It just keeps getting worse and worse for Obama’s legacy.
Conservative journalists and alert citizens are finding more and more that any talk of Barack’s ‘successes’ in office is a sham, plain and simple. For while the failures are numerous, the successes, as it happens, are quite often far worse. Economic recovery? Not quite. Expanded freedom of the press? Tell it to the whistleblowers in hiding.
Raising lower-class Americans out of poverty? Well, apparently not.
Breitbart gave Obama’s legacy one more bitter pill to swallow yesterday, and reported an unprecedented 32% rise in the use of food stamps since 2009. That number, too, is adjusted for population growth, and accounts for the over 44 million people on food stamps at the end of 2016. Such a stark increase is a blunt and pitiless counter to any discussion of economic expansion, or the end of the recession. People with steady jobs don’t get on food stamps. People without steady jobs do. It’s quite simple.
There’s more, too – the cost of the stamps are up, but not their purchasing power. The average families on food stamps don’t need more of them now than they did in 2009, but the program itself still got much more expensive. “As of 2009, all food stamp recipients received up to $50.0 billion in benefits. As of 2016, that number has increased to $66.6 billion, an estimated increase of $16.3 billion.” Again, that’s a cost increase of well over 15 billion. So, before we get excessively proud of the fact that, at least, we’re feeding more hungry Americans in need, keep in mind that we’re doing it so poorly that we’re bleeding even more money – funds that, had we a president with a mind for business, might be better used to help the very same poor Americans we failed over the past eight years.
I should point out that I am, even here, giving Obama the benefit of the doubt. Assuming he had the best of intentions, and only expanded food stamps to help only Americans in need, and no one else, he still failed. The prognosis is much worse if he expanded the program to keep Americans in poverty, rather than save them from it.
However, given any brief history of the Democratic party, we probably shouldn’t hold our breath for Option 1.
Barack was fond of saying – over and over, mind you – that the economic hardships the country faced when he went into office were not his fault. Well, good sir, the hardships the country faces as you leave are, by every good standard of judgment, completely your fault. More people are hungry, more people are poor, and more people are draining the public funds without the means of escape.
Give yourself a round of applause.