The WSJ Tackles Food Stamp Fraud

It's great to see a major newspaper confronting what is obvious to anyone who has ever stood in line at a grocery store; our tax dollars are being squandered in the morass of social programs plaguing our society.  The food stamp program is one of many money pits the federal government demands that we subsidize. From James Bovard:

Millionaires are now legally entitled to collect food stamps as long as they have little or no monthly income. Thirty-five states have abolished asset tests for most food-stamp recipients. These and similar "paperwork reduction" reforms advocated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) are turning the food-stamp program into a magnet for abuses and absurdities.

The Obama administration is far more enthusiastic about boosting food-stamp enrollment than about preventing fraud. Thanks in part to vigorous federally funded campaigns by nonprofit groups, the government's AmericaCorps service program, and other organizations urging people to accept government handouts, the number of food-stamp recipients has soared to 44 million from 26 million in 2007, and costs have more than doubled to $77 billion from $33 billion.

The USDA's Food and Nutrition Service now has only 40 inspectors to oversee almost 200,000 merchants that accept food stamps nationwide. The Government Accountability Office reported last summer that retailers who traffic illegally in food stamps by redeeming stamps for cash or alcohol or other prohibited items "are less likely to face criminal penalties or prosecution" than in earlier years.

Lax attitudes toward fraud are spurring swindles across the nation:

Bovard's piece highlights incredible modes of outright fraud, committed without fear of prosecution.  He concludes:

H.L. Mencken quipped that the New Deal divided America into "those who work for a living and those who vote for a living." The explosion in the number of food-stamp recipients tilts the political playing field in favor of big government. The more people who become government dependents, the more likely that democracy will become a conspiracy against self-reliance.

We have more government employees than ever, yet we can't seem to control the fraud that runs rampant through programs like food stamps, subsidized housing, and medicaid.  These programs are meant to be a safety net, not a way of life, and certainly not a profitable business for cheats and crooks.  If the gov't cannot run these programs, perhaps they should be contracted out to private businesses.  Could the private sector  do a better job screening applicants for genuine need, rooting out fraud, and prosecuting thieves and liars?  Probably.  One thing is for certain; it would be damn hard to do a worse job.