Tennesee legislators propose new bill which ties welfare to children's school performance

Originally posted by calstorm
reply to post by ButterCookie

 

Also, if a parent is getting TANF (welfare checks), they are more than likely eligible for the state health care and could treat the child's disorder at no cost. No excuses here.

Not all health issues are curable. Sometimes the cure is harder on the child than the illness. What if the dr.s can't figure out what is wrong with the child? State medical care is usually very poor to begin with.

True. There are situations where care is not going to 'fix' the disability. But remember, the bill is not targeted at affecting children who are diagnosed as having disabilities anyway.

Originally posted by watcher3339
This is ...interesting.
For those concerned about government interference - the reality is that the government was invented in via the parent's need/request for welfare.

For those worried about students who try but have actual learning issues -- there are plenty of systems in place, which cost a lot of money, to identify and provide adequate compensation for those students. Some parents step to the plate and some of those students become the kind of shining success that makes that effort and expense feel worthwhile. Others use the paperwork as an excuse, do very little to support, motivate, or raise their child and then sue the school district (costing the rest of the taxpayers money) saying that their student must not have received sufficient support from the school. Even when districts when, it costs money to defend these lawsuits. The lawsuits have given some kids a license to disrupt the environment and the learning of others.

I will really have to think about it, but yeah...it is very interesting.

I agree!!

A very interesting point that you raise: for the people who say that "government should not be interfering in the way I raise my child or how they behave/perform in school", they must consider that these recipients have called on the government to "help take care of their child" in the first place.

They then receive that help in the form of welfare, section 8, food stamps, free childcare, free health and dental care, etc...

The problem that they have is when the government demands cooperation on their behalf to help themselves out of poverty.

Same sentiment given when people are in support of drug testing welfare recipients: "Oh no!! This is an attack on the poor!!" No, it actually HELPS the poor by making sure they have a clean system able to pass a drug test for employment, which will eventually ween them off the system.

reply to post by ButterCookie


i see a whole bunch of kids getting their ass beat everday of their life till 18 or out of school lol.

Originally posted by ButterCookie
New Tennessee welfare bill is aimed at 'parents who nothing' by reducing the amount of welfare benefits they receive by 30%.

A Tennessee lawmaker is pushing a controversial new bill that would tie welfare benefits to students' performance in school. Republican state Sen. Stacey Campfield last week introduced the legislation, which calls for the state to cut welfare benefits to parents whose kids don't do well in class. Critics are already panning the proposal as unfair, and one that could hurt students in the end -- but Campfield is defending his idea, which he says would force parents to take a more active role in their children’s education “We’re not asking children to re-write the Magna Carta,” Campfield told FoxNews.com Monday. “A D-minus gets you through.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

“Nothing motivates people like money,” Campfield said. “We have done very little to hold parents accountable for their child’s performance. It’s unacceptable to have this generational cycle of poverty continue.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

“For a long time parents have gotten away with doing absolutely nothing to help their children,” Campfield said. “That’s child abuse to me.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

I fully support this legislation, as I whole-heartedly agree with Senator Campfield. Too long have many welfare recipients gotten away with collecting benefits while their children are delinquent and cannot functionally read or write. Of course this does not describe ALL welfare recipients' situations.

It would, however, force more recipients to become more responsible for their children which in the end is beneficial for the child, the parents, and society as a whole.

Comments?

But then you may have a child that is and is being raised properly that has concentration problems at school after his or her parents divorced, coupled with the bullying he/she endures at school and even though you are a role model parent and the child not a problem child you still get punished because your child's grades were not high enough.

what then.

I think this is a great idea. However the percentage should not be too high otherwise the kid will feel under too much pressure.

And the welfare should also be tied to school attendance.

Wish they had such a thing here in Arizona...
Here they have so many illegals, that they push everyone through high school. They may be functionally illiterate but they have a high school diploma. You see once someone gets a high school diploma in AZ, the state has no obligation to further 'educate' them.
That is also why functionally illiterate students are not held back a year when they fail. If the are held back, then the state has to pay additional funds for the student.
Here in this locale, the schools run for only six or seven hours per day, sometimes less, because of funding issues. Issues brought on by the schools themselves...for instance an illegal Central American student who speaks no English; they hired a personal translator.
Illegals and drugs are killing the school system here...

Originally posted by Maslo
I think this is a great idea. However the percentage should not be too high otherwise the kid will feel under too much pressure.

And the welfare should also be tied to school attendance.

The child is not supposed to be concerned with how much welfare gets cut. This is the parent's business. And attendance is usually tied in with performance anyway.

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by Maslo
I think this is a great idea. However the percentage should not be too high otherwise the kid will feel under too much pressure.

And the welfare should also be tied to school attendance.

The child is not supposed to be concerned with how much welfare gets cut. This is the parent's business. And attendance is usually tied in with performance anyway.

