Recently an Illinois woman realized her dream of winning that state’s lottery. With nearly one million dollars in hand after taxes, did this woman perhaps quit her job to indulge in a carefree life of pleasure? No she did not. It turns out that she had no job to quit. She was in fact on the public welfare roll in the state of Illinois, receiving food assistance in the amount of $200 each month, among other entitlements. After taxes, Amanda Clayton still came out with over $700,000. So maybe she had no job to quit, but at least she got off the public welfare rolls, right? Umm…no, she did not, and has not.
This is at least the second incidence of an Illinois Lottery winner being on state welfare rolls. And as outrageous as it seems, there are no provisions in Illinois law requiring lottery winners to be removed from such entitlement programs. Apparently this loophole exists in most other states’ laws as well. Illinois law DOES require welfare recipients to report any changes in their income or financial status, but, in this case, state officials rather candidly pointed out that welfare agencies rarely take affirmative steps to monitor recipients for unreported changes in status. In other words, it is Ms. Clayton’s responsibility as a good citizen to report her good fortune to the powers that be. Not surprisingly, however, Ms. Clayton is in no hurry to revise her welfare status.
A reporter caught up with Ms. Clayton outside her home (I mean ONE of her homes) and asked her questions along the line of why she was still in the welfare program now that she was a wealthy lottery winner. He specifically asked her if she still felt entitled to her welfare benefits, to which Ms. Clayton replied, “I kind of do.” She went on to say, “I thought that they would cut me off, but since they didn’t, I thought maybe it was OK because I’m not working. I feel that it’s OK since I have no income and I have bills to pay. I have two houses.” (Emphasis mine)
There are a couple of troubling things about Ms. Clayton. First, she appears to continue to have a sense of entitlement. That is, no matter how much money she may receive, whether in a lottery, in some settlement, or maybe just a huge gift from her friends, she has no “income” because she does not “work.” I suppose if she had won one of those “Super Power Ball” lotteries, with prizes in the triple digit millions, she would still have no “income.”
At the same time, we are all left to wonder why she does not work. I am trying to be non-judgmental here. Maybe she has some handicap. Maybe she is taking care of her mother, who apparently resides with her. Whatever the case, Ms. Clayton does not “work.” So, in spite of having over half a million dollars, Ms. Clayton is so concerned about her ability to buy food that she still needs the $200 food entitlement. I guess that if she went grocery shopping and accidentally spent $700,001, she should certainly be able to depend on her state dole to pay the extra dollar.
The other troubling thing about Ms. Clayton is that she gives one the impression that she will probably not go out of her way to make sure that the Illinois welfare agency knows she won the lottery. This may be a moot point, however, since the entire nation is now aware of her recent good fortune. But remember, the Illinois state welfare official already let us know that his agency would not make much of an effort to find out if any particular welfare recipient’s financial condition had changed. If the welfare office does not update Ms. Clayton’s financial status, would she do the right thing on her own? Would she voluntarily have herself removed from the Illinois welfare tab? Should she do so?
I have to admit that my first reaction was, “Of course she should report her new found wealth immediately, and ask that she be removed from the welfare rolls.” But upon thinking it over a little more calmly, I could see that it might be proper to consider all Ms. Clayton’s financial and social circumstances before making such a judgment. The Illinois Legislature apparently thinks so as well. They are working on a bill at the moment that would provide for the examination of any welfare recipient’s eligibility for continued entitlements should that person win any lottery prize worth over one thousand dollars. This is a step in the right direction, although the bill has been pending for over a year now. By the way, why is a welfare recipient playing the lottery in the first place? That is a subject for another blog.
Let us presume that a welfare recipient somehow had the means to play the lottery at other than taxpayer expense. If the person won $1,000 or even $5,000, chances are slim that this in itself would be enough to end the person’s need for (or dependence on) the welfare dole. On the other hand, a person who won a large prize, such as a $1,000,000 super-prize, should probably be taken off the welfare rolls. I suppose an exception would be if the winner owed $1,000,000 in medical bills or some other expense. If the person were legally obligated to pay off the debt with lottery winnings, that person would still essentially be “broke” and therefore still eligible for welfare even though technically a “millionaire.”
