Dependency On Government Growing

Nearly Half of US Households Receiving Benefits from Uncle Sam

Dependency On Government Growing
April 28, 2016

Whether you believe it is a good trend or a bad one, the number of households that receive benefits from the Federal Government has almost reached the halfway mark.

Welfare Dependence Keeps Growing

According to the most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 152.9 million out of 308.9 million total Americans received some form of government entitlement benefit in the third quarter of 2012. That is 49.5% of the population, and given underestimation and existing growth rates, we may be at the 50% mark already. For comparison, in the third quarter of 1983, only 29.6% of Americans received government entitlement benefits such as Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and various means-tested entitlements.

At first glance, one could credit the rise to the "graying" of America thanks to the retirement of the Baby Boomer generation, but that fails to explain the overall increase of individuals receiving entitlements. Of the nearly twenty percentage-point increase in Americans receiving entitlements from 1983 to 2012, Social Security and Medicare only accounted for 1.9 and 3.7 percentage points of the increase, respectively. When the overlap between these two programs is taken into account, less than four percentage points of the twenty-point increase are related to age-based programs.

Where is causing the increase in government dependency?

The increase is mostly from an explosion in means-tested entitlements designed to help those in poverty. There is no doubt that these programs help, but have they reached a point where they perpetuate poverty rather than assist it?

Means-tested programs are generally intended to be temporary to participants, but as the old saying goes, "there's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution." Consider that while the U.S. population rose by approximately 83 million people between 1983 and 2012, the number of Americans on means-tested benefits rose by 67 million, or around 80% of that number. This is a period of time with a few serious recessions but with significant economic booms and overall sound economic growth.

Large increases in Federal SSI (1.4% to 6.6%) and SNAP (8.3% to 16.5%) are dwarfed by the increase in Medicaid coverage (7.8% to 26.9%). Keep in mind that this is during a time when the Federal government is putting pressure on states to expand Medicaid coverage even further.

How is this trend reversed?

It has to be reversed through meaningful means-tested reform that removes disincentives to find work. It can be done, as shown by the one data point that bucks the trend.

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was originally intended to support the children of deceased workers in the 1930's, but it eventually evolved into a support mechanism for split families and unwed mothers. Eventually, AFDC became a magnet for so-called "welfare mothers" with greater incentive to have children and receive benefits than even to attempt to work.

The Clinton administration managed to rein in these benefits by revising AFDC into the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program and restoring the temporary aspect of restricted benefits. As a result, the percentage of Americans on AFDC/TANF dropped from 4.2% to 1.8% between 1983 and 2012.

While aid programs must incentivize job-hunting, it is also important to have jobs for the poor to seek, and the wages must at least be livable to provide greater incentive than the anti-poverty support programs. The jobs component appears to be missing, with unemployment near the "full-employment" mark of 5% and a decrease in overall workforce participants.

Do not hold your breath for any reversal of government entitlement dependence in an election year. While the election results will go a long way toward determining the future trajectory of this trend, the contrasted 1983 to 2012 period covered both Republican and Democratic administrations and various Congressional configurations. Entitlement reform is not just a Republican or Democratic problem — it's an American problem.

Photo ©

  Conversation   |   13 Comments

Add a Comment

By submitting you agree to our Terms of Service
Erin | 04.28.16 @ 18:45
I think there is a lot of reform that can be done with just about all of our national programs. It wouldn't hurt Congress to get off their duffs every once in a while, review these programs, and adjust them fairly, as necessary. I guess it's asking a bit too much for them to do their actual jobs though.
irene | 04.28.16 @ 18:45
Wow that's a lot more people than I thought.
Carla | 04.28.16 @ 18:47
Those numbers are really shocking. There has to be a way to improve that.
Steffanie | 04.28.16 @ 18:51
That is a lot of people. Sadly, I think the government wants it that way.
Jo Ann | 04.28.16 @ 18:52
If the government wants to get people off the system, they need to increase wages for minimum wages, I don't know any person or a 2 person couple making minimum wage can pay for food childcare, medical, rent, etc on minimum wages. Increase wages would allow poor people to buy more, and better support their families. Increasing wages would increase spending which therefore increases demand for consumer goods.
Carla | 04.28.16 @ 18:52
It sounds like a change is in order but also sounds like it would be a slow burning progression. There has to be a plan set in motion before it gets any worse.
Sarah | 04.28.16 @ 18:57
this doesn't really surprise me much. it'd be nice if it wasn't so but we've been lead down this path and there doesn't seem to be much room for turnaround yet.
Beverly | 04.28.16 @ 19:01
I didn't realize all of this was out there. I knew some of it and we definitely need some reform as we can't continue to sustain the way it is.
gracie | 04.28.16 @ 19:07
If they don't bring back some sort of industry that will provide more jobs and better jobs these numbers will continue to increase. There needs to be a way out first before people can get out.
Wanda Langley | 04.29.16 @ 14:03
Something in this Country needs to change, That is way too many People needing help. I do not think our Elected Government is doing their Jobs for the Money that they are Paid.
Greg | 05.07.16 @ 21:00
What this article completely misses is the number/percentage of people who are working full-time jobs yet still need benefits to cover basic living expenses. For the vast majority of workers, real income after inflation has not increased in over 20 years, yet prices for rent, utilities and healthcare have risen far above the inflation rate.
andrewandreyko | 05.08.16 @ 22:44
People who paid into social security are not freeloaders, the system may be flawed, but they paid their dues to infer they are unjustly taking something is wrong
walkerengineerin | 05.09.16 @ 00:30
Social Security is NOT an entitlement. The federal government did not put one dime into SS. The worker and his company paid into the fund. It was a trust fund until the democrats move it to the general fund!! Or as my case, being self employed, I paid both parts for a double whammy.
$commenter.renderDisplayableName() | 06.17.21 @ 18:21