How can you honestly think that the child won't know or be concerned when his family is forced into even more poverty because of even more government intrusion into their lives?

Hypocrites.....Conservatives don't want the government meddling in their lives but it perfectly OK to **** with the poor under the guise of "helping them"

That's right scapegoat the poor instead of actually looking at the cause of poverty and doing something about it.
Let's institute a completely new program, staffed with bean counters, loads of administrators to pry into the lives of poor people.....smaller government.....yeah right

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by Maslo
I think this is a great idea. However the percentage should not be too high otherwise the kid will feel under too much pressure.

And the welfare should also be tied to school attendance.

The child is not supposed to be concerned with how much welfare gets cut. This is the parent's business. And attendance is usually tied in with performance anyway.

How can you honestly think that the child won't know or be concerned when his family is forced into even more poverty because of even more government intrusion into their lives?

Hypocrites.....Conservatives don't want the government meddling in their lives but it perfectly OK to **** with the poor under the guise of "helping them"

That's right scapegoat the poor instead of actually looking at the cause of poverty and doing something about it.
Let's institute a completely new program, staffed with bean counters, loads of administrators to pry into the lives of poor people.....smaller government.....yeah right

edit on 4-4-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Because the child is a child. Why is the child needing to even know that the parent is receiving assistance in the first place? That's 'grown folks business'.

Who would even burden their child with telling them that information?

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by Maslo
I think this is a great idea. However the percentage should not be too high otherwise the kid will feel under too much pressure.

And the welfare should also be tied to school attendance.

The child is not supposed to be concerned with how much welfare gets cut. This is the parent's business. And attendance is usually tied in with performance anyway.

How can you honestly think that the child won't know or be concerned when his family is forced into even more poverty because of even more government intrusion into their lives?

Hypocrites.....Conservatives don't want the government meddling in their lives but it perfectly OK to **** with the poor under the guise of "helping them"

That's right scapegoat the poor instead of actually looking at the cause of poverty and doing something about it.
Let's institute a completely new program, staffed with bean counters, loads of administrators to pry into the lives of poor people.....smaller government.....yeah right

edit on 4-4-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Because the child is a child. Why is the child needing to even know that the parent is receiving assistance in the first place? That's 'grown folks business'.

Who would even burden their child with telling them that information?

Even as a child; I knew what was going on in my household even if I wasn't directly told or involved in the conversation. I listened to the adults and understood what they were talking about and could feel the desperation and fear in their voices. "grown folks business" is often discussed by the whole family so as to get input from all family members; better to make a decision that the whole family will be affected by. It's called communication.

I'm thinking that you are a young person and does not have much life experience and has lived a very sheltered life. imo

reply to post by olaru12


As far as what children know about the financial aspect of things... they know either if they are poor, well off or wealthy. With an exception being of a few bills, like a cell phone bill or the electric bill. That's it. It's no place for a child to have to play or attempt to play accountant and balance check books or worry about how they are going to get that extra $57.25 for the gas bill due in 17 days.

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by olaru12

 

As far as what children know about the financial aspect of things... they know either if they are poor, well off or wealthy. With an exception being of a few bills, like a cell phone bill or the electric bill. That's it. It's no place for a child to have to play or attempt to play accountant and balance check books or worry about how they are going to get that extra $57.25 for the gas bill due in 17 days.

Exactly my point.

People are saying that this will be added pressure for the child to do better in school, for sake of the household. And like you and I said, this pressure isn't supposed to be on the child anyway.

If a parent has shifted the pressure of bills on the child, then something is wrong with the parent.

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by olaru12

 

As far as what children know about the financial aspect of things... they know either if they are poor, well off or wealthy. With an exception being of a few bills, like a cell phone bill or the electric bill. That's it. It's no place for a child to have to play or attempt to play accountant and balance check books or worry about how they are going to get that extra $57.25 for the gas bill due in 17 days.

That's hyperbole BS and you know it....

You can say that because I'll bet you came from a middle or upper middle class background.
I grew up in a situation where "sorry, we just can't afford it" was a daily quote from my parents. I understood what it
meant before I was in 1st grade. Damn it's just astonishing how affluent people seem to know how poor folks think and what they need. What arrogance....

Read my signature please! It certainly applies

Originally posted by Rubic0n

Originally posted by ButterCookie
New Tennessee welfare bill is aimed at 'parents who nothing' by reducing the amount of welfare benefits they receive by 30%.

