“The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Food Insecurity, Dietary Quality, and Obesity Among US Adults” by Binh Nguyen, Kerem Shuval, Farryl Bertmann, and Amy Yaroch talks about food insecurity, which they define as “…having limited access to adequate food is associated with increased stress levels and reduced overall well-being.” They say that there is also correlation between food insecurity and the diminishment of quality of diet, as well as nutritional intake, which has been associated with chronic morbidity and weight gain, as well as other health problems. SNAP has the potential to alleviate the adverse effects of food insecurity on health outcomes, by weakening food insecurity and bettering the dietary quality of the participants. …show more content…
“…increased expenditures on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), providing essential nutritional supplementation to those most in need, was associated with a decrease in Medicaid costs in Massachusetts, particularly as linked to people with chronic illness who are most at risk for food insecurity.” (Galea, Vaughan, quoted Sonik RA) In the article by Galea and Vaughan, another article by Sonik RA is quotes. They talk about how his article provided a dialogue on the importance of government programs that help mitigate the roots of population health. In that particular article, he talks of food insecurity. Galea and Vaughan would most likely not agree with the findings of Nguyen, Shuval, Bertmann, and Yaroch. The majority of their article focused on the opposition. “Of course, one of the counterarguments against the expenditure of government funds on programs such as SNAP is the cost of these programs.” (Galea, …show more content…
A policy to help the consumption would be to issue the benefits semi-monthly, instead of once a month. They go on to say that semi-monthly issuance would “improve food choice architecture”. “Allowing for the option of semi-monthly benefit issuance, along with the staggered issuance days that many states now have, may help smooth both participants' consumption and retailers' sales over the month.”
Though Galea and Vaughan article is relatively objective, I believe the authors of “SNAP Participants' Eating Patterns over the Benefit Month: A Time Use Perspective”, Hamrick and Andrews would disagree with each other on what is to be done with SNAP. It seems that Galea and Vaughan’s bias is leaning more towards ending the program while Hamrick and Andrews see the benefits and also add possible solutions for the ‘benefit cycle’ trend they had
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.
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).
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.
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
As the US national debt nears $20 trillion, government programs are being looked to be cut, one of those being the SNAP program. SNAP is a federal program which offers nutrition assistance to low income families, by use of food-stamps, while also providing economic benefits to communities (“Supplemental”). SNAP is the largest program in domestic hunger safety (“Supplemental”), the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) works with nutrition educators, faith based organizations, and neighborhood organizations to help those eligible for the SNAP program make informed decisions about applying (“Supplemental”). The FNS also works with the retail community and State partners to improve the program’s integrity and administration (“Supplemental”). The SNAP
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a government program for low-income individuals and families which allows them to receive nutrition assistance. Previously known as the Federal Food Stamp Program, SNAP was renamed in 2008 to fight stigma of those who participate in the program. The first food stamp program can date back to 1939 and was created by Milo Perkins who was able to see a solution for both farmers who had surpluses of crops and the undernourished population within the town.
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.
Less than one percent of America has what is considered a "very low food security," yet eighteen percent of America is on food stamps (Hoar). There are many people in the surrounding area of Leedey, Oklahoma that are on food stamps. Most of them do not have any plans to make a change in their lives, and none of them seem to be struggling in regards to food. Many will say that it is not the government's job to control what people eat. The average person in America eats or drinks something that can be considered "junk food" every day. Why should the people on food stamps be limited on food when they are already limited to other expenditures? Seeing that it is everyone's right to eat what he or she wants, he or she should be able to buy junk food if it is he or she's own money. Food stamps are primarily run on government money. At least those who are not on food stamps who buy junk food can say that it is he or she's own money. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), food stamps, was created to get rid of hunger in the United States (Hoar). According to Robert Paarlberg of Harvard University obesity is the problem in most low-income households, not hunger (2). Jen Fifield, the founder of a food pantry in Quitman County, claims that "many public health and medical officials. . . [are] saying that the program. . . [is] feeding into the country's unhealthy habits and worsening the obesity epidemic. (1)" This is supported by many statistics. Arkansas state Representative Mary Bently states that one in three adults in Arkansas are obese, and she is afraid that food stamps are "enabling" diabetes and obesity to rise (1). If junk food is continued to be accessed by those on food stamps, then it will be more than adults being affected by obesity. The children of America will eventually be affected by the leniency of food
As of 2013, one sixth of the entire country was enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Through this program, 47 million Americans are given federal financial aid to purchase fresh groceries (Plumer). One of the highly debated provisions of the SNAP program is what participants should be allowed to use their food stamps for. As of right now, food stamps can only be used to purchase food that can be cooked or eaten at home, preventing families from spending the federal aid at restaurants (USDA). Recently, the fast food corporation YUM!, which owns Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut, has lobbied to change this restriction (USA Today). Should people benefitting from the SNAP program have the right to spend their money on
The supplemental nutrition assistance program –SNAP helps families in domestic hunger safety. Most might refer to them as Food stamps. SNAP is helpful for people who need assistance facing poverty. The Hamilton Project says, “This makes it the country’s most critical tool in battling poverty. The program kept 4.9 million out of poverty in 2012.” Many may argue, why are people still being unassisted in receiving SNAP benefits? As Michael Tanner writes in his policy analysis, “Snap is a deeply troubled program that has high administrative costs and significant levels of fraud and abuse” (1). Which leads me to say, it is time for the state to
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”.
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
Obesity in Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) participants is a problem that needs to be addressed through an effective intervention. The problem is that even though SNAP provides resources to food insecure individuals, the food being provided is not nutritious and is thus contributing to the high rates of obesity in SNAP participants. The most effective way to address this issue is through nutrition education for these participants. At least two intervention programs have worked in the past, with a few improvements that could be made. Looking at two different intervention programs and funding options will help determine the most effective methods for relieving this issue. When the benefits and obstacles of each intervention are understood, the best program can be established, funded, and implemented to best serve the population. Using nutrition education methods to alleviate obesity in SNAP participants through SNAP-Ed and WIC Health are the most effective in terms of the textbook’s theory layout.
Food insecurity is one of the leading public health challenges in the United States today, since millions of people (children and adults) are food insecure because of insufficient money income and other socioeconomic and demographic factors. (Seligman, Kushel, & Laraia, 2010)