to be ashamed of this and only use it until they got back on their feet. Your DUmbass seems to think it's the government's responsibility to provide you with a living. Make me dictator for a year and all of you that don't want to work, would be kicked off the roles and allowed to starve to death.
Failure is the new success for the left and the imbeciles that vote donk. This is what 40 years of 'liberal' teachers has done to America.
-
Well, when you consider the number of inbred, toothless, mouth-breathing, sister-humping, booger-eating ****nuckles who call themselves "native" Mainers that are permanently on the dole thanks to the Masshole tourist cash--that and the highest state/local tax burden in the nation--it's hardly surprising that them thar "Downeasters" would want to protect their own little rice bowl, errah...
-
jwirr (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-26-11 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. I don't either and I have been a recipient for years. By the way when
you go in to apply of welfare all kinds of programs are usually included in one application (food stamps, cash assistance and medical assistance) and the worker asks for a birth certificate or other proof of who you are. That certificate is then a permanent part of you file. I have lived in NE, IA and MN and it was required in all these states long before this became an issue.
Their lord and savior 0 better hope he never gets down on his luck in NE, IA, or MN.
-
Whenever DUmmies hear about a state with more lucrative welfare payouts, they fire up the Buick and cruise across the state line.
When you say that to a DUmmy they will counter that no one moves just to get a bigger handout. My counter-counter is, you would be amazed how much work some people will do not to get a job.
-
The DUmp responses are probably a good indicator of how the economy is actually doing. So many of them no longer willing to give free everything to everyone.
-
The DUmp responses are probably a good indicator of how the economy is actually doing. So many of them no longer willing to give free everything to everyone.
I don't know about that. I don't sense any reluctance to take my money and give it to their buddies and, especially, themselves. Since they're deadbeats, none of these giveaways have a downside for the DUmp democrats.
-
Any system that exists to dispense money and has poor management controls over who get it is just a large-scale bleeding wound in the budget of whatever government entity runs it. If it also has poor internal controls, then add widespread embezzlement to the mix, to boot.
-
There was a thread over there, I think about TB being spread in homeless shelters, and there were several posts ripping on the limo liberals. The gist was that the LL were glad gas was higher now so that more people would be encouraged to buy electric cars and better gas milage cars.
The poor advocates were throwing some good class warfare hate their way. Classic lib-on-lib action, I would be surprised if the thread does not got locked.
I would have started a different thread but some of the recent posts here were semi-related.
-
I don't know about that. I don't sense any reluctance to take my money and give it to their buddies and, especially, themselves. Since they're deadbeats, none of these giveaways have a downside for the DUmp democrats.
Sure but now they are talking about taking the DUmmys stash. Big MFing difference to a DUchebag.
-
People used to be ashamed of this and only use it until they got back on their feet. Your DUmbass seems to think it's the government's responsibility to provide you with a living. Make me dictator for a year and all of you that don't want to work, would be kicked off the roles and allowed to starve to death.
That was when it used to be called things like 'welfare' and 'government assistance' - those phrases were too negative, and made the recipient feel bad. Now they are called 'entitlements' - which makes the recipient feel good - because entitlement suggests that the government owes benefits to the recipient...