Notice the lack of a “as we know it” at the end of the words federal welfare programs above. Ending all federal welfare programs means just that, not “ending them as we know them.” In 2011, state and federal spending on means-tested federal welfare programs total more than $1.028 trillion. This does not include entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security or any veterans benefits. These are are 83 federal programs intended to be assistance to those below the poverty line.

The Obama administration, that also gutted the welfare reform provisions requiring some kind of work as a condition of receiving welfare benefits, is also doing the most it can to encourage more citizens to become dependent on welfare programs.

Many believe that President Obama is simply following the Cloward–Piven strategy and trying to get as many citizens on welfare as possible. Under this president, the federal government has spent millions running radio and television advertisements urging people to apply for “food stamps” or what is now call the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) which is intended to subsidize grocery purchases for those below the poverty line. The program is rife with waste, fraud and abuse because many game the system and trade their SNAP benefits for cash to purchase alcohol, drugs and/or cigarettes.

It just happens to be that the federal budget deficit is and has been for the last four years under this administration just over $1 trillion per year. That is about the same as what is being spent on the 83 federal welfare programs. Ending federal welfare programs and letting the state and county governments take up these functions would go a long way toward balancing the federal budget and maybe even creating some budget surpluses to begin paying down the national debt so our children and grandchildren of the future won't be so immorally saddled with so much of our debt from spending their money decades before they've earned it. Not only is this excessive debt immoral, but it's rapidly becoming far less economically viable and will become very much unsustainable.

But eliminating federal welfare programs is not only the fiscally responsible thing to do, it is also the most truly compassionate way to address these issues. State and county governments can much more efficiently and effectively create a needed safety net for those who fall below the poverty line and do a much more better job of helping citizens learn to become more self-sufficient and make it on their own. But the far left doesn't believe in individuals and families being self-sufficient, they in fact think this is a myth that must be dispelled in order to get the public to buy into their socialist agenda of unlimited depedennce on government programs. Look at the “Julia” story on Obama's campaign web site, that was all about cradle-to-the-grave dependence on government. Look at the whole “you didn't build that” argument carried on by President Obama and his supporters, Massachusetts senate candidate Elizabeth Warren, they believe citizens can do nothing for themselves without big government help every step of the way.

Welfare programs should be as close to the local level as possible and provide a safety net for those who temporarily need it, and should include helping those on the programs learn to become self-sufficient and make it on their own. This is consistent with the “teach a man how to fish rather than giving him fish” notion of helping someone by giving them a hand up and not a hand out. The far left doesn’t believe you can provide for yourself and would rather have dependent on government programs and relying on you to cast a straight Democrat ticket on election day too. The liberal agenda isn't about compassion, it about using you and anyone that will fall for it, by enslaving you with an addictive government check and hoping you'll vote for them on election day. It's no wonder liberals don't care that there is so much alcoholism and drug abuse among the welfare recipient community. Apparently the addition to government checks and drugs go hand-in-hand.

True freedom is being able to pursue your dreams and make it on your own and have a real future in life, not taking government welfare checks. Liberals just can't see beyond the dependency culture they have created and enabled with these 83 federal welfare programs. Newt Gingrich wasn't racist at all, race has nothing to do with this, but he was spot on right when he called President Obama the “food stamps president.” We now have almost 47 million citizens on the SNAP program and record numbers on many other programs including those providing cash assistance.

As for balancing the budget, if we end all the federal welfare program and close down the economically destructive Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the largely wasteful and ineffective Dept. of Education we'd saved billions more in federal spending. The best road map to a balance federal budget remains the budget proposed by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) that will reduce the size and scope of the federal government while balancing the budget. It needs to be done next year under President Mitt Romney and the republicans controlling both houses of Congress.