New reports show culture of dependency beneath Idaho’s welfare ‘safety net’

Reprinted with permission of the Idaho Freedom Foundation

New data reveals most able-bodied adults on Idaho’s welfare programs are not working, and enrollees tend to remain on the books for years—not weeks or months. By supporting increasingly generous benefits, taxpayers are funding a lifestyle hidden in the guise of a social safety net. It is time lawmakers retract, not expand, Idaho’s welfare state.

The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare recently launched new, monthly transparency reports for the state’s six largest welfare programs. It is a welcome departure from the obscure program administration of previous management. The reports reveal that welfare became more of a lifestyle for many enrollees.

In five of Idaho’s six largest welfare programs, fewer than half of able-bodied adult enrollees have a job or participate in job training. Medicaid, food stamps (SNAP), and cash assistance (TANF) provide some of the most egregious examples of low work rates, in spite of their work or training requirements.

It is commonplace for beneficiaries to spend years on a welfare program. The average ranges from 2 years, 7 months for food stamps to 4 years, 10 months for Medicaid. This lengthy tenure of enrollment is surprising, because these programs were intended to be temporary—especially in TANF (where the T stands for “temporary”) and SNAP.

Some might argue Medicaid serves a large number of elderly or disabled enrollees, inflating the average time on the program. But in truth, these long-haulers only make up a small portion of enrollees. Rather, 80% are supposed to be short-term enrollees—including children, pregnant women, or able-bodied adults—whose turnover should drag down the average.

Some argue welfare participants aren’t taking advantage of taxpayers, but are instead victims of a broken system. They say many enrollees might take steps to improve their circumstances but most worry if they do, then they may lose their assistance and end up worse off. This is the “welfare cliff” argument.

The welfare cliff is a reality for some enrollees, but data shows it is not a threat for most. Even those “trapped” in the system could still earn up to the eligibility limit before being disqualified. Despite this—with the exception of the Employment & Training Program—less than 2% of all welfare beneficiaries in each program have an income within 10% of the limit.

One reason why so many enrollees not working at all could be that Idaho’s welfare system became too generous. One report from the Foundation for Government Accountability determined that a person who signs up for several of Idaho’s welfare benefits could fetch $4.11 more per hour than the state median wage. This is equivalent to a taxpayer-funded salary of about $45,600 per year.

Idaho’s welfare benefits are also far too broad. Conservatives successfully stopped a harmful proposal to expand cradle-to-grave welfare benefits that disregard household income, but other initiatives to grow the welfare state succeeded. In Medicaid, for example, nearly 85% of monthly expenditures—or about $3 billion—are spent on optional enrollees, benefits, or both (“optional” being any part of the program not federally required). This includes spending on able-bodied adults and services like dental coverage, prescription drugs, eyeglasses, and physical therapy. Many taxpayers who are footing the bill for these perks can’t afford to buy those items for themselves.

The welfare state poses real costs to Idahoans. For every two people on government assistance, five people in the workforce must cover the cost of those programs. For these working Idahoans, this means many personal sacrifices to make ends meet as the effects of government overspending—higher taxes and inflation—consume more of their earnings. 

As these costs rise, families struggle to balance maintaining a home, driving to work, or buying groceries. They may even end up on welfare themselves. We have a vicious cycle that expands the system at the cost of Idahoans’ independence. This is not only unfair, but unsustainable.

With more data comes the potential for better, more informed decision making. The new reports from the Department of Health and Welfare are an asset to legislators and the larger policy debate. They illustrate how Idaho’s welfare system lost sight of its mission. Idahoans should take advantage of these resources to make sure these programs only benefit the truly needy. 

More generous handouts and forever enrollment won’t help Idahoans. Rather, the most benevolent policy, for taxpayers and program enrollees alike, is to get beneficiaries off programs and into the workforce where they can build their own lives, independent of the government dole. Prosperity for both workers and for taxpayers will inevitably follow.