Medicaid and other antipoverty programs reward work, not indolence

It's a common delusion among some wealthy people that their success is a product of their industry and ingenuity. They regard poverty, therefore, as a consequence of indolence and ignorance. As the British journalist Walter Bagehot once observed, "Poverty is an anomaly to rich people; it is very difficult to make out why people who want dinner do not ring the bell."
 
I can understand the indifference of so many wealthy folks, particularly Republican politicians, toward the poor. What I don't comprehend, however, is their eagerness to vilify, ridicule and punish poverty.
 
That's what Kansas Republican Gov. Sam Brownback did recently when he opposed the expansion of Medicaid, the federal-state program that supports health care for low-income families. Brownback explained he vetoed the bill "because it fails to serve the truly vulnerable before the able-bodied [and] lacks work requirements to help able-bodied Kansans escape poverty." In 2013, then-Gov. Bobby Jindal pushed a similar slur against the poor as he opposed Medicaid expansion.
 
To the average person, Brownback's and Jindal's reasoning might make sense. Doesn't giving health care to poor people make them reluctant to find a job with health insurance? It might, if most of those who would benefit were unemployed, which they are not.