Readers Praise and Criticize Sun Series on Social Security Programs

Let's not create the illusion that "cracking down" on immigrants or the poor would solve our country's problems. We all share a responsibility for their creation and their solutions.

Diane Paul

Baltimore

Needy Recipients

As a former worker at the Department of Social Services, I found your articles on welfare very one-sided.

There may be and probably are some frauds among recipients, but I never found any among the many hundreds of cases I reviewed and clients I interviewed.

In fact, my constant thought was amazement that these people were able to rise in the morning with so little to hope for in the future.

Why not portray some of the recipients who are needy and try to become independent? Your articles reinforce the stereotypical idea that all welfare recipients are lazy cheats. That is untrue.

By all means encourage legislators to reform the system, but do it case by case.

Then provide training, education, affordable day care, jobs and a living wage for the able-bodied.

But let's not debunk the whole system because of a minority who are able to manipulate bad rulings.

Agnes McAvinue

Baltimore

Mean Spirit

If The Sun's misleading, mean-spirited sub-headline on American aid to refugees is any proof ("America's Most Wanted Welfare Plan: Immigrants Walk Off the Boats and Onto SSI Disability Rolls," Jan. 24), Newt Gingrich's congressional ascendancy has brought his confederates' mercilessness to Baltimore as well.

The piece, in its analysis of the few refugees who commit fraud to obtain federal disability, fails to note that Supplemental Security Income is only available to the small number of immigrants admitted to the U.S. with refugee status.

The vast number of immigrants and refugees may not even file an application for SSI. On balance, these newcomers to the U.S. contribute far more tax revenues to federal and state coffers than they draw through any type of program.

What's more, the piece fails to credit the generosity -- albeit limited -- of American refugee policy.

Every year, the United States rescues about 120,000 refugees, a fraction of the millions of people throughout the world who flee their homes because of religious, political and ethnic persecution . . .

Those refugees who return American kindness with the ingratitude of falsely obtaining disability funds certainly deserve condemnation.

But the many refugees who commit no such fraud should not be viewed with harshness, even if the middle class must make a minor charitable sacrifice.

Barry List

Baltimore

Informative Pieces

My name is Patricia Anne DeBow, I am a 61-year-old disabled black woman, currently drawing Social Security disability insurance in the amount of $416 a month, which has taken me three years to obtain.

I have been reading the articles by Jim Haner and John B. O'Donnell. The articles were well written and very informative and heart-breaking.

It really is appalling to read how people who have never contributed to the Social Security program can sign up for the benefits and receive $458 each month.

Patricia A. DeBow

Havre de Grace

Welfare, not SSI

Congratulations to your reporters John O'Donnell and Jim Haner on their excellent expose of the waste and fraud in Social Security's give-away programs.

If these people mentioned have a real need, it should be through the welfare system, not Social Security. It is best equipped to sort out the malingerers.

It's a gross injustice to the millions of Americans, including myself, who have worked for years, paid into the system and now need the return on our investment.

The Supplemental Security Income program should be stopped immediately . . . This cheating probably results in the deserving ,, receiving less than they actually should be paid.

Walter Farnandis

Ellicott City

Family Values

While reading the recent Sun articles about welfare reform, something kept bothering me.

At first I questioned my compassion for those less fortunate than myself. What seemed to irritate me the most was large families on welfare -- especially recipients who continued to add children their under-financed families.

Then it came to me. I have two children of my own and would have liked to have had more, if I could have afforded a larger family.

After my first child's birth I took a part-time job in the evenings and Saturdays. After our second child was born, my wife started working part-time.

Income from the extra jobs helped pay the bills and kept us ahead, at the cost of time away from our home and children.

The only financial assistance we received was the income tax deduction that came with each child. Which is OK, since I've always felt responsible for my family's growth and maintenance.

However, I never had an employer raise my pay because of my family's increased size.

The idea that welfare benefits should increase with a family's growth is just as irrational as my wife and I producing more children than we could afford . . .

My parents never had medical insurance, nor could I afford it 14 of my first 20 years of marriage. I'm not proud of this.