It is inevitable that a welfare recipient will win the lottery again in one state or another. While it may be that we could depend on most lottery winners to voluntarily update their status with their respective welfare agencies, there would still be some who would “omit” their status update. For these people, a system of cross-checking lottery winners with welfare recipients would insure that they were caught and charged with welfare fraud. They could then use their lottery winnings to pay for their criminal defense, thus saving taxpayer money that would have been expended for that purpose.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
After Fifty - Living Dangerously
In July of last year, my fiftieth birthday came and went, actually with relatively little fanfare. Unlike the immanent 12/21/12, the world did not end on my birthday. I did not even get the usual black party or "over the hill" bash. Basically, nothing happened. Actually, though, something DID happen. I began to live dangerously. As my daughter said, "Gee, Dad, you've made FIFTY! You've beaten the odds!" We were discussing motorcycles at the time, and Child B (the daughter) was trying to encourage me to learn to ride a motorcycle. And, oddly enough, I AM seriously considering it! But today I have done what must surely be one of the most dangerous things a man can do. You would think at fifty I would know better, that I should have learned over the two decades of marriage. Not me!
Yesterday my lovely bride told me she was getting a haircut today. She wanted to get her hair "cut off." So today, after work, I drove home eager 1) to see my spouse's lovely new haircut, and 2) to depart for Tampico, one of the better Mexican food restaurants in the Midland area. Just as I pulled into the drive, I saw my son (Child A) walking toward our residence. I joined him and we both entered my residence together. There, seated on the couch, was my lovely bride and her new...er, um. I told her, "Lovely Bride, you did not get your hair cut after all!" My spouse said, "What?! I DID GET A NEW HAIRCUT!" Like I said, having turned fifty, I really DO like living dangerously!
Child A, standing a few feet away, was already looking at me as if I were a distant but cherished memory. He is not even thirty and HE knew I was now in the DANGER ZONE. Thinking rather quickly for a fifty-year-old I said "Oh, Lovely Bride, they did your cut so well you can't even tell you've HAD a haircut." The LAZER-EYES (as discussed in an earlier blog) were pointed in my direction, boring holes through my skull. Child A, standing a few feet away, continued to stare at me as if I were a distant but cherished memory. Thinking quickly again, I said, "Tampico?" I was quickly out the door before Lazer Eyes could do any further damage.
Needless to say, the evening had a happy ending (else I would not now be writing these words). Yes, we went to Tampico, with Child A in tow. The Lazer Eyes were extinguished with a Tampico special Margarita and some good food a la the Botano Platter. It was a great meal, and there was lots of laughter thanks to Child A's witty sense of humor. The great meal was topped off by a stop at the local TCBY parlor, then home again. With more quick thinking, I made numerous observations concerning the loveliness of my Lovely Bride's new hairdo. I think that the combination of my silver tongue and the spouse's frozen Margarita won the day. Now Child A is gone to his abode, and I am seated on the couch with my Lovely ( and somewhat mellowed) Bride. She has a new hairdo and I am really enjoying my Year of Living Dangerously.
Yesterday my lovely bride told me she was getting a haircut today. She wanted to get her hair "cut off." So today, after work, I drove home eager 1) to see my spouse's lovely new haircut, and 2) to depart for Tampico, one of the better Mexican food restaurants in the Midland area. Just as I pulled into the drive, I saw my son (Child A) walking toward our residence. I joined him and we both entered my residence together. There, seated on the couch, was my lovely bride and her new...er, um. I told her, "Lovely Bride, you did not get your hair cut after all!" My spouse said, "What?! I DID GET A NEW HAIRCUT!" Like I said, having turned fifty, I really DO like living dangerously!
Child A, standing a few feet away, was already looking at me as if I were a distant but cherished memory. He is not even thirty and HE knew I was now in the DANGER ZONE. Thinking rather quickly for a fifty-year-old I said "Oh, Lovely Bride, they did your cut so well you can't even tell you've HAD a haircut." The LAZER-EYES (as discussed in an earlier blog) were pointed in my direction, boring holes through my skull. Child A, standing a few feet away, continued to stare at me as if I were a distant but cherished memory. Thinking quickly again, I said, "Tampico?" I was quickly out the door before Lazer Eyes could do any further damage.
