Senior Government Seminar: The Great Society

Jasmin Forgenie
October 18, 2013
Senior Government Seminar
The Great Society
The Great Society is a controversial topic between conservatives and liberals. The conservatives, people who believe in self-sufficiency and little to no government help, believe that the Great Society ineffective and is doing too much harm while the liberals, people who believe that it is the governments role to help and alleviate social and economic troubles of society, believe the opposite. The Great Society is a vision by Lyndon Baines Johnson of an America “where no child will go unfed and no youngster will go unschooled; where every child has a good teacher and every teacher has good pay, and both have good classrooms; where every human being had dignity
The Great Society programs such as welfare, Medicare, and food stamps have been very expensive, spending 9 trillion of taxpayer dollars since 1964. However, it is effective as it has declined poverty by 57% by providing cheaper housing, allowing people to have opportunities to get jobs and it increases the life expectancy of men and women since 1964. Therefore, the programs provided to society should be continued.
The programs of the Great society vision have greatly improved poverty and have allowed people to pursue high levels of education. Michael D. Tanner, the director of health and welfares studies believes that the Great Society programs have helping in some ways. Tanner states “Since 1996, roughly 2.5 million families have left the program, a 57 percent decline. Most of those who left welfare found work, and of them, the vast majority of them work full-time” ( Tanner). Basically Tanner is saying the welfare programs have allowed people to become self-sufficient
Joseph Califano believes that due to programs such as Medicaid and Medicare the life expectancy for humans have increased. “In 1964, life expectancy was 66.6 years for men and 73.1 years for women. In a single generation, by 1977, life expectancy jumped 10 percent: for men to 73.6 years; for women, to 79.2 percent” (Califano Jr.). These government insurance programs have allowed people to get the medical attention and medication the need to live a healthy life. In the article “Did the United States Lose the War on Poverty the life and death rates of infants are discussed. The author states “Infant mortality among the poor, which had barely declined between 1950 and 1965, fell by one-third in the decade after 1965 as a result of the expansion of federal medical and nutrition programs” (“Did the united states lose the war on poverty”). This point proves that the medical assistant programs are really working if the infancy death rate is decreasing dramatically. Not only have the death rates gone down and life expectancy gone up, but also the ways of living have been improved. “The proportion of families living in substandard housing—that is, housing lacking indoor plumbing- also declined steeply, from 20 percent in 1960 to 11 percent a decade later” (“Did the US Lose the War on Poverty”). The government housing programs have provided a stable environment for families and provide