Search


Subscribe to AFM


Subscribe to AllFinancialMatters
by Email

All Financial Matters

Promote Your Page Too

The American's Creed

Site Sponsors

Books I Recommend


AFM in the Media


Money Magazine May 2008

Real Simple March 2008

Blogroll (Daily Reads)

« | Main | »

Doofus of the Day: Rosa DeLauro

By JLP | October 26, 2011

Thursday is Daiper Need Awareness Day in Connecticut

Gov. Dan Malloy is declaring Thursday “Diaper Need Awareness Day” in Connecticut as the state’s Democrats try to raise awareness of the cost and public health concerns of diapers.

The move is part of a campaign to push the federal government to provide free diapers for poor families, and follows in the wake of a bill proposed by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) called the Diaper Investment and Aid to Promote Economic Recovery Act (DIAPER), reports the Hartford Courant.

“No family should have to choose between buying diapers for their child or buying groceries—but that is exactly what is happening today,” said DeLauro in a statement earlier this month. “Diapers are expensive, but necessary, to keep children healthy and in daycare, giving their parents the freedom they need to work.”

Traditionally, public assistance funds and food stamps have not been applicable to the purchase of diapers. DeLauro estimates that families pay about $100 a month purchase diapers.

Here’s the deal: I have NO PROBLEM with Representative DeLauro starting her own PRIVATE foundation to collect and dispense diapers to those in need. I DO have a problem with her expecting taxpayers to cover the cost, creating ANOTHER government program.

This quote stuck out to me: “No family should have to choose between buying diapers for their child or buying groceries…” This makes no sense to me since the families that are in this situation are probably already on food assistance programs.

Whatever the case, I can’t get Benjamin Franklin’s thoughts out of my mind:

“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Topics: Economics | 25 Comments »


25 Responses to “Doofus of the Day: Rosa DeLauro”

  1. The Biz of Life Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 9:00 am

    Franklin was a wise man. DeLauro is a fool trying to buy votes. Maybe we need to hire federal workers to change those free diapers also, but don’t let me give her any more ideas.

  2. Jack Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 9:13 am

    Here’s an idea — WASH THE DIAPERS!

    If you cannot afford disposable diapers, DON’T BUY THEM!!

  3. BG Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 9:22 am

    Jack) Daycare centers require disposable diapers, not the ‘washable’ kind. As for the ‘welfare’ part — I think the change they are making is allowing the use of Food Stamps to purchase disposable diapers too. (I have no opinion on this, but am surprised it is not currently allowed). This ruling is probably another government handout, this time to disposable diaper manufacturers.

    And, as for: “I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.”

    Does he propose a tax on the poor? If you want less of something, then tax the hell out of it — hence, tax the hell out of the poor and you will have less poor. *sarcasm*

    That is the argument the ‘rich’ use, to argue against why they should pay more taxes.

  4. Money Beagle Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 9:44 am

    The government needs less handout programs, not more. That’s evidenced by the mounting deficits we have. I know the entitlement programs are just one part of what’s led us there, but free diapers now? Come on.

  5. JLP Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 9:54 am

    BG wrote:

    “That is the argument the ‘rich’ use, to argue against why they should pay more taxes.”

    This is why we need a flat tax so that we no longer have to have these silly arguments. If everyone pays the same rate and we don’t have deductions, then no one can say anything about “tax the rich” or “tax the poor.” Get that argument out of the way so we can focus on more important things than class warfare.

    Once again, I have NO PROBLEM with Rep. DeLauro setting up a PRIVATE foundation that people can contribute to in order to raise money to purchase and give away diapers IF SHE CHOOSES. Of course, she won’t go this route because she won’t gain any votes from it. Makes me ill.

  6. Russ Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 10:33 am

    Here is a thought… if you can’t afford diapers, don’t have kids.

    If you do make that mistake, I am sure there are some churches or other foundations that can help folks out who are really struggling to put diapers on their little kids.

  7. BG Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 11:11 am

    Russ) Is it the kids fault that they were born to poor parents? Or maybe the parents were OK, until a medical disaster bankrupted the parents, and they _became_ poor?

    “…if you can’t afford diapers, don’t have kids.”

    which means people need to get off their high-horses when someone chooses to have an abortion.

    If you disagree with that: then all the poor kids should be dumped on the pro-life people to raise — which, of course they will want to be compensated (by the state), thus leading (once again) to free diapers.

    So, all this is a non-issue anyway — just something to argue over, where the alternatives are exactly the same outcome (just who gets the kids/money is different).

  8. Russ Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 11:33 am

    BG, not blaming the kids. However, government can’t keep funding someone’s dumb ass decisions because the situation tugs at our heart. If it bothers you so much, you are free to give YOUR money to help the cause, but don’t make donations on my behalf out of my tax dollars. I rather make that decision on my own.

    As JLP said, there are plenty of churches and other PRIVATE entities that will step in if a parent is truly in need of some assistance.

