Food Stamp Cuts: Justified or Unjustified? Essay

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers food assistance programs that help provide food for low to no income families. It is their goal to increase food security and reduce hunger by increasing access to food, a healthful diet, and nutrition education for low-income Americans (Caswell, 2013, para. 1). Some of the current nutrition assistance programs include “the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)”(Caswell, 2013, para. 1). SNAP will be the primary nutrition assistance program of the paper at hand. No matter how morally good it is to try to help reduce hunger and increase food security within the United States, there are still many questions regarding issues with SNAP. This paper will be discussing why there is such a strong support for the program, how it helps the United States as a whole, problems with the program, and why some people are against SNAP.

Food stamps are an important component of low-income families’ monthly resources, increasing the chances that families are able to meet basic needs (Ratcliffe, McKernan & Finegold, 2008). This form of food relief dates back to the Great Depression when many Americans lost their jobs and did not have money to feed their families. People were starving while farmers produced abundant crop that could not be sold due to a lack of consumers with buying power (Dorsch, 2013). The Federal Surplus Relief Corporation which was a part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, bought basic farm goods at low prices and distributed the among hunger relief agencies in different states and local communities (Congressional Digest, 2013).

SNAP is the foundation of nutrition assistance programs. This program provides over 47 million individuals in nearly 23 million low-income households. The eligibility is not restricted to certain groups of individuals, and because of this, SNAP serves a vast amount of families with children, elderly people, and individuals with disabilities. Others eligible for SNAP include families with adults who work in low-wage jobs, unemployed workers, and those with a fixed income. The SNAP Program assists about 72 percent of people who live in households with children. Nearly 25 percent of households with seniors and individuals with disabilities, are also assisted (Rosenbaum, 2013).

Food insecurity remains to be a current problem that is defined as the limited access to food due to low income. In 2012, approximately one million Canadian households were classified as food insecure. Certain groups such as, Aboriginals and single mothers, are at higher risk for food insecurity compared to other groups.

It has been reported across media that the number of food stamp recipients has increased tremendously, reaching an all time high of 5 million people (Matt, 2013). The amount forgone is approximately $175 million (Matt, 2013). Of this amount, $75 million has been distributed to individuals who do not meet the eligibility criteria (Matt, 2013). In his research study, Matt (2013) indicated that for every $60 in benefits, Texas doled out close to $6.11 to people or recipients who are not eligible (Matt, 2013). The national average stands at $3.05, which shows that Food Stamp fraud in Texas is alarmingly high (Matt, 2013). This shows clearly that Food Stamp fraud is indeed destroying the economic potential of Texas. The amount used in order to provide benefits to fraudsters is supposed to be used in other areas of economic worth. However, believing that the needy citizens are being assisted, Texas has continued to use its revenues for unwarranted courses of action. Furthermore, the food stamp fraud is costing the tax payers immensely. As such, the cost of benefits provided under this program is met by the tax payers. As such, they must pay some income tax, some of which is channeled into the food stamp course. With an increase in the number of recipients, it means that the tax payers have to forgo more. This, as a result, ensures that those who are economically active continue to suffer at the expense of

In the United States of America, there is enough food in this country that the total amount of agricultural exports is enough to feed everyone twice over (Dorsch, 2013). The problem is that even though there is so much food in this country millions of people require assistance to purchase the food and feed their families. Dating back almost 100 years, the now called Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) has evolved to keep up with the changing needs of the Country. In 1933 SNAP was built into Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA). The AAA was put into law during the great depression. The purpose of the law was to help farmers deal with the excess supply of crops by having the government subsidize the cost. The government would also distribute these crops to relief agencies and local communities (The History of SNAP). In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the Food Stamp Act. With this legislation enacted it was now required to purchase stamps. These stamps also had bonus amounts that were determined by income level. In the 90’s and early 2000s major changes were done to SNAP. The electronic benefit transfer (EBT) card was

Did you know that 17% of Americans in rural areas live below the poverty line, and out of those 17%, 15 million of those individuals are children? (Hunger In America 2014). The month of September was Hunger Action month and many individuals helped raise awareness by taking the Food Stamp (SNAP) Challenge. This challenge consists of an individual living on the SNAP balance of a $6-7 per day budget for food. Many individuals came to the realization that this is a difficult budget, and does not meet the nutritional needs for a family.

