ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, June 9, 1996 TAG: 9606070005
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: 3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MICHAEL TANNER
ATTEMPTING to capitalize on the success of last year's "Million Man March," a gaggle of liberal interest groups descended on Washington, D.C., last weekend to demand a reinvigoration of the welfare state. But despite its sponsors' claims, the so-called "Stand for Children" bears no resemblance to the Million Man March.
Whatever one thinks about Louis Farrakhan, the Million Man March was largely a positive event. Its theme was atonement, its message one of community involvement and self-help. In contrast, last weekend's march was simply a grab for government power.
The Million Man March was about the value of individuals. Last weekend's marchers say that individuals are powerless, totally dependent on government. "Respect us," said last summer's marchers. "Give us," whine this summer's.
The Stand for Children was organized by the Children's Defense Fund and co-sponsored by the usual suspects among liberal interest groups. A host of organizations with no discernible ties to children signed on, from the Natural Resources Defense Council to the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP).
A single demand echoed from speaker after speaker - more! They want more spending of taxpayers' money, more federal programs, and more government intrusion into everyone's life. They, as Talleyrand supposedly said of the Bourbons, "have learned nothing and forgotten nothing" from the last 30 years of experimenting with the welfare state.
Since we declared war on poverty in 1965, this country has spent more than $5.4 trillion on social welfare programs. Yet more children live in poverty today than when we started, while the social problems affecting children have grown steadily worse.
Look at just a few of the results of the policies advocated by the marchers:
nIllegitimacy.
In 1960, only 5.3 percent of births were out of wedlock. Today, more than 30 percent of births are illegitimate. Among African-Americans, the illegitimacy rate is nearly two-thirds. Among whites, it tops 21 percent.
Children raised in single-parent households are at great risk for a host of social problems. They are more likely to commit crimes, drop out of school, use drugs and even commit suicide than are children from two-parent households. There is strong evidence that directly links the availability of welfare with the increase in out-of-wedlock births.
Yet the marchers have little to say on this issue except to demand more welfare.
nDependence.
Nearly 65 percent of the people on welfare at any given time will be in the program for eight years or longer. Moreover, welfare is increasingly intergenerational.
Children raised in families on welfare are seven times more likely to become dependent on welfare than are other children. A recent study from the University of Tennessee found that 7 percent of that state's welfare population were in their third generation of welfare dependence.
Yet the marchers oppose any attempt to reduce or limit welfare benefits.
nCrime.
Evidence continues to grow that today's welfare state contributes to crime by destroying family structure and breaking down the bonds of community. But do the marchers echo the 1995 report by the Maryland NAACP concluding that "the ready access to a lifetime of welfare and free social service programs is a major contributory factor to the crime problems we face today"? Don't count on it.
Our social welfare system is unfair to everyone: to taxpayers, who must pick up the bill for failed programs; to society, whose mediating institutions of community, church and family are increasingly pushed aside; and most of all to the poor themselves, who are trapped in a system that destroys opportunity for themselves and hope for their children.
Advertising executives will tell you that the best way to sell a product is to include a dog or a child in your commercial. Well, dogs may have been forgotten, but the Stand for Children is an excellent example of attempting to exploit Americans' concern for children in order to sell a very poor product.
If the marchers really cared about children, they would be demanding an end to the failed welfare state. The evidence suggests that they have another agenda.
Michael Tanner is director of health and welfare studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., which distributed this commentary.
BARBARA CUMMINGS/L.A. Times
---
The Stand for Children is an excellent example of attempting to exploit American's concern for children in order to sell a very poor product.
LENGTH: Medium: 96 lines ILLUSTRATION: GRAPHIC: Barbara Cummings/LATIMESby CNB