A Tennessee lawmaker is pushing a controversial new bill that would tie welfare benefits to students' performance in school. Republican state Sen. Stacey Campfield last week introduced the legislation, which calls for the state to cut welfare benefits to parents whose kids don't do well in class. Critics are already panning the proposal as unfair, and one that could hurt students in the end -- but Campfield is defending his idea, which he says would force parents to take a more active role in their children’s education “We’re not asking children to re-write the Magna Carta,” Campfield told FoxNews.com Monday. “A D-minus gets you through.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

“Nothing motivates people like money,” Campfield said. “We have done very little to hold parents accountable for their child’s performance. It’s unacceptable to have this generational cycle of poverty continue.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

“For a long time parents have gotten away with doing absolutely nothing to help their children,” Campfield said. “That’s child abuse to me.” Read more: www.foxnews.com...

I fully support this legislation, as I whole-heartedly agree with Senator Campfield. Too long have many welfare recipients gotten away with collecting benefits while their children are delinquent and cannot functionally read or write. Of course this does not describe ALL welfare recipients' situations.

It would, however, force more recipients to become more responsible for their children which in the end is beneficial for the child, the parents, and society as a whole.

Comments?

But then you may have a child that is and is being raised properly that has concentration problems at school after his or her parents divorced, coupled with the bullying he/she endures at school and even though you are a role model parent and the child not a problem child you still get punished because your child's grades were not high enough.

what then.

Again, you are placing the responsibility of the household on the child. The parents in the situation are supposed to take on that burden, getting themselves out of poverty so that the money is not determined by the child's grades in the first place.

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by olaru12

 

As far as what children know about the financial aspect of things... they know either if they are poor, well off or wealthy. With an exception being of a few bills, like a cell phone bill or the electric bill. That's it. It's no place for a child to have to play or attempt to play accountant and balance check books or worry about how they are going to get that extra $57.25 for the gas bill due in 17 days.

That's hyperbole BS and you know it....

You can say that because I'll bet you came from a middle or upper middle class background.
I grew up in a situation where "sorry, we just can't afford it" was a daily quote from my parents. I understood what it
meant before I was in 1st grade. Damn it's just astonishing how affluent people seem to know how poor folks think and what they need. What arrogance....

That's not what Kimishi is saying at all.

What we are trying to say is that whether or not the child 'understand's that they are poor, the responsibility isn't supposed to be on them. How lowly of parent who is receiving state assistance to be angered at the CHILD if the child's grades are failing and benefits are cut off?

If I were the child, I would tell the parent,"This is not MY responsibility ANYWAY".

reply to post by olaru12


Wrong, I grew up poor as #, way below the poverty line, in a single parent household, went to the poorest school in the county and one of the poorest in the state... try again.

Your signature means nothing seeing that MLK was a womanizer and practiced infidelity. Pot, meet kettle. That's what I see in your signature. Sorry. I call it like I see it.

Originally posted by daveinats
Wish they had such a thing here in Arizona...
Here they have so many illegals, that they push everyone through high school. They may be functionally illiterate but they have a high school diploma. You see once someone gets a high school diploma in AZ, the state has no obligation to further 'educate' them.
That is also why functionally illiterate students are not held back a year when they fail. If the are held back, then the state has to pay additional funds for the student.
Here in this locale, the schools run for only six or seven hours per day, sometimes less, because of funding issues. Issues brought on by the schools themselves...for instance an illegal Central American student who speaks no English; they hired a personal translator.
Illegals and drugs are killing the school system here...

the answer to your problem in Arizona is....QUIT HIRING ILLEGALS, and give the people that do hire them, mandatory prison sentences of 2 years...call it tough love

Originally posted by kimish


Your signature means nothing seeing that MLK was a womanizer and practiced infidelity. Pot, meet kettle. That's what I see in your signature. Sorry. I call it like I see it.

That's right attack the man not the message.

Pulling out old #5 is such a lame ploy at deflection.

Perhaps you should read this....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I on the other hand don't apologize for calling it like I see it!! The MLK message stands on it's own merits.


But if you grew up poor as # like you stated; I was wrong for jumping to conclusions and I apologize. However you should know that government intervention in poor folks lives is as despicable as placing restrictions and rules on anyone else. Scapegoating the poor for political reasons is so typical of conservatives though.

reply to post by olaru12


Because of the "man" that relayed that message, the message means nothing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
If Will Ferrell told you he was a surgeon, how much credibility would he have? Bad analogy but you get the point. And the point is valid.
The government is opportunistic towards needy people. And some people are opportunistic towards government handouts. Fact. My family was denied help. Fact. I was denied help. Fact. Father of 2, pay child support, living with mom... NO government help to assist me on getting on my feet.... You get the point... again.

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by olaru12

 

Because of the "man" that relayed that message, the message means nothing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
If Will Ferrell told you he was a surgeon, how much credibility would he have? Bad analogy but you get the point. And the point is valid.
The government is opportunistic towards needy people. And some people are opportunistic towards government handouts. Fact.

edit on 5-4-2013 by kimish because: (no reason given)

Will Ferrell... Livin with mom...

Your signature fits you quite well....