Young: Shutdown lesson — don’t depend on D.C.
The recent federal government shutdown has highlighted a significant vulnerability in the nation’s safety net, particularly the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which underscores the need for a reevaluation of how we deliver aid to those in need. With Congress’s inability to agree on a budget, SNAP recipients found themselves facing uncertainty and potential hunger—a situation that many agree is unacceptable. The core issue is that reliance on Washington for critical support can leave vulnerable populations at risk during political standoffs. As Ryan Young, a senior economist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, argues, the solution lies in decentralizing aid distribution, moving it away from federal control and closer to local communities where it can be more responsive and reliable.
Transitioning aid programs like SNAP to state and local funding could significantly enhance their effectiveness. Currently, while SNAP is administered by state governments, it relies heavily on federal funding, which makes it susceptible to the whims of national politics. By empowering states to fund and manage their own aid programs, we can create systems that are not only more adaptable to local needs but also more accountable to the communities they serve. This approach mirrors historical practices of mutual aid, where neighbors supported each other before the establishment of large-scale federal welfare programs. Young cites historian David Beito’s work, which illustrates how community-driven support systems thrived in pre-New Deal America, suggesting that a return to these roots could yield better outcomes for those in need today.
Moreover, the article emphasizes the efficacy of private aid in alleviating poverty. Americans are known for their generosity, having donated approximately $550 billion to charities last year. This spirit of giving demonstrates that citizens can often provide more immediate and personalized assistance than government programs. Local food pantries, shelters, and community organizations are vital resources that can fill the gaps left by federal aid failures. The enduring presence of these private infrastructures suggests that while government programs have crowded out some forms of aid, the desire and capacity to help one another remain strong. The takeaway from the shutdown is clear: rather than placing our faith in Washington, we should advocate for a system that empowers local communities and encourages private initiative, ensuring that help reaches those who need it most without being contingent on the political climate.
The federal shutdown is over. Here’s one big takeaway: We need to depend less on Washington. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) food aid program’s vulnerability shows how government failure puts people at risk.
Shutdowns make the federal government too unreliable to be solely entrusted with helping the poor. When people need help, they should be able to get it. Almost everyone agrees on that, regardless of politics. The question is how to deliver that help.
When Congress cannot agree on a budget, SNAP recipients are an unintended casualty. The solution is to move aid out of Washington and closer to home, so national political spats have no bearing on whether hungry families can afford food.
Government-run relief programs should be funded at the state and local levels to the greatest extent possible. SNAP is administered by state governments but depends almost entirely on federal funding, which makes it unreliable. States should transition to funding and running their aid programs without federal involvement.
There are other benefits to reform. Programs run at lower levels of government tend to be less distant and impersonal, more adaptable, more accountable, and have fewer long-term dependency problems. It is easier to fix a problem in your own town than it is to solve one halfway across the country from a Washington office building.
Private aid tends to work better than government aid. Everyday citizens should consider donating and volunteering at a local food pantry, soup kitchen, or shelter and look for other ways to help people in their community. Americans gave $550 billion to charities last year, according to the National Philanthropic Trust. That makes us among the world’s most generous donors, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of our income. We have the means to succeed where Washington fails.
The historian David Beito’s book “From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State” shows the rich history of neighbors helping neighbors in pre-New Deal America and how that degraded when Washington took over the job. Even in a society much poorer than ours is today, people found ways to help each other out.
Although government aid has crowded out a lot of private aid, that private infrastructure is still there in the form of non-profits, churches, families, friends, and neighbors. More importantly, the will to help is still there. Anyone who puts their mind to it can do what Washington can’t. So why not you?
The most important lesson from the latest federal shutdown is this: Don’t trust Washington, and don’t give the politicians there any more power.
Poverty relief is just one example out of many that demonstrate why a combination of federalism and private initiative can provide higher-quality services that are not affected by federal shutdowns.
Ryan Young is senior economist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI)./InsideSources
