Originally published on Substack. 

​America has spent more than $25 trillion (inflation-adjusted) fighting poverty since President Lyndon Johnson declared a “War on Poverty” in 1964.

The result?

A poverty rate that has barely budged or was already improving before forced massive divergent spending and redistribution on flawed programs. Families trapped in cycles of government dependence and policymakers still tinkering with the edges. They argue over how much in welfare payments do recipients get rather than asking the more important question: how do we help people thrive?

​The latest poverty data show the cracks: millions remain stuck, even as government spending on welfare programs continues to climb. For too many, assistance has turned into a trap—where the marginal tax on returning to work is so high that staying on welfare seems rational. That’s not compassion. That’s policy failure.

Why the War on Poverty Failed

The central problem is design. Instead of fostering upward mobility, most programs lock people into dependency by phasing out benefits quickly when they return to work. This creates a punishing tradeoff: work more, lose benefits. For a single parent weighing childcare costs, transportation, and reduced benefits, working can actually mean taking home less.

Worse, well-meaning add-ons—from regulating what low-income families can buy with SNAP to new bureaucratic hoops—only pile on frustration without changing incentives. These regulations pretend to “help” but mostly signal distrust of the very people the programs claim to serve.

The unintended consequence?

Generational cycles of dependency. Families learn to navigate welfare systems, not labor markets. Children grow up without seeing parents steadily employed. Communities lose the dignity and prosperity that come with meaningful work.

A Better Way: Empowerment Accounts

There’s a smarter path forward: Empowerment Accounts.

As I’ve written and spoken about with the Alliance for Opportunity and in conversation with the Sutherland Institute, these accounts would consolidate welfare benefits into a single, flexible platform that recipients could use for their specific needs—while facing the right incentives to transition back to work.

Here’s why it works:

• Flexibility: Families choose how to allocate resources—whether for childcare, training, transportation, or basic needs.
• Accountability: Payments are conditional on progress toward self-sufficiency, with work requirements that actually help.
• Simplicity: Dozens of overlapping programs are replaced with a single system, reducing waste, fraud, and bureaucratic overhead.
• Incentives: Benefits taper in a way that encourages work, rather than penalizing it.

This flips the focus from “how much can you get” to “how fast can you succeed.”

Direct and Indirect Costs of Dependency

We often talk about the fiscal price tag—billions in taxpayer dollars funneled into programs that don’t reduce poverty.

But the indirect costs are even higher:

• Lost productivity when millions of work-capable adults are sidelined.
• Higher crime and instability in communities with entrenched dependency.
• Declining family formation and cultural cohesion as government replaces community and church-based support.

Dependency is expensive not just for taxpayers, but for society itself.

​The Case for Reform Now

The case for reform is urgent. Policymakers keep layering on rules—like banning “junk food” purchases with SNAP—as if micromanaging diets will solve poverty. That’s a distraction. The real question is: how do we transition people back into work, restore dignity, and let families prosper?

Empowerment Accounts are not just about saving money—they’re about unleashing potential. They recognize that the goal of welfare should be temporary assistance, not permanent dependency. They return the focus to work, responsibility, and opportunity.

Conclusion

Compassion isn’t measured by how much government spends. It’s measured by whether people actually escape poverty. After decades of stagnant results, it’s time to admit the War on Poverty was lost—and chart a new course.

We need welfare that empowers, not entraps. Programs that encourage work, not avoidance. Policies that trust families to make decisions, not bureaucrats to micromanage them.

If we want families and communities to flourish, welfare reform must move away from dependency and toward prosperity through empowerment.

Listen & Learn More:

• Alliance for Opportunity: Empowerment Accounts
• My Sutherland Institute conversation
• Let People Prosper Show

​True compassion is not handing out more benefits. It’s equipping people to leave welfare behind for good. Empowerment, not dependency, is the way forward.

​What happens when your life changes in an instant, and you have to rebuild it from the ground up?

In this week’s Let People Prosper Show, I talk with Rachel Barkley, a policy advocate, wife, mother, and one of the most resilient individuals I know. After a rare spinal cord tumor left her paralyzed just weeks after giving birth to her first child, Rachel began a long and painful road of recovery—one marked by faith, perseverance, and incremental miracles.

But her story isn’t just one of personal triumph. Rachel now leads state and national efforts to reform the safety net for individuals with disabilities and those facing hardship. She’s championing policies like the One Door Policy to streamline services, shift the conversation from “able-bodied” to work-capable, and ensure the system supports human dignity and independence. Don’t miss this episode!

For more insights, visit vanceginn.com. You can also get even greater value by subscribing to my Substack newsletter at vanceginn.substack.com. Please share with your friends, family, and broader social media network. 

(0:00) – Introduction and Background
(3:05) – Rachel's Journey Through Adversity
(9:00) – The Impact of Health Challenges on Family
(15:00) – The Role of Community and Support
(21:47) – Building New Systems and Habits
(25:18) – Finding Purpose in Adversity
(26:44) – Advancing Freedom and Dignity
(27:53) – Work Capable vs. Able Bodied
(31:44) – The One Door Policy
(40:34) – The Future of Safety Net Reforms

​Why do so many families turn down work opportunities—and how can we fix that?

