On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> I expect the major difficulty here to try it would be the GOP, but > logically that does not make sense. > >From the conservative thinktank, The American Enterprise Institute comes a proposal to replace the welfare state with basic income <http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-in-our-hands_105549266790.pdf> . The only time basic income was ever even tested on a limited scale in the US was under the much maligned administartion of GOP president Nixon. No, the biggest impediment, by far, to anything that bypasses the corrupt welfare state is the Democratic Party which treats civil service jobs in that bureaucracy as political spoils delivered via "community organizers" that deliver votes to the Democrats: Speech by President Richard Nixon <http://www.abelard.org/briefings/nixon_speech_guaranteed_income_citizens_wage.php> Good evening my fellow Americans: As you know, I returned last Sunday night from a trip around the world—a trip that took me to eight countries in 9 days. The purpose of this trip was to help lay the basis for a lasting peace, once the war in Vietnam is ended. In the course of it, I also saw once again the vigorous efforts so many new nations are making to leap the centuries into the modern world. Every time I return to the United States after such a trip, I realize how fortunate we are to live in this rich land. We have the world's most advanced industrial economy, the greatest wealth ever known to man, the fullest measure of freedom ever enjoyed by any people, anywhere. Yet we, too, have an urgent need to modernize our institutions—and our need is no less than theirs. We face an urban crisis, a social crisis-and at the same time, a crisis of confidence in the capacity of government to do its job. A third of a century of centralizing power and responsibility in Washington has produced a bureaucratic monstrosity, cumbersome, unresponsive, ineffective. A third of a century of social experiment has left us a legacy of entrenched programs that have outlived their time or outgrown their purposes. A third of a century of unprecedented growth and change has strained our institutions, and raised serious questions about whether they are still adequate to the times. It is no accident, therefore, that we find increasing skepticism—and not only among our young people, but among citizens everywhere—about the continuing capacity of government to master the challenges we face. Nowhere has the failure of government been more tragically apparent than in its efforts to help the poor and especially in its system of public welfare. TARGET: REFORMS Since taking office, one of my first priorities has been to repair the machinery of government, to put it in shape for the 1970's. I have made many changes designed to improve the functioning of the executive branch. And I have asked Congress for a number of important structural reforms; among others, a wide-ranging postal reform, a comprehensive reform of the draft, a reform of unemployment insurance, a reform of our hunger programs, a reform of the present confusing hodge-podge of Federal grants-in-aid. Last April 21, I sent Congress a message asking for a package of major tax reforms, including both the closing of loopholes and the removal of more than 2 million low-income families from the tax rolls altogether. I am glad that Congress is now acting on tax reform, and I hope the Congress will begin to act on the other reforms that I have requested. The purpose of all these reforms is to eliminate unfairness; to make government more effective as well as more efficient; and to bring an end to its chronic failure to deliver the service that it promises. My purpose tonight, however, is not to review the past record, but to present a new set of reforms—a new set of proposals—a new and drastically different approach to the way in which government cares for those in need, and to the way the responsibilities are shared between the State and the Federal Government. I have chosen to do so in a direct report to the people because these proposals call for public decisions of the first importance; because they represent a fundamental change in the Nation's approach to one of its most pressing social problems; and because, quite deliberately, they also represent the first major reversal of the trend toward ever more centralization of government in Washington, D.C. After a third of a century of power flowing from the people and the States to Washington it is time for a New Federalism in which power, funds, and responsibility will flow from Washington to the States and to the people. During last year's election campaign, I often made a point that touched a responsive chord wherever I traveled. I said that this Nation became great not because of what government did for people, but because of what people did for themselves. This new approach aims at helping the American people do more for themselves. It aims at getting everyone able to work off welfare rolls and onto payrolls. It aims at ending the unfairness in a system that has become unfair to the welfare recipient, unfair to the working poor, and unfair to the taxpayer. This new approach aims to make it possible for people—wherever in America they live—to receive their fair share of opportunity. It aims to ensure that people receiving aid, and who are able to work, contribute their fair share of productivity. This new approach is embodied in a package of four measures: First, a complete replacement of the present welfare system; second, a comprehensive new job training and placement program; third, a revamping of the Office of Economic Opportunity; and fourth, a start on the sharing of Federal tax revenues with the States. Next week in three messages to the Congress and one statement—I will spell out in detail what these measures contain. Tonight I want to explain what they mean, what they are intended to achieve, and how they are related.