    Having children isn’t rocket science. These folks more than likely can afford cell phones, cars, and new $100 Nikes, but some how can never seem to spend $3 bucks on a pack of condoms or birth control pills.

    When you subsidize behaviors you get more of it. It is that simple. These women are going to have to learn to keep their legs closed and that government is not going to step in and help them out if they don’t.

  9. Stacey Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 11:40 am

    Can you say “personal responsibility?”

    Step 1: Get a job at Walmart, Target, etc
    Step 2: Use employee discount and purchase said diapers

    OR

    Look at Freecycle, Freesource for used cloth diapers (you’re going to bleach them anyway!), OR ask your FAMILY for help w/buying the 1st round of cloth diapers…
    Food pantries often ask for diaper donations, (I know, b/c we contribute!) so that is a source for disposables for those kids in daycare. OR Write to the manufacturers: P&G and Kimberly Clark being the big disposable players, explain your situation and they will send coupons. There are also diaper buying programs I’ve heard about.

    Babysit at night (or day) for extra money to buy said diapers.

    Problem solved.

    Note I never had to mention “rich” or “abortion” in my response…

  10. Steve Braun Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    Please, someone tell me this article is a recycled April Fool’s joke or some skit from SNL.

  11. jimmy Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    Flat tax?? FLAT SALES OR CONSUMPTION TAX
    http://www.fairtax.org

    Why should income be taxed??

    When was the last time you ate a dollar bill, or wore a dollar bill, or drove a dollar, or lived under a dollar bill?

    Why should two people spending the same amount of money pay different amounts of tax based on how much money they made, or what they spent it on.

    Tax every transaction the same way. Let people decide what to spend their money on. Get rid of all deductions.

  12. clocks Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    I agree with Russ. I’m not for encouraging the poor to have kids by providing even more assistance. These kids will grow up, and the tax payers will have to pay for their school lunches, their college tuition, etc….

  13. Luis Says:
    October 26th, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    I have a problem with adding more spending in a down economy. I also have a problem with people making sly comments about representatives “buying votes”. I have a problem about straying from the topic at hand and talking about fair taxes. Why do political issues turn nasty? If we were on a personal finance topic, you know we would not have these problems.

  14. BG Says:
    October 27th, 2011 at 7:24 am

    Russ) It takes two to make a baby. So, first and foremost, the state should be going after the father to recoup the money.

    Secondly, for couples with a working dad, companies should be paying a living wage so that the family can afford the diapers. The government handout is benefitting cheap employers by allowing people to tolerate the low minimum wages.

    Luis) taxes are an extremely important part of this. My opinion is that it is our tax laws that favor companies who offshore American jobs. It is the politics that allow older people to collect huge pensions (paid for by todays workers), while younger workers abstractly afford diapers.

    You want to stop the handouts? Eliminate social security, eliminate medicare, eliminate tax loopholes, eliminate government backed pensions for bankrupt companies, etc.

    People throw a fit if a baby gets a government paid for diaper, but don’t say a thing when granny gets her government paid for diaper.

    I am all for the elimination of welfare, but start with the elimination of welfare to the rich first.

  15. S Rao Says:
    October 27th, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    I don’t think kids should suffer because their parents made mistakes.

  16. Theresa Says:
    October 27th, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    $100 per month for diapers?!?!
    Some people just can’t be happy unless they’re buying Huggies, but store brands are much cheaper and just as good.

  17. clocks Says:
    October 27th, 2011 at 9:45 pm

    S Rao – I understand your point, but I also believe that I, as part of the 53% of people that pay income taxes, should not have to suffer for their parents mistakes either.

    If someone wants to provide diapers for the needy, start a charity. That is not what government is supposed to be for. Our $15 trillion debt should be the priority for the near future. Not finding more ways to spend tax payer money.

  18. Russ Says:
    October 28th, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    BG:

    1) It takes two to tango? Maybe, but the woman is the one who ultimately makes the decision of whether or not to sleep with a guy. Remember, NO means NO? If the father is a deadbeat, then maybe these women need to reassess their judgment when it comes to boyfriends.

    2) Here we go with the living wage BS again. You get paid what you are worth. PERIOD. If you can’t afford to live on minimum wage, it isn’t the wage that is the problem. The problem is you made some seriously bad decisions in your life. Minimum wage is called minimum because you bring minimum skills to the table.

    Yeah, lets go ahead and pay everyone $50k a year. Why not $75k? Hell, lets make it $100k. That is a nice round number. You do realize that all that will happen is INFLATION. The price of everything will go up and guess what… the $100k minimum wage loser is still going to be a complaining about he can’t afford diapers.

    Here is the reality. You can start EVERYONE off with $100k in the bank and I would guarantee that within 10 years the same people who are broke now would be broke then.

    Poor people do things that make them poor. Rich people do things that make them rich. Poor people who work hard, further their education, and don’t have kids they can’t afford, usually don’t stay poor. Even if they never “make it”, poor folks who instill the values of hard work, values, and education typically have kids who wind up being substantially more successful than their parents.