In this thought-provoking episode of the Let People Prosper Show, I sit down with Nic Dunn, vice president of strategy at the Sutherland Institute, to explore how benefit cliffs, broken welfare incentives, and poorly designed safety nets can trap people in poverty instead of lifting them out of it.

Nick shares his personal journey into public policy, his belief in the dignity of work, and the data-driven case for state-led welfare innovation that removes the fear of losing benefits for earning more. This episode is all about restoring upward mobility and helping families truly prosper.

For more insights, visit vanceginn.com and get even greater value with a subscription to my Substack newsletter at vanceginn.substack.com. 

(0:00) – Introduction to Prosperity and Safety Nets
(2:18) – Why Nick Dunn chose public policy
(5:02) – How life experiences shaped his worldview
(9:46) – Successes and setbacks in fighting poverty
(12:11) – The vital role of work in upward mobility
(16:43) – Dignity, labor force participation, and culture
(23:24) – The reality of benefit cliffs
(29:35) – Innovative state solutions and pilot programs
(36:40) – Federal reforms to restore opportunity

Originally published at Econlib.

​At the recent vice-presidential debate between Senator J.D. Vance and Governor Tim Walz, both leaders emphasized that families are America’s backbone. However, they erred in their approach by suggesting that more government involvement could solve families’ challenges. From expanding the child tax credit to advocating for new social programs, their solutions imply that the government can strengthen families. This is a dangerous misconception. 

Instead of empowering families, government programs often create dependency and stifle personal responsibility.

Families thrive when they can shape their futures, not when bureaucratic systems constrain them. Each time the government steps in with a new program or benefit, it diminishes that freedom, replacing it with control. 

What begins as well-intentioned assistance often leads to dependence on the state. For example, the expansion of the child tax credit may appear to help families in the short term, but beneath the surface, it’s just another form of wealth redistribution. The government takes from some families to give to others, often with strings attached, reducing overall freedom and fostering a culture of dependency.

As Milton Friedman often argued, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Every dollar spent on social programs must come from somewhere—from today’s taxpayers or, worse, future generations who will inherit the debt. 

When politicians advocate for more government borrowing, they are not helping families; they are placing a financial burden on the very children they claim to support. These government interventions discourage self-reliance and erode the virtues that strengthen families, such as responsibility and initiative.

The real solution to helping families is not more government intervention—it’s less. 

Cutting government spending and reducing taxes allows families to keep more of their hard-earned money. When families control more of their income, they can make decisions that fit their unique needs, whether saving for a home, investing in their children’s education, or starting a small business. 

Families are far better equipped to allocate resources than Washington bureaucrats.

Moreover, reducing the size of government programs fosters independence. Work requirements, for instance, are essential to reducing welfare dependency. When individuals are encouraged to contribute to society through meaningful work, they regain a sense of dignity and self-worth—key elements for the stability and strength of the family unit. 

Government handouts that lack work incentives trap individuals in cycles of poverty and dependency. Over time, these individuals lose the motivation to improve their circumstances, weakening the family structure.

A critical area where this is evident is in criminal justice reform. 

Too many fathers, particularly in minority communities, are imprisoned for non-violent offenses, leaving families without a primary breadwinner and creating emotional and financial strain. This is another case where excessive government intervention—in the form of overcriminalization—has done more harm than good. 

Reforming the system to focus on rehabilitation and second chances would do far more to help struggling families than government welfare checks. Strong families depend on having responsible, present role models. Keeping families intact is essential to breaking the cycles of poverty that afflict so many communities.

Rising living costs are another major issue for families, but government intervention often exacerbates this problem. 

In housing, healthcare, and education, regulations and taxes inflate costs, making it harder for families to get by. For instance, restrictive zoning laws and excessive property taxes increase housing costs. Rather than creating new government programs to subsidize housing, a better approach would be eliminating these regulations and reducing the tax burden, allowing the free market to provide more affordable solutions. 

The free market has a proven track record of reducing prices and increasing access, while government involvement often does the opposite.

The government should protect individual rights and ensure a fair playing field, not interfere by redistributing wealth or attempting to manage the economy. Personal responsibility and economic freedom are key to prosperity. Families need the freedom to choose how to work, spend, and live their lives. 

More government programs won’t strengthen families—freedom will.

Politicians like Vance and Walz, though well-meaning, miss the broader point. Families don’t need more government programs; they need more freedom. This includes the freedom to work, to spend their money as they see fit, and to live without excessive regulation. By reducing the size of government, cutting taxes, and eliminating burdensome regulations, we give families the tools they need to succeed on their terms.
​
The key to strengthening families is not expanding government but reducing its role. Families thrive when they have the freedom to make their own choices without the heavy hand of government dictating their lives. The best way to help families is to let them keep more of what they earn, remove the bureaucratic red tape that stifles opportunity, and foster a culture of personal responsibility. The freer families are to pursue their goals, the more prosperous society will become—not just for them but for the entire country.