The Democrat Crime Wave of 2023

posted at 9:56 pm on August 31, 2010 by
[ Family ]   

Caution: this is not a snarky post. Zero-percent snark. I want to connect a few dots for you. Additional caution: you may want to sit down.

* * * * * * * * *

 1  USA Today: Record number in fed anti-poverty programs

Government anti-poverty programs… now serve a record one in six Americans and are continuing to expand… More than 50 million Americans are on Medicaid, the federal-state program aimed principally at the poor…

More than 40 million people get food stamps, an increase of nearly 50% during the economic downturn, according to government data through May. The program has grown steadily for three years…

…Close to 10 million receive unemployment insurance, nearly four times the number from 2007. Benefits have been extended by Congress eight times beyond the basic 26-week program, enabling the long-term unemployed to get up to 99 weeks of benefits. Caseloads peaked at nearly 12 million in January — “the highest numbers on record,” says Christine Riordan of the National Employment Law Project, which advocates for low-wage workers.

More than 4.4 million people are on welfare, an 18% increase during the recession…

In February 2009 Robert Rector, quoted in the London Sunday Times, predicted that the Obama Democrats’ expansion of welfare, food stamps and unemployment would be disastrous.

One of the few undisputed triumphs of American government of the past 20 years – the sweeping welfare reform programme that sent millions of dole claimants back to work – has been plunged into jeopardy by billions of dollars in state handouts included in the president’s controversial economic stimulus package…

…Robert Rector, a prominent welfare researcher who was one of the architects of Clinton’s 1996 reform bill, warned last week that Obama’s stimulus plan was a “welfare spendathon” that would amount to the largest one-year increase in government handouts in American history… Despite dire warnings that reduced benefits for single mothers and deadlines on entitlement would create a social calamity – one liberal senator warned at the time that children would be “sleeping on grates” – the 1996 reforms cut welfare rolls from more than 5m families in 1995 to below 2m a decade later without a discernible increase in hardship.

In other words, the Obama ‘Stimulus’ program was intended to massively expand the welfare state. But wait! There’s more!

* * * * * * * * *

 2  Increasing welfare and food stamps leads to more kids born to unwed mothers

The statistical link between the availability of welfare and out-of-wedlock births is conclusive. There have been dozens of studies that link the availability of welfare benefits to out-of-wedlock births.

One study found that a 50 percent increase in the value of AFDC and foodstamp payments led to a 43 percent increase in the number of out-of-wedlock births.

A 1996 paper describes the correlation in ominous terms.

…Out-of-wedlock births are strongly related to welfare dependency. A 1 percent increase in the welfare dependent population in a state increases the number of births to single mothers by about 0.5 percent…

…Welfare dependency reduces employment. A 1 percent increase in the dependent population increases the number who are not employed by about 0.1 percent… An increase in welfare benefits reduces employment by increasing the number of welfare dependents. An increase in AFDC benefits by 1 percent of average income increases the number who are not employed by about 0.5.

In other words, if you ratchet up welfare benefits, you get reduced employment and more single-parent families.

Now, why am I telling you this?

* * * * * * * * *

 3  Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates

In 1995, Dr. Patrick Fagan wrote a seminal summary of the situation: “Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers… High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers… The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers…

“Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods… Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime… Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married.”

Of 23 peer-reviewed U.S. studies since 2000, 20 found that family structure directly affects crime and/or delinquency.

“[R]esearch strongly suggests both that young adults and teens raised in single-parent homes are more likely to commit crimes, and that communities with high rates of family fragmentation (especially unwed childbearing) suffer higher crime rates as a result.”

For example, a 23-year study found that nearly 90% of the change in violent crime rates can be attributed to the change in percentages of out-of-wedlock births (divorce rates, on the other hand, had no relationship with crime).

In The Atlantic Monthly, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead noted that the “relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation’s mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime.”

Let me repeat the most important statement — “controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime.”

Single-parent families generally lead to increased levels of crime; and there are no significant differences between blacks, whites, or any other race when it comes to this simple fact.

* * * * * * * * *

 4  Recap:

• Fact: There are a record number of Americans dependent upon government anti-poverty programs thanks to the Obama Democrats
• Fact: Expanded access to welfare and food stamps greatly increases the number of children born to unwed mothers
• Fact: Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates
Conclusion: with the unprecedented increase in welfare, food stamps and unemployment, we will also see an unparalleled increase in violent crime within the next dozen or so years.