  19. BG Says:
    October 28th, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    “You get paid what you are worth.”

    Yep, and people are refusing to work for ‘minimum wages’. If employers want people, then they need to start upping their wages. Just look at all the farmers in Alabama crying over all the migrant labor fleeing the state (due to that state’s crackdown on illegals). Guess what?: if you paid more than slave wages, you will be able to hire someone who isn’t illegal in this country.

    I’m sick of hearing employers saying: “No American will do this job.”. It is not that, it is that no American will do your job for SLAVE wages — which is why those jobs were sucked up by (mostly) illegal immigrants collecting food stamps.

    As I said before: the welfare is subsidizing cheap employers. Eliminate welfare, and watch farming/housing/etc employers absolutely crater because no-one will work for slave wages.

    It is ridiculous that employers pay their employees such a low wage that the employees need supplemental help from the government JUST TO LIVE. And, BTW, this includes our military personnel who get the $500/month family subsistence supplemental allowance (FSSA) — which is the military’s version of Food Stamps: and yes, that money can absolutely be used to purchase diapers.

  20. Russ Says:
    October 28th, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    BG, if they paid more for US workers then they would have to charge more to consumers. You talk a good game, but we will see if you are willing to pay the market rate for fruits and veggies when the workers are being $10/hr or more versus the migrant workers.

    People vote with their wallet. It is that simple. I am sure there is some company who farms all organic veggies hand picked by Yale english majors earning $30k a year. My guess is the average American couldn’t afford to pay for their $10 apples though at Whole Food in the organic section.

  21. BG Says:
    October 28th, 2011 at 4:59 pm

    Russ) absolutely I am willing to pay higher prices. As others on this board can attest to: I only buy local, and detest places like Amazon.com. Plus local grown veggies are so much better than the prefrozen junk at supermarkets.

    Unfortunately, the masses are either ignorant of this or they just don’t care: and to them I say: ‘enjoy the race to the bottom’

  22. Jack Says:
    October 29th, 2011 at 11:10 am

    So you raise the wages and raise the Prices accordingly. So the low-end pay goes no further than it did before.

  23. Bridget Says:
    October 31st, 2011 at 10:33 am

    My thoughts:

    1. I am against the government funneling money to the poor. I am concerned, especially with this idea, because it’s enabling the poor AND perpetuating disposible diaper dependancy – which is essentially throwing money into the trash and with the fecal matter that doesn’t dcompose in our landfills.

    2. This diaper problem is manufactured. If this is really as big of a problem as they say it is, there needs to be better awareness of MODERN cloth diapering which most daycares ARE okay with ONCE they are educated in how they are used (i.e. just like disposibles, only they go into a “wet bag” that goes home with the kiddo instead of the trash). Saying daycares won’t accept them is a redherring. I smell the money trail, and it goes right back to the government and Huggies / Pampers. It doesn’t smell sweet.

    3. Before everyone starts yelling that a working parent cannot handle cloth diapers, my family uses modern pocket-style cloth diapers exclusively. My kids are 16 months apart, so yes, there was a time when we had TWO babies / toddlersin cloth diapers. My husband and I work full time and the kids are in daycare, in cloth diapers, every day of the week. The daycare is state-licenced, too. There is one person watching the 12 kiddos and she handles the cloth just fine. She said she wasn’t okay with them until we SHOWED her that cloth diapers are just as easy as disposibles. We wash them every other night in our non-high efficiency washer and dryer. They do not require any fancy folding, pins, or clips. It is 100% doable, even easy to cloth diaper today. The only time difference we note between disposible and cloth is the time it takes to put the diapers in the laundry (minimal) and the time it takes to “stuff” the pocket diapers with the absorbant cloth inserts, which takes 20 minutes while we watch TV. If you have time to throw in a load of laundry every other day and 20 minutes to watch TV, you have time to cloth diaper. No exuses. There ARE options.

  24. BG Says:
    October 31st, 2011 at 11:51 am

    “There is one person watching the 12 kiddos and she handles the cloth just fine.”

    That won’t fly in Texas. In Texas there is a 4:1 ratio for kids under 11 months (4 kids per daycare worker _maximum_). A 5:1 for kids 12-17 months, etc. You can only have a group of 12 if half the kids are 5+ years old, and none are less that 17 months old.

    This varies by state, btw.

    However, I agree — people need to push cloth diapers, and seek out daycare centers that accept them.

  25. Bridget Says:
    November 1st, 2011 at 3:43 pm

    BG: Yes, it does very by state. We’re in Nebraska, and I think our provider can only have two or three kids under 12 months. Most of them are 3 or older, but yes, the ratio is not as strict here. My point was that if a reputable, busy daycare provider was willing and able to handle cloth diapers, then it’s reasonable to assume most daycares could handle them if they gave them a chance. It’s certainly less of a health risk, in my opinion, to flush human waste away than to have them build up in plastic bags all day.

Comments