Leftists insist there could be more assistance available for poverty-stricken families. If only the rich would pay their fair share. But assistance has existed for years (read The Welfare State is a Tragedy and Everyone Can Escape It. Here's How...). So how about our current welfare programs? Shouldn't they help?

Turns out a lot of financial "assistance" isn't going to poor families...

The welfare reform bill that Clinton signed into law 20 years ago this month fractured the U.S. welfare system, from one managed mostly by the federal government to one largely directed by individual states. Welfare['s replacement,] Temporary Assistance for Needy Families... empowered [each state] to spend its welfare grant as it saw fit, one monolithic system devolved into 50 different ones - with far less money going directly to low-income families.

Now, perhaps one could argue that less families are in need. Less poor families, less assistance. That's not a bad thing. If old Bill's reform helped cut down overall welfare spending, then that would account for less assistance. Yes?

The 1996 reform didn't result in a reduction in total spending on welfare... In 2014 there were about 12 million more people below the poverty level than in 1998.

Where's the money going?

Good question. It seems it goes where all unnecessary government spending goes. Either "government programs" or office furniture. Hint: not office furniture.

Under TANF, states can spend welfare money on virtually any program aimed at one of four broad purposes: (1) assistance to needy families with children; (2) promoting job preparation and work; (3) preventing out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and (4) encouraging the formation of two-parent families. Some states have interpreted those purposes - especially the last two categories - "very, very loosely," said a researcher at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The result has been a shift of resources away from cash assistance and toward spending on other programs. In 1998, nearly 60 percent of welfare spending was on cash benefits, categorized as "basic assistance." By 2014, it was only about one-quarter of TANF spending.

Say, isn't welfare supposed to help people? It seems it's creating more unwanted programs. Programs which allocate money wherever they see fit. Remember when I said money wasn't going to office furniture?Just kidding. It's probably office furniture. Plot twist.

This won't come as a surprise to most (see Yes, Democrats Need You to Stay Poor and Helpless. Here's Their Twisted Strategy...). So why does it matter? Because it exemplifies how crappy leftist bureaucrats are at handling money. Specifically your money.

Numbers don't lie. This is their plan, and it's an utter crapfest. Meanwhile, those poor families? Still poor.

Whether you're for or against welfare, it's clear something isn't working. You know, besides the people on welfare.

NOT SUBSCRIBED TO THE PODCAST? FIX THAT! IT’S COMPLETELY FREE ON BOTH ITUNES HERE AND SOUNDCLOUD HERE.