Put. The dog whistle. DOWN.

It's not enough for mean-spirited majorities to slash holes in the safety net, if not rip it up and throw it out altogether. No, it's important to inflict shame on those who needed it. That's the common thread in so much legislation we're seeing these days- from abortion restrictions to feticide laws to the trend in many states aimed at cutting benefit eligibility for people or uses based on anecdotal and stereotypical "abuses" that need to be ferreted out.

Latest on the Parade of Shame is Kansas, where the Lej has passed, and sent to Guv Sam "I Just Can't Quit Shaming You" Brownback, a bill that would legally prohibit welfare recipients from having a life:

By the terms of a measure now awaiting Brownback's signature, they're going to be saddled with dozens of directives and limitations on how and where they can spend their relief assistance.

Some of these are just stupid (no "cruise ships"!), some are intrusive (no movies, no swimming pools), and some are stupid, intrusive and counterproductive (no ATM withdrawals of more than $25 a day).

It's always amazing how these guys are so opposed to Big Gummint Regulation- except when it comes to people who don't look like them, or don't belong to the same exclusive clubs they do. Then it's all good- even when it does no good at all. Several states have passed drug-testing bills for welfare recipients, and I've yet to read of one of them where the "abuse" uncovered by the shaming came even close to covering the cost of the testing program (trust us- peeing in a cup ain't cheap).

But never mind that. Never mind the unenforceabilty of the provisions. Especially move along, nothing to see about the ATM withdrawal limit, which, as the author above points out, renders their benefits cards essentially useless for paying Prosperous American things like RENT without being subjected to time-wasting for multiple machine visits and, usually, nickel-and-dollar ATM fees that enrich the banks and waste their benefits.  It makes the Ayn Randians happy about not having to support those damn moochers and takers- at least not supporting the ones they're stereotyping. As I posted in response after the first Facebook friend mentioned this new legislation:

Don't try to engage the right on the proposed Kansas poor-shaming legislation by saying it's mean-spirited (even though it is) or is totally unenforceable (likewise). They think it's THEIR money and the moochers and takers shouldn't have it. Fine. Here's my take:

New York's Senate already passed one of these poor-shaming bills. I wrote my state Senator and suggested that they try including corporate welfare recipients in the next shaming bill- if you get IDA money or tax breaks, no strip clubs, private jets or luxury suites. I've yet to see that amendment come up on the floor.

And I won't- because THOSE moochers are "job creators"- mainly, of their own cushy overpaid jobs.

----

Then, after reading about that, I read about this: Rochester's version of a jobs program recently fictionalized, which doesn't fit the stereotype of Lazy Shiftless Welfare Recipient that these bigots are all about:

The scene outside RochesterWorks one cold, drizzly afternoon last week was pretty impressive: dozens of teenagers were waiting in line. And cars, bumper to bumper, were bringing more.

They kept coming, from up the street and from around the corner, where parents waited in cars.... The teenagers - more than 300 of them by the end of the afternoon - were dropping off identification, work permits, and other documents in the hopes of landing a summer job.

RochesterWorks provides free employment and job training services, among them a Summer Youth Employment Program. The teenagers who land a job will work for area businesses, non-profits, and others for six weeks, earning minimum wage, learning, and getting work experience and resume cred. Employers don't foot the bill; the salaries are paid for with federal funds.

The program is open to young people 14 to 21 years old, and they have to be in middle school or high school. There are income-eligibility limits, so many of the participants are low-income city residents who may otherwise find it hard to get a job.

Not the image the Kansas leaders want to project- of welfare queens and princes on the porch, polishing their tats, drinking their 40's and fornicating in the front yard to up their checks by a couple bucks a month. No, the real image is of urban kids seeking the same dignity and opportunity that their suburban counterparts are born into and naturally expect.

The name of the program struck me, because it's regionally the same as AmericaWorks- the Big Idea that the writers of House of Cards made up as the centerpiece of fictional Frank Underwood's election campaign.  They depicted 30,000 unemployed in just DC, lining up on the lawn behind the Capitol, driven by the same motivation to lift themselves up from poverty through real work.  I disagree with the fictional means Frank proposed to get to this goal- a wholesale slaughter of Social Security and Medicare- but I am fine with the goal itself.

We've tried it before. A big part of the New Deal, but one that didn't survive as Social Security did, was the Works Progress Administration. You still see, if not use, public works projects over 80 years later that were built with American ingenuity and pride back then.  By my teen years, it had been replaced with something called CETA- an employment and training program, which was quickly scuttled as "make-work" patronage once Reagan got in.

Because for all their talk of Jobs Jobs Jobs, Republicans do little or nothing to involve government in the process of creating them. Their motivation is simple and mathematical: fuller employment means a scarcer labor supply, which means higher wages, which mean lower profits. That's why stock markets often react negatively to instinctively "good" employment news.

Plus, it's far quicker and cheaper to demonize the unemployed and underemployed- that dog-whistle runs just fine in the Southern Strategy world where Welfare Queens and Scary Brown Men With Tats fire up the base, and their checkbooks, just by existing.

So I fully expect this shaming bill to be the law of the Heartland soon, if it isn't already. Maybe that's appropriate in the end, because in one of the most famous movies of all time which the poor will now be banned from seeing, you had to get the hell out of Kansas before the story got any good- and maybe the Statehouse will land on Brownback's sister.