The federal food stamp program (SNAP), makes up the largest portion of the budget for the US Department of Agriculture.1 In New York alone 15.3% of residents receive benefits from the SNAP program.2 The purpose of SNAP is to provide nutrition to low-income citizens, however SNAP beneficiaries experience higher rates of obesity compared non-reciepiants.3 According to a report published by the USDA, Americans use food stamps to buy more than $600 million worth of “sweetened beverages,” and bought hundreds of millions more of junk food and sugary snacks.4 Lack of regulation and reform to the SNAP program is causing harm to the public.

People who can cook and work need to buy all the ingredients, but in reality, it is hard to make time to shop before work or after work. People who have food stamps are low income people who needs to work for hours to support their family. When people who work need to shop, they need to think about open and close time for the grocery store, shopping time, traffic and finding parking space, waiting line to buy, and also time for going back to their house to drop off all the food and going to work if they are planning to shop before their shift. For example, When you go to the Costco or Walmart, there are long lines to purchase and countless cars in the parking lot. Costco is always busy with people that

Food stamps have helped a lot of people out and I have no doubt about that in my mind. Many families depend on

Abby Phillip, author of “Wisconsin Wants to Discourage the Poor from Spending Food Stamps on Junk Food,” explains the bill and its possible impacts. This article, published in the Washington Post, includes comments from legislators and business coalitions about the positives and negatives of the possible implementation of this bill.

Food stamps are government-issued coupons for low income families. People in America like to take advantage of those coupons and use them for unhealthy food and drinks. In SNAP households, soft drinks are ranked the second highest purchase (Tanner). SNAP is the formerly known program for food stamps. In one study, low income women admitted their babies into a government nutrition assistance program. Researchers confirmed that “The rate of youngsters at risk for obesity fell during the study, from almost 15 percent in 2010 to 12 percent overall in 2014” (Tanner). In that study, the government took control of what food stamps were available, and the obesity rates fell among the families. Additionally, another survey published by SNAP provides a glimpse into the shopping cart of a typical house. As said by a group of Stanford researchers, “Banning sugary drinks for SNAP would be expected to significantly reduce obesity prevalence and type 2 diabetes incidence” (O’Connor). Here, it means, that instead of promoting unhealthy food, the government can give out food stamps that are a healthier alternative for the public . Although this may be true, some people consider that it is society’s responsibility to be healthy. Ryan Schwertfeger, president of the Student Senate concludes, “Those who make healthy choices will have no reason to suffer or worry about those

My experience with the website and and the two articles was mostly satisfying. I considered the eligibility application for social services on the Georgia Compass website to be inviting. The simplicity and helpfulness within the application energized me to complete the application and see the available opportunities for me. I was intrigued by The Debunking Myths About Food Stamps article because I was able to learn the facts that allowed me to relinquish my false beliefs on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. I read the What New Mothers Need to Know article, and I was pleased to see that I was not alone in knowing whether or not if my education and resources were suitable for raising a child in the best possible way.

Skepticism of people’s true need ties into the support of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formally known as Food Stamps. By the 1990’s conservatives and some liberals argued that the Johnson-era reforms had created a culture of dependency on government aid. In 1996 Congress overhauled the welfare system by imposing work requirements and putting time limits on cash payments to the needy. This act caused the SNAP rolls to drop, but the economic crisis that began in 2007 pushed the national unemployment rate above 9 percent. With unemployment at an all-time high this forced millions of families to seek government aid. In response to this new need the SNAP program was expanded as part of the stimulus package in 2009. This expansion was intended to be a temporary fix with cuts to the program to being in 2013. The thought

In today’s modern society, the United States faces many public policy issues, whether those issues include social welfare, immigration or even environmental issues. Congress receives numerous issues on public polices every day, but they cannot handle and solve every issues that comes across their daily agenda, nor can they satisfy every person in this country. Congress prioritizes on those issues that are more important and relevant to find a probable solution too. A growing issue we see that in today’s society are issues in the social welfare system. Social Welfare has so many issues within some of those issues include the food stamps, and even in the healthcare system. The matters in social welfare requires every individuals help to resolve, not just congress. The second major public policy issue we face in American today are within the Public Assistance Programs. Those programs include the SNAP, SSI, and even the TANF program.