Connect with us

Politics

New Kansas Rules Would Limit Spending of Welfare Benefits

Published

on

In this April 13, 2015 photo, Kansas Republican Gov. Sam Brownback makes a point during an interview in his office in the Statehouse in Topeka, Kan. Brownback is preparing to sign welfare legislation restricting how poor families can spend cash assistance from the state. The Republican governor scheduled a Thursday, April 16, 2015, morning signing ceremony at the Statehouse. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

In this April 13, 2015 photo, Kansas Republican Gov. Sam Brownback makes a point during an interview in his office in the Statehouse in Topeka, Kan. Brownback is preparing to sign welfare legislation restricting how poor families can spend cash assistance from the state. The Republican governor scheduled a Thursday, April 16, 2015, morning signing ceremony at the Statehouse. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

JOHN HANNA, AP Political Writer

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — A new Kansas law tells poor families that they can’t use cash assistance from the state to attend concerts, get tattoos, see a psychic or buy lingerie. The list of don’ts runs to several dozen items.

More than 20 other states have such lists. But, the one included by the Republican-dominated Kansas Legislature in a bill that GOP Gov. Sam Brownback planned to sign Thursday appears to be the most exhaustive, according to state Department for Children and Families officials.

It’s inspired national criticism and mockery from “The Daily Show.” Host Jon Stewart suggested that in accepting federal funds, Kansas should be forced to give up items like roads “paved with luxurious asphalt.”

“The list has attracted attention because it feels mean-spirited,” said Shannon Cotsoradis, president and CEO of the advocacy group Kansas Action for Children. “It really seems to make a statement about how we feel about the poor.”

It is part of a broader welfare law taking effect in July that Brownback and his allies say is aimed at moving poor families from social services into jobs.

“We want to get people off of public assistance and into private-sector employment, and we’ve had a lot of success with that,” Brownback during an interview this week with The Associated Press.

A 2012 federal law requires states to prevent benefit-card use at liquor stores, gambling establishments or adult-entertainment businesses.

At least 23 states have their own restrictions on how cards can be used, mostly for alcohol, tobacco, gambling and adult-oriented businesses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

A few states — not Kansas — prohibit buying guns, according to the NCSL, and a few ban tattoos or body piercings. Massachusetts prohibits spending on jewelry, bail bonds, or “vacation services.” A 2014 Louisiana law bars card use on cruise ships, which is also on the Kansas list.

Kansas Department for Children and Families officials said that it’s difficult to track how often cash assistance is used for items on the state’s new list because recipients can use their benefits cards to obtain cash. The law will limit ATM withdrawals of cash assistance to $25 a day.

The department said it reclaimed $199,000 in cash assistance from 81 fraud cases from July through February, but said most involved questions about eligibility. The state provided $14 million in cash assistance during the same period.

A 2014 federal report said a check of eight states’ data showed transactions with benefit cards at liquor stores, casinos or strip clubs accounted for less than 1 percent of the total.

Critics question whether such restrictions can be enforced. Elizabeth Schott, senior fellow with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said enacting them simply creates an “aura of abuse.”

“Undermining support for the programs is what the restrictions do,” she said.

Phyllis Gilmore, Kansas secretary for children and families, said her state’s list is a “composite” of others and has educational value, sending the message that cash assistance should be used for necessities.

“Every dollar that is used fraudulently is a dollar that is not going to an American who is struggling,” said state Sen. Michael O’Donnell, a Wichita Republican who supported the bill.

Much of the new Kansas law codifies administrative policies enacted after Brownback took office in January 2011, so they’ll be harder to undo later.

They include a requirement that cash assistance recipients work at least 20 hours a week, be looking for work or enroll in job training. The new law also includes a much-criticized provision shortening the lifetime cap on cash assistance to 36 months from 48 months, although the state Department for Children and Families said recipients rarely bump up against the lower limit.

The number of cash assistance recipients in Kansas has dropped 63 percent since Brownback took office, to about 14,700 in February. Brownback said the decline confirms the success of his policies, but critics note that U.S. Census Bureau figures show the state’s child poverty rate remaining at about 19 percent through 2013.

Brownback said his state’s list of prohibited cash-assistance uses has become a way for the left to argue against welfare-to-work policies.

“I think you’re seeing the left trying to pillory this,” Brownback said. “They’re just trying to poke fun at it, when it’s not what the debate is really about.”

___

Online:

Text of Kansas welfare measure: http://bit.ly/1H8k7SD .

Kansas Legislature: http://www.kslegislature.org

___

Follow John Hanna on Twitter at https://twitter.com/apjdhanna

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Alameda County

Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

Published

on

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.
At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.

The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.

“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.

According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.

Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.

However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.

Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.

Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.

“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.

“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”

Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.

A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.

So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.

Continue Reading

Activism

Families Across the U.S. Are Facing an ‘Affordability Crisis,’ Says United Way Bay Area

United Way’s Real Cost Measure data reveals that 27% of Bay Area households – more than 1 in 4 families – cannot afford essentials such as food, housing, childcare, transportation, and healthcare. A family of four needs $136,872 annually to cover these basic necessities, while two adults working full time at minimum wage earn only $69,326.

Published

on

Affordable housing is the greatest concern for consumers, it’s followed by the cost of groceries. Courtesy photo.
Affordable housing is the greatest concern for consumers, it’s followed by the cost of groceries. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

A national poll released this week by Marist shows that 61% of Americans say the economy is not working well for them, while 70% report that their local area is not affordable. This marks the highest share of respondents expressing concern since the question was first asked in 2011.

According to United Way Bay Area (UWBA), the data underscores a growing reality in the region: more than 600,000 Bay Area households are working hard yet still cannot afford their basic needs.

Nationally, the Marist Poll found that rising prices are the top economic concern for 45% of Americans, followed by housing costs at 18%. In the Bay Area, however, that equation is reversed. Housing costs are the dominant driver of the affordability crisis.

United Way’s Real Cost Measure data reveals that 27% of Bay Area households – more than 1 in 4 families – cannot afford essentials such as food, housing, childcare, transportation, and healthcare. A family of four needs $136,872 annually to cover these basic necessities, while two adults working full time at minimum wage earn only $69,326.

“The national numbers confirm what we’re seeing every day through our 211 helpline and in communities across the region,” said Keisha Browder, CEO of United Way Bay Area. “People are working hard, but their paychecks simply aren’t keeping pace with the cost of living. This isn’t about individual failure; it’s about policy choices that leave too many of our neighbors one missed paycheck away from crisis.”

The Bay Area’s affordability crisis is particularly defined by extreme housing costs:

  • Housing remains the No. 1 reason residents call UWBA’s 211 helpline, accounting for 49% of calls this year.
  • Nearly 4 in 10 Bay Area households (35%) spend at least 30% of their income on housing, a level widely considered financially dangerous.
  • Forty percent of households with children under age 6 fall below the Real Cost Measure.
  • The impact is disproportionate: 49% of Latino households and 41% of Black households struggle to meet basic needs, compared to 15% of white households.

At the national level, the issue of affordability has also become a political flashpoint. In late 2025, President Donald Trump has increasingly referred to “affordability” as a “Democrat hoax” or “con job.” While he previously described himself as the “affordability president,” his recent messaging frames the term as a political tactic used by Democrats to assign blame for high prices.

The president has defended his administration by pointing to predecessors and asserting that prices are declining. However, many Americans remain unconvinced. The Marist Poll shows that 57% of respondents disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, while just 36% approve – his lowest approval rating on the issue across both terms in office.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.