Food Stamp Program

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

House of Representatives member, Phil Roe, introduced a bill to amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. The Healthy Food Choices Act of 2016 would require the participants of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to use their benefits to purchase items that meet the nutrition requirement proposed by the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children or WIC program (Roe, 2016). According to the United States Department of Agriculture (2016), there were 45,766,672 people participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in the 2015 fiscal year. This means that nearly forty-six million people will be affected by the passing of this act and would no longer be able to use SNAP to purchase sugary

While the SNAP program has been successful in reducing food insecurity, some wonder whether SNAP is as nutritionally beneficial. Here we have assembled relevant information on the role of SNAP in the nutrition of Americans, and areas where there is room for improvement.

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.

The Hunger-free kids act is a nutrition program that provides all children with healthy food in school and to low income families. Because of this act schools are playing a larger role in children’s health. Included in this legislation other programs that focus on hunger has come into play such as: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Woman, Infants and Children (WIC), Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), Summer Food Service Program, After School Meal Program and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed). The programs under the Hunger-free kids act do not have a specific expiration date however,

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”.

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.

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

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Woman, Infants, and Children (WIC) was established in1972. This federally funded program’s primary focus is the nutritional harm that hunger, and poverty creates specifically for mothers, soon-to-be mothers, children and infants (Blau and Abramovitz, 2014). This program has seen an influx of participants over the many years since its existence. Recently, in 2009 WIC underwent major changes that would benefit both mothers and their children. WIC required its participants to buy healthier foods and pushed grocery stores to provide healthier foods for the participants (Block and Subramanian, 2015). Most recipients of WIC are low-income and more than likely live in neighborhoods with food deserts.

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 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

Federally-funded school meal programs, including the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP), serve an average of 31.3 million lunches and 11.1 million breakfasts per day at a cost to the country of $11.1 billion in 2011 (Food & Nutrition Services, 2012). These federally-funded meals are an excellent opportunity for regulation of nutrition as well as education regarding healthy choices. Obesity is clearly a great threat to the health of our nation, and the federal government must step in to defend its citizens against this growing threat. Children are at the mercy of their families, their social conditions, and their schools, predisposing them to obesity through poor nutritional options and a lack of education; the federal government must intervene through regulation of school meals and snacks to protect children from the abundance of unhealthy options while also educating them and reducing childhood obesity.

Since 1946 the National School Lunch Act’s laws and regulations have been amended twenty-two times. Today’s program has over 100 years of testing, evaluating, and constant research to make sure the program provides the best in nutrition, nutrition education, and foodservice for millions of students. The school lunch program has become so accepted that most Americans don’t think of it as welfare (Winchell, 2009). The USDA still maintains control over the program, but there are still funding issues with more than half of school lunches free or reduced. According to the National Nutrition Standards, which are published by the School Nutrition Association, in order for schools to receive federal subsidies for free or reduced lunch meals they must follow Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA).

nutritious meals. There should also be restrictions put into place on what participants can and cannot buy. The Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program has guidelines on what can and cannot be bought. A participant is allowed to buy a certain dollar amount of fresh fruits and vegetables a month, along with 1% or skim milk, eggs, cheese, breakfast cereal, beans, peanut butter, bread, and tuna for breastfeeding mothers. Everything that can be purchased has a good nutritional value and nothing is considered unhealthy. This promotes improved eating habits not only for the mother, but for the children as well. If the same guidelines are set into place for SNAP, then participants will be receiving a more proper nutrition. Also, their children

Chang, Kuo-liang, Marjorie Zastrow, Christina Zdorovtsov, Ryan Quast, Larissa Skjonsberg and Suzanne Stluka. "Do SNAP and WIC programs encourage more fruit and vegetable intake?" Family and Economic Issues 36.4 (2015). ProQuest Central. Web. 22 Nov. 2015.