Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program 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.

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

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.

Eighteen percent of America is currently on food stamps. Why is that so? Food stamps allow just about anyone to qualify. Most of those on food stamps are able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) (Hoar). Why is it that so many people are on food stamps? Maybe because it is lenient with its rules. Being on food stamps does not give someone a comfortable and easy lifestyle, but it is comfortable enough. It is no secret that obesity is a growing epidemic in America. Food stamps are one of the major roots of the problem. Imagine getting to stay home and not have to go to work. The government sends checks in the mail to spend on groceries, but it gets better. The government does not prohibit the purchase of junk food. Those people can now indulge

People are selling their Foods Stamps through various methods like taking people to the store and buying food. Individuals are making packaged deals to outsmart the system. For example, Food Stamps are generally more than actual money because it is government funded. So therefore, non-assisted people are getting excessive food benefits, while the abuser is receiving cash.

The United States does not spend too much on the food stamp (SNAP program) and no one deserves to go hungry. Every year during budget talks the welfare program is a featured topic as the government explores ways to cut the budget. There appears to be a lot of unnecessary spending due to abuse of the system and program administration complexity. There are many areas in which reforms could be instituted and the program could be expanded without misappropriation of funds.

With $30 you can buy the following: 2 pies of Frozen Freschetta 12” Pizza, 1 box of Kellogg’s cereal of your choice, 3 boxes of Barilla Pasta, 2 jars of Barilla Pasta Sauce, 1 pound of turkey breast cold cuts, 1 package of salad blend, 1 and a ½ crown of broccoli, 5 tomatoes on the vine and 8 slices of store-made angel food cake (“ShopRite of Poughkeepsie Weekly Ad Week of April 20 through April 26”). Can you survive on that for a week? The average single able bodied, unemployed Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipient in New York receives around $30 a week to purchase food (“Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program”). The food stamp program was made national by the Food Stamp Act of 1964 by President Lyndon. B. Johnson (“Food Stamps in the U.S”). Today, over 47.6 million Americans rely on the government to buy groceries (“Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program”). The food stamp program is a staple part of our society. However, there was a time when the program was so unpopular that it shut down for almost two decades. In the recent years, food stamp benefits have been on a trend of expanding not only the amount of recipients, but also the amount each recipient receives in benefits. Why has the food stamp program become so popular and supported over the years? And what is the fate of SNAP? The analysis of trends of the policy changes and public moods shows that the size of the food stamp program has changed with the shift in America’s attitude towards

Snap helps families bring in food for the family to eat. Most recipients of SNAP are either a child or senior citizen. Food stamp spending is only a tiny part of the overall government spending (Just Harvest). Only two percent was spent in 2012, but nineteen percent of the U.S budget is spent on defense. Food stamp (SNAP) program is highly efficient in terms of taxpayers: it reaches the majority of people who need it and has been shown to unlike our overseas engagements, the food stamps program is highly efficient in terms of bang for the tax-payers’ bucks: it reaches the majority of people who need it and has been shown to take 4.7 million people out of poverty which reduces child poverty by three percent (Just Harvest). Each dollar that is spent on food stamps benefits will double that in economic activity. The majority of Americans have supported the food stamp program and believe that cutting it is the wrong way to go. They believe it would be the wrong way to try to decrease government spending. But a way to reduce government spending is to drug test/screen applicants to guarantee that the money will be spent on food and not sold for drugs etc. They should also look deeper into who they are giving assistant to (Just

The United States does not spend too much on the food stamp (SNAP program) and no one deserves to go hungry. Every year during budget talks the welfare program comes up as the government explores ways to cut the budget. There seems to be a lot of unnecessary spending due to things like abuse of the system and program administration. There are many areas in which reforms could be instituted and the program could be expanded without misappropriation of funds.

I believe the evaluation of the SNAP program proves that there is more abuse in the program than the government is portraying and as a result, all the stakeholders are suffering from the abuse. It makes me wonder if it would not be easier to just give the recipients money versus stamps and let them control how they want to spend the money. I do not think it would be much different from what is happening now and it would reduce the cost to the taxpayers, and stores that take these EBT cards and the same time allow people to use the money on all their needs not just food.

Food stamp benefits do not have a great social standing. “Because of previous abuse of the system such as selling food stamps to buy cigarettes, there is a social stigma with receiving funds.” (Marie Thibodeaux, Wanda.) People feel that persons on food stamps are lazy and don’t want to work. They take advantage of the free money that is given to them

“…among the food-insecure population, SNAP participation appears to buffer against poor dietary quality and obesity…” Their research highlights how SNAP can potentially play into helping at risk people obtain a healthy diet and weight status.

The food stamp program was instituted to ensure that people are no longer are going hungry in America. Since The Food Stamp Act came into effect in the year 1964. Obesity seems to be more prevalent in participants of this food program. Obesity does not discriminate, although it does appear to affect lower-income women that participate in the Food Stamp Program. As written by Gibson (2008) "Participation in the Food Stamp Program by low-income women was associated with a 9.0% increase in the probability of current obesity" (as cited by Zhu,Yen,Eastwood, 2005). More people are inclined to be more obese now than ever before; there are 30% or 6 million of adults that are categorized as obese in the United States (Collins, 2007). The rate is for