Young: Shutdown lesson — don’t depend on D.C.
The recent federal government shutdown has shed light on a critical issue: the vulnerability of federal assistance programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which underscores the need for a shift away from reliance on Washington for poverty relief. During shutdowns, essential services often falter, leaving those in need—particularly SNAP recipients—without the support they rely on. This situation highlights a broader consensus across the political spectrum: when help is needed, it should be readily available. The challenge lies in determining how to deliver that support effectively and consistently, without the interruptions caused by political gridlock.
One proposed solution is to decentralize aid, moving it from federal oversight to state and local management. Currently, while SNAP is administered at the state level, its funding is predominantly federal, making it susceptible to the whims of Congress. By empowering states to fund and operate their own assistance programs, communities could better respond to local needs without being impacted by national political disputes. This localized approach not only enhances accountability and adaptability but also fosters a sense of community involvement. Programs managed at local levels tend to be more personal and responsive, addressing issues directly within the community rather than from a distant federal office.
Moreover, the article emphasizes the potential of private initiatives to complement or even replace government aid. Historically, American communities have thrived on mutual aid, as illustrated in David Beito’s book, “From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State,” which chronicles how neighborly support diminished with the rise of federal programs. Despite the prevalence of government assistance today, the infrastructure for private aid—through non-profits, churches, and community organizations—remains robust. In fact, Americans donated an impressive $550 billion to charities last year, showcasing a strong willingness to support one another. The message is clear: while Washington may falter, individuals and local organizations have the capability and motivation to step in and provide the necessary assistance. The key takeaway from this shutdown is to rethink our dependence on federal solutions and empower local communities to take charge of their welfare initiatives.
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
