OCR Text |
Show Public Welfare Chairman Defends Lien Law Before Women's Council; Asks Holers To Retain On Utah Books Speaking to the Women's Legislative Council at the State Capitol on October 23, 1952. H. C. Shoemaker, chairman of the State Department of Public Welfare, Wel-fare, lashed out at the proposed repeal of Utah's Lien Law. M.. Shoemaker said, "if more people peo-ple understood this important piece of legislation, "how it worked and who it helped, the voters of Utah would unanimously unani-mously vote again repeal oi Utah's Lien Law November 4." Briefly, Mr. Shoemaker outlined out-lined for those present the following fol-lowing 20 points regarding what he termed "Utah's most important issue." 1. It keeps off the welfare program persons who have other oth-er means of support, including the aid of financially able chi! dren. 2. It preserves the welfare money for those who are real!;, .needy, and enables the State to increase the grants of those who are in need. 3. It has been stated that the old people have to sign over their homes to the State. This is absolutely false. The lien is . a type of mortgage which in effective only after the death of both of the old persons. It is a charge against their estate. They have full ownership during dur-ing their entire lifetime. 4. The only persons who are affected by the lien law are the heirs. These are usually the ohildren who cannot or will not nelp their own parents. 5. Financial considerations are important, but they are not as important as moral considera tions. The great moral consideration consider-ation in the lien law is: "Should the taxpayers be forced to support sup-port people who have other resources. re-sources. Is there not an obligation obliga-tion for children to help their parents , if they are well ablo to do so?" 6. Over 4,000 old people have gone off the welfare rolls since the lien law was passed in 1947. We know of no cases where these old people are suffering real need. We do know of many cases where the heirs are helping help-ing their parents because they do not wish to inherit property with a lien. 7. More people on the welfare rolls means a greater drain on, the sales tax fund. . Money is desperately needed today for education and for educational buildings. We do not wish to jeopardize education by inviting thousands more to come on the welfare rolls. 8. Many old persons with property pro-perty have mortgages on their homes and are making monthly payments on contract. The taxpayers, tax-payers, through the Welfare Department, De-partment, provide the money to make these monthly payments. Should the taxpayers be expected expect-ed to build up these estates for the heirs to inherit, when they have done nothing to help their parents? 9. Thirty-fo'ur states and territories ter-ritories of the Union have lien laws or similar laws providing for recovery from the estates of recipients after death. The U. S. Congress passed such a law effecting recovery in the District of Columbia. Governor Stevenson of Illinois recently forced such a law through the Illinois Legislature. 10. The lien law as it stands discriminates in favor of home owners, and rightly so. A home owner with a home worth $10,000 can receive public assistance as-sistance and own his home as long as he lives, and his wife, likewise. A man, equally thrifty, who has amassed $10,000 in other .(personal property, but who has not bought a home, cannot receive a cent from the Welfare Department. He must use up his personal property, not to exceed a specified rate, until it is down to $300 before he is eligible for help. 11. The primary purpose of the lien law is not to recover money for the state. Only about $300,000 has been recovered so far. The primary purpose is to keep off the rolls those who have other means of support, and to increase the amount of money available for the really needy. 12. Most people who are for repeal of' the lien law do' not really understand it. They are governed by sympathy for the old people. We are equally sympathetic, sym-pathetic, but we feel that the lien law helps the old people who are really needy to get higher grants. 13. When the lien law went into effect four jot five years age, the Public Welfare Directors Di-rectors in the various 'counties ' of the state passed a resolution calling for its repeal. After five years' experience, these same persons are unanimous in support of it, after having had actual experience with its workings. work-ings. The lien law costs the state practically nothing' to adminis-, ter. No extra employees are' re- quired on its account. ' 15. Due to the liberal exemption exemp-tion provided to the heirs of the old people, the state is hardly hard-ly ever required to foreclose on a property. The heirs have always al-ways been able to make settlement set-tlement and retain the exempted exempt-ed interest the law gives them. 16. Only one person over 65 out of five in the state is receiving re-ceiving public welfare help. Should this one out of five pre- ( sume to speak for all the old people? 17. In some states which have neither a lien law nor a relative rel-ative responsibility law, the welfare wel-fare program has gone wild. Examples are: Louisiana, which has 631 old people per thousand thous-and on its welfare rolls; and Oklahoma, Ok-lahoma, which has 462 per thousand. , 18. A number of states which have had lien laws have at one time or another repealed them. The great majority of these states have either re-enacted lien laws or else have enacted laws requiring contributions r from financially able relativa?, j which are much more severe than the lien. 19. An old person and his children pay sales tax oi 2 per cent. The life expectancy of a person 65 years of age is HVfi years, or 128 months. If an av-l erage person age 65 receives old age assistance of $60 per month I for that length of time, the total to-tal would be $8,280. Someone has to pay sales tax on $414,000 worth of goods to provide this money for the old person. 20. Many older people tell us that they favor the lien law, because be-cause ,they feel they are helping help-ing to pay their own way, instead in-stead of being wholly dependent upon the taxpayers. |