A welfare service functions in a relatively straight-forward way.
- People contribute with money to a certain fund.
- An organisation is set up which administers the use of those funds for welfare purposes.
This two-step procedure doesn't need to involve a government. You are allowed to do it yourself. The only difference is that the organisation mentioned in step-two is now an actual NGO rather than a government department.
So why don't proponents of certain welfare services just perform the above two-step procedure and do it themselves?
For example, the Democratic Party certainly seems to have enough administrative ressources to ask for donations from their voters and set up an NGO which runs whatever welfare service their voters desire: healthcare, UBI, m/paternity leaves, etc. These services are of course only available to those who contribute to its fund. This process doesn't sound overtly difficult to me and there's no legal hindrance either. It would probably take a few years to set up and get it to run optimally, but comparing that to the slow development of usual politics, a few years of hard work doesn't sound like much in comparison.
So why don't they just do that? I understand that their ultimate goal is to achieve a national coverage of such welfare plans, but if you really believe so much in these welfare programs, surely a first step is to just initiate it on your own? That would also showcase to the rest of the population that it works and is a good thing.
EDIT: By "welfare services", I don't mean services that take from the rich and give to the poor. In that case, the problem is obvious: adverse selection. I am talking about services that promote welfare: healthcare, ubi, paternity leave, education, etc.