I think Peshak is right that this could be enforced by putting the responsibility on businesses and fining them for non-compliance. Most of these businesses (liquor stores, strip clubs, casinos) are already regulated.
I think you would just see people selling their cards for about fifty cents on the dollar, but the letter of the law would still be followed.
I'm more interested in why we are singling out strip clubs, casinos, and liquor stores. Others have mentioned this already, but do we want these support progams to only pay for necessities?
If we ban strip clubs, do we ban movie theatres as well?
If we ban movies, do we ban the purchase of books as well?
What about spending on education? That is not a necessity either.
What if they want to join a gym?
My personal opinion is that even at basic levels of government assistance, we should let people make choices. You want to buy Fruit Roll Ups instead of fruit? Ok. You want to spend money at the strip club instead of going to community college? Ok. As long as you are following the same laws everyone else is, and as long as the money we are giving them isn't enough to discourage them from working, I'm personally okay with that.
I understand others are not. If we decided as a society to only provide the necessities to those on Government Assistance, I think it should be administered in a completely different way. Basic government owned housing with food distribution centers in urban areas, social workers to provide some basic groceries and household items in more rural areas.
Again, I don't agree with that, but if we as a society decide that we only want to provide essentials, I feel like that would be the way to go about it.
Anyone feel like strip clubs, liquor stores etc. should be banned, but other forms of entertainment should be permitted? I can't follow the logic on that one.