Needless to say, the evening had a happy ending (else I would not now be writing these words). Yes, we went to Tampico, with Child A in tow. The Lazer Eyes were extinguished with a Tampico special Margarita and some good food a la the Botano Platter. It was a great meal, and there was lots of laughter thanks to Child A's witty sense of humor. The great meal was topped off by a stop at the local TCBY parlor, then home again. With more quick thinking, I made numerous observations concerning the loveliness of my Lovely Bride's new hairdo. I think that the combination of my silver tongue and the spouse's frozen Margarita won the day. Now Child A is gone to his abode, and I am seated on the couch with my Lovely ( and somewhat mellowed) Bride. She has a new hairdo and I am really enjoying my Year of Living Dangerously.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Leap Day - Part Two
Yesterday was Leap Day for 2012. I hope you had a great one and did something special. In Midland, Texas seven babies were born on this day. One of the parents already said he is going to count his daughter’s age only by Leap Years. When his daughter thinks she is sixteen and wants to drive the family care, Daddy will tell her that she has only had four birthdays and therefore is too young to drive the car, and particularly too young to date. Personally I am not holding my breath for that one. I suspect that this young lady will have had several boyfriends and a couple of speeding tickets by the time she reaches her “fourth” birthday.
Actually I have been thinking about some modern uses for Leap Day, and I believe I have come up with some good things that could be done on Leap Day every Leap Year. First, why pay federal income tax every single year? Just think of the administrative costs that could be saved if taxes had to be filed each LEAP DAY. I can hear the IRS screaming now. It’s just a thought!
For school students, why not decree that those children must take the TAKS each and every February 29th? Along with that decree would be the requirement that teachers could only begin “preparing” the students for their test six months before the upcoming Leap Day test. Wouldn’t it be great if students could actually “learn” for at least three out of every four years?
What about the United States presidential election? Yes, I know it already occurs during each Leap Year, but I would like to add a new twist. Instead of the seemingly endless campaigning, with the associated huge political contributions and accompanying cronyism, I submit to you that we should limit the presidential campaign to only the months of January and February of each election year. In January the candidates could campaign until the 15th of the month. The remainder of the month would be dedicated to primary elections. In Leap February, the winners of the primaries would have another five days to make their final campaign appearances. The election would then be held. The results of the election would be vetted by the fifteenth day of February, leaving our new president another two weeks to be briefed and “brought up to speed” by inauguration day, Leap Day!
These ideas of mine for a better use of Leap Day are “tongue in cheek” ideas, but really only half so. I am somewhat serious as I write this blog. Why not just one scholastic achievement test, if such a test is needed at all? After all, students must pass tests and otherwise prove they have gained the required knowledge at many points during each school year. As to students who have NOT achieved passing levels, THAT is already known too, AND without the need for a separate (and federally mandated) achievement test. As to national elections, why should we be forced to endure (and finance!) two years of presidential campaigns? Again, I am sure many people would love to see the campaign season whittled down very drastically. As to income tax only every fourth year, do not hold your breath for that one. Income taxes will be an annual requirement for years to come, as long as there is a United States of America.
Thanks, everyone, and have a happy Leap Year!
Actually I have been thinking about some modern uses for Leap Day, and I believe I have come up with some good things that could be done on Leap Day every Leap Year. First, why pay federal income tax every single year? Just think of the administrative costs that could be saved if taxes had to be filed each LEAP DAY. I can hear the IRS screaming now. It’s just a thought!
For school students, why not decree that those children must take the TAKS each and every February 29th? Along with that decree would be the requirement that teachers could only begin “preparing” the students for their test six months before the upcoming Leap Day test. Wouldn’t it be great if students could actually “learn” for at least three out of every four years?
What about the United States presidential election? Yes, I know it already occurs during each Leap Year, but I would like to add a new twist. Instead of the seemingly endless campaigning, with the associated huge political contributions and accompanying cronyism, I submit to you that we should limit the presidential campaign to only the months of January and February of each election year. In January the candidates could campaign until the 15th of the month. The remainder of the month would be dedicated to primary elections. In Leap February, the winners of the primaries would have another five days to make their final campaign appearances. The election would then be held. The results of the election would be vetted by the fifteenth day of February, leaving our new president another two weeks to be briefed and “brought up to speed” by inauguration day, Leap Day!
These ideas of mine for a better use of Leap Day are “tongue in cheek” ideas, but really only half so. I am somewhat serious as I write this blog. Why not just one scholastic achievement test, if such a test is needed at all? After all, students must pass tests and otherwise prove they have gained the required knowledge at many points during each school year. As to students who have NOT achieved passing levels, THAT is already known too, AND without the need for a separate (and federally mandated) achievement test. As to national elections, why should we be forced to endure (and finance!) two years of presidential campaigns? Again, I am sure many people would love to see the campaign season whittled down very drastically. As to income tax only every fourth year, do not hold your breath for that one. Income taxes will be an annual requirement for years to come, as long as there is a United States of America.
Thanks, everyone, and have a happy Leap Year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)