Food Stamp Program Benefits

The modern program was established as part of the War on Poverty in the 1960s but has undergone mass changed since then (Edin, 2014). One being that the government gives out electronic debit cards, rather than stamps, for buying food. Since 2008, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program has become the largest food assistance program in the U.S. It serves greater than 45 million people in the U.S and is a critical safety net program for health and nutrition in the U.S (The History of SNAP, para.

For each of these three recommended actions to be implemented into policy, several things need to occur. For the SNAP policy update and increase in funding recommendation, a general consensus among the United States Department of Agriculture needs to be on board that this is a necessary action. The USDA regulates the SNAP program, so they are the primary agency that would update the policies to further enhance eligible food items and restrict purchasing of unhealthy food. They have the resources of dieticians and medical doctors that understand nutrition, and can differentiate between what healthy and unhealthy food products are. They already have restrictions based on eligible food items, but they do not have any restrictions based on the

Time to go to the grocery store with only $29.00 worth of food stamps for the

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.

In the United State, there is a federal nutrition program for low income people to help food budget and buy healthy food. People who have low income in the United States get the food stamps, also known as “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)”. For every month, eligible people who have low income get benefits deposited in to their EBT account. Once they get food stamp, people can purchase food items including seeds and plants to grow food in their house or backyard. It can be used at a grocery store, a supermarket, a farmer 's market, and a shelter that serves meals. However, with all these great benefits, people still eat unhealthy because of too much time consuming, limited money, some food dessert area, and the benefits allow people to eat junk food.

This writing will be about the usage of food stamps, or maybe I should say the abuse of food stamps. I see a lot of food stamp abuse in my work environment and i would like to find out how they really work and if the system is really abused. I intend to learn and research about the background of food stamps and how the system really got started along with its original intentions. I would also like to research people's personal encounters with them, may it be what they have seen or the stories of the people who actually have them, whether they abuse them or use them for their good.

Tom Vilsack once said “The lack of access to proper nutrition is not only fueling obesity, it is leading to food insecurity and hunger among our children”. In recent years an unruly amount of homes were classified as food insecure, which is a government measurement for when all people are not able to access nutritious foods to help maintain a healthy lifestyle. Hunger is a worldwide problem and is also a crisis in the United States of America. Because of this concern the federal government configured a temporary solution for society, called Food Stamps or now known as SNAPS. SNAPS stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Although this program helps to alleviate America’s hunger problems, it also created a new problem in the

Administered by the USDA, the goal of the program is to alleviate hunger and malnutrition for low-income families, adults and seniors. The program is considered one of the largest and most successful solutions in decreasing food insecurity among senior Americans. The USDA pays 100% of all SNAP/Food Stamp benefits to the states that share the administration cost with the federal government. Congress reauthorizes the SNAP program every five years as part of the Farm Bill, the reauthorization determines who is eligible and addresses benefit levels and program accessibility (Fox, Hamilton, & Lin, 2011, p. 30-33). The USDA has implemented a program to create incentive for low-income seniors to purchase more fresh fruits and vegetables using food stamp. The USDA and other state agencies, businesses, nonprofits and the AARP to draw in low-income seniors to eat healthy foods, have supported the program. The program gives increases the number of establishments that accepts food stamp payment by giving dollar for dollar matches for food purchased by eligible seniors. The program labeled as the Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Program SFMNP also establishes educational programs about good nutrition in area grocery stores and farmer’s markets (USDA, 2015, p.

Aaron Carroll starts his article off with talking about the food stamp system and its correlation with America's obesity rates that keep getting higher. Carroll’s purpose for this article is to take a deeper look at what might be causing America's obesity rate to go up. He takes a look at a factor that most people may not associate to the rising rates. Carroll’s intended audience are people who might have an interest in physical health/ well-being and might want to find out possible solutions to the rising obesity rates in America. The author assumes that the audience has some sort of basic knowledge on food stamps and government welfare programs in general. Carroll does a little explaining of these programs but doesn’t go into that much depth

Recent cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program (S.N.A.P.), also known as the U.S. Food Stamp Program, have become extremely controversial. Whether Congress was wrong to reduce funding to the program remains a question. There are two principles that may be used to represent each side of this debate. The difference principle will be used to represent those who believe the program cuts were unjustified and the harm principle will be used to represent those who believe the program cuts were justified.

The initial program for nutritional support from the government was established in 1964; the program was altered in 1977, and remains the largest federal nutrition program for low-income households (USDA). Census reports from the Department of Agriculture reveal that we more than 47 million low income families rely on the SNAP benefits monthly within the Unites States. However, more than 50% of the recipients are children and elderly residences; about 8% actually receive cash welfare. Approximately 30% of SNAP recipients have earnings, or reside in a household with earnings. Nonetheless, government spending at its highest; money allocated for programs that have little or no monetary return, such as the SNAP program are deemed useless, wasteful, and detrimental to our ever growing capitalist economy. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse

For states that have needed more help to become healthier in their food choices such as southern states like Alabama and Georgia, they could receive a higher rebate of $0.45 for every dollar they spend on fruits and vegetables. Adding this incentive into the program is expected to actually increase consumption of fruits and vegetables by twenty-five percent, according to the Healthy Incentives Pilot program in Massachusetts. This policy should be enacted because as of right now there is no other way to promote spending on healthier choices when the prices on these choices are already so high for low-income families. In order to expand the SNAP program to fund this incentive, we need to allow for more government spending on this program. Though this would lead to higher debt for our domestic consumption, it would help those in the U.S. who have virtually nothing to eat. We plan on getting the money to fund this by allocating money from other unneeded government purchases such as the ones in our so called, “waste book”.

Food stamps are intended to provide low-income families, who struggle to buy healthy food own their own, the opportunity to have a healthy diet. With the purpose of food stamps in mind, a policy should be added that will prohibit purchases that are not considered healthy choices, including but not limited to; soft drinks, energy drinks, candy, snack food, and additional food considered to be luxurious. If you are capable of limiting the food served in our school systems to healthy choices, then I believe you have the same capability to do so with food stamps. Next, the number of stores that are allowed to accept food stamps needs to be limited. With numerous grocery stores and convenient stores accepting food stamps across the state it becomes practically impossible to monitor all food stamp transactions. By limiting the number of stores who are allowed to accept food stamps you will have more capability of monitoring the purchases more closely. This policy will also cut down on corrupt business owners who contribute to food stamp fraud and illegally accept food stamps as cash for non-food items such as tobacco or

Low socioeconomic status individuals have limited access to healthy and affordable foods which sequentially contributes to obesity. One might contend that the government provides assistance (WIC and Food Stamps) to

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