Young: Shutdown lesson — don’t depend on D.C.
The recent federal government shutdown has shed light on a critical issue: the vulnerability of essential aid programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the inherent risks of relying too heavily on Washington for poverty relief. As the shutdown demonstrated, when Congress fails to agree on a budget, it is often the most vulnerable populations—those who depend on food assistance—who suffer the consequences. This situation raises an important question: how can we ensure that help reaches those in need without being hampered by political gridlock? The answer may lie in moving aid closer to home, thereby reducing reliance on federal funding and bureaucracy.
SNAP, while administered at the state level, is predominantly funded by federal dollars, making it susceptible to the whims of national politics. To create a more reliable safety net, experts advocate for a shift towards state and local funding models for aid programs. This decentralization not only enhances the responsiveness and accountability of assistance programs but also fosters a sense of community involvement. Local governments are more attuned to the specific needs of their residents, allowing for tailored solutions that can be implemented quickly. Moreover, historical evidence suggests that private aid initiatives often outperform government programs in effectiveness. With Americans donating approximately $550 billion to charities last year, there is a robust foundation of private support that can be leveraged to fill the gaps left by federal programs.
The potential for revitalizing community-driven assistance is well-documented. Historian David Beito’s work highlights a time in pre-New Deal America when neighbors relied on one another for support, demonstrating that local networks can effectively address poverty and hardship. While government programs have overshadowed many private initiatives, the infrastructure for mutual aid remains intact through non-profits, churches, and grassroots organizations. The willingness of individuals to help one another is still strong, suggesting that citizens can take action where federal mechanisms falter. As the shutdown illustrates, the most significant takeaway is to cultivate a culture of local support and to rethink our dependence on Washington for solutions to social issues. By empowering communities and encouraging private philanthropy, we can create a more resilient and effective system of aid that is less vulnerable to the uncertainties of federal governance.
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