Obama and his Democrats sycophants in Congress will have created hundreds of thousands of single-parent families. These kids, born out-of-wedlock, will find themselves trapped in lives of criminality at far higher rates than kids from two-parent families.

Fast forward a dozen years, give or take a couple, and we will see a true Obama Crime Wave. I predict that we will see an unprecedented increase in crime. In fact, you could call it historic.

And the question is not whether it will happen. The question is whether the Obama Left is doing it on purpose.

 
Cross-posted at: Doug Ross @ Journal.
 

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The only flaw I can see is the use of straight-line extrapolation to predict the future. As no tree grows to the sky, there comes a point – assuming the trend holds – where an enervated society finally collapses and the dark age begins.

potkas7 on September 1, 2010 at 7:28 AM

Just bending the cost curve down, right?

Slavery by debt so large it can never be repaid. Take that you liberty loving slobs. Try and pay it off.

tarpon on September 1, 2010 at 8:06 AM

The Democrat crime wave is now. They are looting the treasury. Thanks to deficit spending, they can actually take more than is there, much more.

zmdavid on September 1, 2010 at 8:38 AM

I rather agree with zmdavid, but I am happy to note that the OP does not fall into the ‘correlation/causation’ trap. I do think it would benefit everyone if it’s more ‘spelled out’. I’ll try to look more at the data to ensure that these conclusions are indeed accurate.

Please note: I agree completely, philosophically, with the OP. However, I think that the point regarding divorce is slightly (only slightly) shortsighted. An argument can certainly be made that easy divorce laws led to an environment where single-parent families were tolerated to a greater degree. This would be a historical argument, however, that the data would not necessarily cover.

Scott H on September 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM

I am not sure even the socialists would deliberately create a crime wave like this out in the future. It was the crime wave of the 70s and 80s resulting from 1960s policy that finally caused society to discard a lot of the leftist “rehabilitation” model of law enforcement, in favor of building more jails and getting tough.

Sekhmet on September 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM

http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-wc67.html

Last year, the Maryland NAACP released a report concluding that “the ready access to a lifetime of welfare and free social service programs is a major contributory factor to the crime problems we face today.”(1) Their conclusion appears to be confirmed by academic research. For example, research by Dr. June O’Neill’s and Anne Hill for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services showed that a 50 percent increase in the monthly value of combined AFDC and food stamp benefits led to a 117 percent increase in the crime rate among young black men.(2)

bloghooligan on September 1, 2010 at 9:48 AM

And the question is not whether it will happen. The question is whether the Obama Left is doing it on purpose.

Look no further than Britain to see if it’s deliberate. Not-so-Great Britain, once the home of liberty is now one of the most camera surveillanced societies, where now the debate is over knife control, not gun control (a battle lost) and citizens are discouraged from fighting back when attacked, even in their own homes. I hate paranoia, and virtually all conspiracy theories are rubbish, but I can’t shake the feeling that there is a movement afoot to undercut the idea of the individual, and individual responsibility, in favor of making all totally dependent on The State.

A high crime rate demands a more forceful, and more powerful, state. (And yes, there are Republicans who like a vigorous police against all sorts of crimes. Usually they are Rockefeller Republicans.)

rbj on September 1, 2010 at 9:50 AM

I might not be around in 2023 unless the death panels really take hold but my grandson will be. I sure as heck don’t want him to live in those conditions. We all better show up in Nov and start to turn back this progressive tide.

Kissmygrits on September 1, 2010 at 12:03 PM

I am not sure even the socialists would deliberately create a crime wave like this out in the future. It was the crime wave of the 70s and 80s resulting from 1960s policy that finally caused society to discard a lot of the leftist “rehabilitation” model of law enforcement, in favor of building more jails and getting tough.

Sekhmet on September 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM

That means they get tough on everyone and everyone eventually loses their liberty. It’s already happening now with federal forfeiture laws, zero tolerance policies of all types and the disturbing paramilitary aspects of today’s law enforcement. Hell, you can’t even buy a box of Sudafed without first handing over your driver’s license and your privacy.

Government always wants to expand its power and it doesn’t care where it comes from.

RadClown on September 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

You forgot to mention one thing. Criminals and those in poverty are greatly more likely to vote democrat. This isn’t about violence, violence is just a means to the end of getting reelected.

SnKArcbound on September 2, 2010 at 2:27 AM