Who Are the 47%?

| September 24 2012
Sheila K. Muehling

Over the past couple of weeks I have been bombarded with messages from people who are worried sick about how the Romney/Ryan campaign is handling the message of our conservative movement to replace Obama in the White House. Many worry that Romney is not aggressive enough or not getting the message out. Many are concerned about the polls showing Obama gaining momentum.

Last week a hidden video was released showing a Romney’s statement at a fundraiser last May.  It was amazing how this video was released right in the middle of a disastrous event in Libya on 9/11. Instead of America being focused on the killing of our ambassador and three other Americans we listened to a speech where Romney points out what we all know is true, American is becoming a country of entitlements.  Instead of the message that America is in deep economic trouble we are hearing that Romney is not going to represent 50% of the country if elected President

The truth of the matter is the United States is becoming a country of people who expect the government to pay for their social needs.  More people are on unemployment, food stamps, school grants and federal health care programs than at anytime in our history. I would like to take a moment and share with you my thoughts on this issue. First here is basically what the media both liberal and conservative are saying about the clip from the Romney fundraising event in May.

Romney tells donors that the roughly 47 percent of Americans who do not pay income tax will support Obama and “are dependent upon government.” 

I am not going to analyze in my comments in what context this statement was made. That is not the point of my views. I am going to make the argument about what I see is happening to our society and how I see more and more people who have exactly the attitude Romney was talking about. I am going to do that using real life people who are featured in our local Arizona Republic newspaper.  Over the last weekend, the Arizona Republic a newspaper that many consider typical mainstream liberal, printed the following headline:

Arizona taxpayers pay for 53% of births by Alia Beard Rau – Sept. 22, 2012 11:12 PM  The Republic | azcentral.com

Read more http://arizonarepublic.az.newsmemory.com/?source=nletter-top5

Arizona taxpayers foot the bill for the delivery of more than half of all babies born here, a growing trend with a $200 million-plus annual price tag that has caught state leaders off guard — even though the numbers have been rising for more than a decade.

Lets take a minute and think about this story. The couple featured is a young 27-year old male and 21-year old female. This couple already had two children age 4 and 2 who were both born in Arizona and who’s birth had been paid for by AHCCCS, the state and federal Medicaid program. The mother stated that the new baby, Julian wasn’t planned, but they would have had him even without help from AHCCCS. She said that without state assistance, she would have been forced to drop out of school, go back to work and ask the hospital to allow them to go on a payment plan.  “I want to get a good education and better myself and my kids,” the mother said. “And when I graduate I can get a job and help somebody else on AHCCCS.”

OK, so here is what I understand from this article. A young couple had their third child on my taxpayer money.  Their first child was born at ages 17 and 23 respectively. This was a child they could not afford at such a young age, an age when they should have been going to school to get that college degree the mother now wants.

However, they got pregnant, married and started their young family.  Instead of making sure they did not have another child they could not afford, they made the decision to keep having babies and keep taking AHCCCS benefits. Why prevent another so-called unplanned pregnancy when they have the safety net of the government. I do not know this for a fact but I will bet the bank that this couple also receives food stamps and educational benefits from state and federal agencies.

So let me address what should have gone on here. This couple started having children at age 17 and 23.  Some say they started to early but as we know, we all were young and dumb at some time and our hormones are raging. Clearly the parents of both the male and the female did not teach their children to use contraception to avoid a pregnancy they could not afford to pay for. Instead, they went on to have not one baby but another two years later and now another two years later again.  Although I find it hard to believe, they claim that the third child was unplanned so again clearly they still have not learned about contraception. However, the mother has good intentions as she is still planning on continuing her state paid for education so that she can help the next person who will take her place at 17 to have another two or three or more children on state AHCCCS money.

This is the way the system works in not only Arizona but all over this country. Elizabeth Warren says the system is stacked against people. I say the system is stacked to encourage this behavior.  If you do not take personal responsibility for your own children then the government will step in and take the responsibility for you.  You play we pay. This attitude is called “entitlement”.  These are the people who like the Obama policies; these are the people that are part of the 47 percent Mitt Romney was talking about.  These are the people who will never vote for Romney and will always support a Barack Obama.

In another story, a couple of weeks ago the Arizona Republic featured a young football player at Arizona State University.

Tackling life: Arizona State linebacker Kipeli Koniseti juggles football, marriage, fatherhood and school
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/asu/articles/20120912tackling-life-arizona-state-linebacker-kipeli-koniseti-juggles-football-marriage-fatherhood-school.html#ixzz27JTckneV

By all accounts Kipeli Koniseti is a great guy who loves his children. However, here is the story. Kipeli 21 and his wife have three children under 3 years old, they live on scholarship funds, food stamps, state health care benefits and help from the parents of the couple. They claim they had the three children intentionally and that God will show them the way.

So again I ask when it comes to this couple, “Why would they do this?”  And, why would the media put this couple up as an example of making good responsible decisions and a role model as a good father?  A responsible decision would have been not to have babies.  They say they are leaving this in God’s hands but God never promised them he would pay for their food stamps! However, who needs God when you have Barack Obama.  This is the attitude of entitlement that has taken over our society.

Did Mitt Romney say 47% of the people expect government to take care of them?  Was he intentionally including seniors on Social Security? OK, maybe he did quote a number with the seniors in it.  However, in many respects he is telling the truth. We have seniors who are getting their promised benefits from Social Security but we all know that the system is unsustainable.  The system is broken and we the American people have to agree to fix it. Will it be painful? YES

Romney is right. If seniors who are either on retirement benefits or preparing to receive retirement benefits do not take the time to see that an Obama 2nd-term will result in lowered services and benefits then they are being naive.  They are going to hear that Romney is going to take away their benefits and Obama is going to give them benefits. There is no money for either man to prop up the Social Security and Medicare funds.  If we do not get a solid business mind in the White House we will not survive the next twenty years. The Romney/Ryan’s plan does not touch the benefits for those people 55 and older. Seniors currently on the plan will not be affected.

Here is my concern. Seniors like the two young couples above, are going to vote for a man they think will protect them, not for someone who might be able to fix the financial mess we are in and make the future better for current and future generations.

8 comments
smuehling
smuehling

Thank you for your comments. It occurred to me that I need to take a page out of Obama's playbook and "block out all the noise" in my life.  I wonder how long it would be before I would need to see how long the lines are at the unemployment office? Just a thought.

PatShaler
PatShaler

This was written by my friend Sheila for Western Press with examples out of Arizona.  Excellent point for those who are still willing to listen.

sleepergirl
sleepergirl

100% agreement. My jaw dropped when I too read that particular headline on Sunday. Wow, we Arizona taxpayers subsidize 53% of births. The government "rewards" this behavior and entitlement dependents suffer no consequences for making poor choices, which simply encourages more bad behavior and poor choices. A perfect example of Liberalism writ LARGE.

Dennis Donner
Dennis Donner

True, True, True. Unless the 47% shrinks away America goes 'belly up'. Democratic republics die when the electorate figures out they can 'vote' themselves benefits from the treasury and when enough of them do that ... it sinks the ship of state. -Dennis

WesternFreePress
WesternFreePress moderator

 @Dennis Donner Yes, Dennis. Scary, but inescapably true. Is a complete collapse of the system the only thing that can break the cycle of dependency and economic bondage? Not sure. We hope not! Keep making the arguments, and maybe enough people will get it . . .

Dennis Donner
Dennis Donner

 @WesternFreePress Shocking it is ...

We're seeing Obama with NOTHING to offer

Sooo close to Romney

America is way too close to the dead fish!