EDITORIALS We stand for the constitution of the United States with its three departments of government as therein set forth, each one fully independent in its own field. Deseret News Oct 6th 1949 Salt Lake City, Utah The Deseret News Thursday, October 6, 1949 Status of Welfare in Utah THE PUBLIC WELFARE picture in Utah has changed with the coming of a new state administration. Statistics from the latest Utah Foundation Research Report, the one entitled Trends In Utah Public Welfare, point out some interesting facts and trends. Of prime importance to any real consideration is the number of persons being helped and the total cost of the various programs. Welfare rolls have been cut in half in the past eight years. But total costs have climbed to more than a third again as much. For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1949, our total welfare outlay was 12,740,103; for fiscal 1941 it was 8,090,025. In April 1941 nearly one tenth of the entire population of the state (54,038 persons) were receiving public welfare assistance. In July 1949 the equivalent number had dropped half, to 27,418. Thus half as many people are receiving a total of a third again as much money. Figured on the basis of 1949 grants, if the welfare rolls should increase again to the 1941 level, it would cost 25,000,000 a year to carry the burden. Enforcing of some new policies in recent months has been notable. Children who are earning money and living at home have been required to contribute more to the support of the family, for one thing. Cases of two families are cited in the foundation study to illustrate what has happened in this field. Each family was receiving a substantial welfare grant, and each of them had two employed sons receiving a monthly wage of 290. Thus a total of 580 was coming into each family every month a mere 6900 a year per family. Under the assistance standards in force last April these boys were required to contribute only 25 each to their familys support. A new standard went into force in May which required them to contribute half of their income in excess of 40 for the support of the family. Thus each family received 250 a month from the combined efforts of its wage earning sons, making the families ineligible for public assistance. A total of 87 families were dropped from the rolls during May on the basis of this policy. New policies have also been put into effect covering combined payments to several persons within the same household; payments for utilities have been discontinued where these are already being furnished free to the recipient of state aid by some individual; steps are being taken to collect alimony due divorced women whose support otherwise falls on the state. Findings as to the operation of the lien law, also, are of note. This law provides that the property of old age recipients shall be subject to a lien by the state in the amount of certain grants to the parties. Such cannot be enforced during the life of an old age recipient or the life of his or her spouse. Some 2000 old age recipients voluntarily withdrew from the relief rolls rather than submit to this lien provision. Some 400 of these subsequently signed the lien provision and returned to the welfare rolls. It is estimated that this lien law provision has saved the state 1,125,000 a year, so far, in old age assistance. As time goes on and there are some recoveries under the law, this will increase. So far there has not been a single case in which the lien provisions have been enforced by the sale of the property. In each instance heirs have either paid or arranged to pay the amount of the lien so they could keep the property. It is evident that progress is being made in the administration of welfare policies. As a matter of principle, persons needing support should receive it from their families first, from churches or civic groups second, and from the state only when these primary agencies fail. This will make for a healthy condition for all concerned.