Welfare statistics have liberal bias!

Families Receiving Welfare

New Gingrich, the cuddly prophet of conservatism, has called Obama the “food stamp president” and the “welfare president.” Bill O’Reilly, who is never wrong, has said that under Obama we have become a “welfare nation.”  Dick Morris, on Fox News, said, “Obama Has Basically Put Everybody In The Country On Welfare.”

So how is it possible that this above graph shows the number of families receiving welfare assistance is dramatically lower than it was at any time in the 1990’s? Indeed, according to this graph, there are almost 2 million fewer families receiving welfare assistance now than there were in 1996.  According to this graph, the number of families receiving welfare looks like it is going down even though the number of families with children in poverty has been going up!


There is clearly a very sinister plot going on here. Since welfare recipients are notoriously liberal, they must be refusing to accept the free handouts that Obama is trying to give them just to make Fox News look bad.

But we know better! This statistic clearly is just the product of a massive conspiracy and  liberal bias!!!!

graph source:  Graph: Washington Post, Data: CBPP
found via: Washington Post

17 Replies to “Welfare statistics have liberal bias!”

  1. Oh, your “source” was the Washington Post? Your graph came from the nation’s second largest “I Love ‘Rats!” bird cage liner? OK! That’s good enough for me!

    1. You’ve ignored the claim and made an ad hominem attack against The Washington Post. This is the type of “argument” typical of conservatives. I suppose you get your “news” from a “fair and balanced” source. Do you have any conflicting information?

      1. The original post is full of parenthetical ad hominems. God forbid a commenter (it’s the internet!) should follow suit… And in case you haven’t been on this internet thing for very long, that is the type of argument typical of liberals and conservatives! You can find liberals and conservatives who try not to make those arguments, but the typical liberal and conservative makes them in spades. Any time you find yourself saying X is typical of libs/cons, it’s wise to check yourself.

  2. Way to go captain obvious!! You’ve pointed out that everything, just like YOUR ARTICLE, is biased towards whoever is writing it. Wow how old are you? Just wondering how long it took you to find out that we all protect our own interests. And yes I’m a conservative and we are just as biased on absolutely everything.

  3. I haven’t looked at the data source for the chart, but it’s possible that welfare assistance has a narrower meaning than “all assistance programs” or whatever you are taking it to mean, so that both the chart and Newt Gingrich (et al) could be right. Casey Mulligan has been writing about some of this (eg http://caseymulligan.blogspot.com/2012/04/has-1996-welfare-reform-been-reversed.html and http://caseymulligan.blogspot.com/2012/05/food-stamps-and-unemployment-insurance.html); I think he has a book coming out about it. Anyway, you can see that the rise in foodstamps predates Obama, though it has continued strongly during his presidency.

  4. How about a factual comment from a conservative. 4.4 million on welfare in 2010 according to USA Today. Also according to Congressional Budget Office, Department of Commerce and Brookings Institution. See below.


    How about Welfare cost rising from 63.4B to 108.3B 2008-2012. Unemployment insurance raising from 43.8B to 96.3B 2008-2012. Source: Department of Commerce – of these United States of America.

      1. Hey Genius, I didn’t say anything about Obama. I pointed out that the chart says the number of people on welfare was 1.98 million. All of my sources claim it was 4.4 million. That’s all, no Obama bashing. Your response is pretentious.

  5. JRD3123 you do know that the U.S. Department of Commerce is not a government agency right? They are one of the most I influential lobbying groups (not to mention highest paying) for corporations in this country. One could conclude their overall agenda for publishing those statistics is because they want to convince you that Obama is not creating jobs… when in fact he just wants to tax them more and stop manufacturing over seas.

    1. How about some old fashion life experiences. My wife had a 15% pay cut three years ago. They are threatening another pay cut soon. Our Health insurance has gone up 18% this year. Our health insurance deductible has risen from $2000.00 to $5000.00 in the last two years. I accepted a 10% pay cut and to the company’s credit, they haven’t laid anyone off. Fica taxes have risen so our paychecks have been reduced by 2%. QE is reducing the value of the dollar which causes the cost of food, price of gas, electricity and cost of living to artificially rise. One high point is my home value gone up. I turn on the aphabet news organizations and they talk about the Q storm and housing prices. Nothing mentioned about the price of food, insurance, gas and electricity prices going up or any of the struggles regular people face day by day because of Quanitative Easing. I’m not trying to place blame, crony capitalism has been going on for the last 5 – 6 years. Obama didn’t start this fiasco, Bush did. The difference is the media isn’t reporting it now, where they reported it ad nauseum when Bush was in office. To say there is no media bias demonstrates a disturbing view that is struggling with honesty.

      1. Here is some of my old fashion life experiences. My pay and insurance has stayed the same. Except that my bonuses have increased. We bought a 2nd home, a new van and had 2 awesome vacations. All of this in the last 15 months. Sorry your having such a hard time JRD3123, but sometimes you just need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and hit it. Maybe a college education(or a better one) would have benefited you and your wife. I could offer you other advice that could benefit you, but you seem to be the type that blames everyone else, but the man in the mirror. I do however wish you luck.

        1. I never said we weren’t doing well. I would rather spend my money on something instead of health insurance. The healthcare costs have risen by 32% according to Washington AP. You’re either not paying attention or your being dishonest when you say your insurance hasn’t been paying more for medical claims. When costs go up insurance rates go up. Ours has risen by the amounts I spoke of earlier. The affordable care act is estimated to raise costs of health insurance by 60-85% by 2017 according to the AP. As for me, I have taken a new job. Jobs are easy to find if you want one. We’ve paid off our second home and are doing fine financially. We could spread the proverbial wealth around if our insurance hadn’t risen by so much. I heard rumblings from the Weather channel this morning about health insurance costs rising 32%. So I guess I’ll not have a point about media bias if they start paying attention and reporting their findings accurately. Wow, even the weather channel gets it. Cheers!

  6. Actually, those who scoff at the chart’s source are absolutely correct. The actual number of persons receiving some form of welfare is 51 million, to the tune of $131 billion. Source: US Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Commerce, CATO Institute
    Date Verified: 10.15.2012

    Now, the chart might actually be referring to the number of persons on welfare just in Washington, D.C., which is believable.

    1. You’re comparing “individuals who have received any kind of assistance” to “families that have received income-related welfare”.

      When the CATO Institute talks about “any kind of assistance” their criteria are pretty broad. It includes vets on disability and students with government-sourced scholarships. When making the claim that we are becoming a “welfare nation” it’s pretty irresponsible, and misleading, to define the term so broadly.

      More on this topic:
      Jim DeMint says 69.5 Americans Dependent on Government

Leave a Reply to JRD3123 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *