Both sides dig in over cutting food stamps
While battle lines harden, at least 234,000 fewer people are collecting the benefit from December's peak. That might not appease critics.
Updated at 4:36 p.m.
A fight is simmering over food stamps, one of the nation's most used social welfare benefits and a lightning rod for both conservatives and liberals.
The number of Americans tapping the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) reached a record in December, bringing the program under fire for last year's $74.6 billion in spending. That's more than double what the program paid out before the Great Recession.
As a result, both the Senate and House are debating measures that would shave the program. The Senate Agriculture Committee on Tuesday approved the Farm Bill, which would cut the SNAP program by about $4.1 billion, according to The New York Times. Meanwhile, the House Agriculture Committee is considering its own version of the Farm Bill, which would trim about $2.5 billion a year.
The fight over the proposed cuts is coming from two sides: those who think the reductions don't go far enough and those who believe they will devastate already struggling families.
But lost amid the debate is the fact that demand for the benefit is easing from its December peak, when a record 47.8 million people received the aid. Since then, the program has shed about 234,000 people from its rolls, according the most recent data from the Department of Agriculture, which has posted figures through February.
While only a small improvement, it does suggest the program is helping some families get by until they're able to boost their incomes and get off the rolls.
The fighting over food stamps, though, is likely to ratchet up as the legislation progresses, with some Republicans, such as Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., complaining that the cuts are inadequate. Some critics also complain that the program allows people to buy unhealthful food such as Coca-Cola's (KO) sweetened soft drinks or Mondelez's (MDLZ) Oreo cookies.
"We believe we have to start moving in a direction that gets the spending trajectory of these programs down to a more reasonable level," Thune said, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Meanwhile, some lawmakers are fighting the cuts, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., saying in a statement that the reductions will "literally take food away from hungry children."
Despite the recent decline in food stamp recipients, the number of Americans receiving SNAP benefits remains well above the levels seen just a few years ago. That means the debate won't die down anytime soon.
Follow Aimee Picchi on Twitter at @aimeepicchi.
Food Stamps are one of the most abused and wasteful social program this country has ever developed. A family of four receives more money monthly then my family of five spends a month on food. The amount paid out each month should be cut by at least one third. Purchases by food stamps should be (if not already) restricted to the following: Fresh/frozen non prepared meats & fish, fresh/frozen non prepared vegetables, deli meats/cheeses, canned goods, breads, non sweetened dairy, and juices. The following should always be banned, and processes need to be in place where not already, to restrict: Soda, bottled water, power and energy drinks, coffee, tea, ice cream, candy, energy bars, any pre-prepared meals or sandwiches, snacks/junk food. If these rules would be followed, no one would be hungry and we the taxpayers would save billions.
Close the foodstamp program down and replace it with boxes filled with sugar, flour, cooking oil, some veggies and fruits, dried beans, powdered milk, cornmeal, etc. People can pick up their boxes at the nearest school or post office.
If that's too difficult to coordinate, then make it more like WIC...you get a voucher listing specific items you may have--like 3 lbs hamburger, 2 gallons milk, a bag of oranges, etc....they can use that at the grocery cash register.
Food stamps should only be good for food that needs to be prepared. No 'ready to eat stuff'-Chips snacks, soft drinks, candy,....
And eliminate the cash benefit part or separate it from the SNAP program.
The program will shrink significantly. Great Britain recently did something similar for disability payments and saw their payout fall by over a third.
The same should be done for WIC, SS disability and welfare as well.
There is so much abuse in this program it's ridiculous. I was in a store just the other day the lady paid for all here food products with the government provided card. While on her finger dangled at least a four carrot diamond ring. She proceeded to use her debit card to purchase a candy bar and get $40.00 dollars cash. There are just way to many people on this program who aren't deserving.
"Meanwhile, some lawmakers are fighting the cuts, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., saying that the reductions will "literally take food away from hungry children.""
No, I think it's more about taking food away from lazy adults. Maybe we should give them all a month's supply of military MRE's. Once they get tired of those, they might think about getting a job, not making a baby every year and getting off the public dole.
This program, like a lot of things, has outlived its capacity and existence overall. Was it helpful when it was initiated? Probably. People were in too deep, sometimes by no fault of their own. Now? Are you kidding me? With men and women popping babies like it's candy out of a jar, then asking the rest of the society to help pay raise the kid. I don't think it should be reduced. It should be completely terminated, along with Section 8 (housing) and all other welfare programs. Trust me; other countries do not have this, and people still live and prosper.
Besides, where is the incentive? If you work no hours, you end up with unemployment, section 8, food stamps, gas/energy/water/phone assistance, heck, even free internet. If you go out and *gasp* work, all those goodies go away or get reduced. So, which one to choose?
Last, some of the people in this generation are 3, 4, even 5th generation food stampers. It is a given to them. Who are we to tell them to stop leeching and get off their butts and work? Oh, yeah. We're the ones PAYING THEM!
Shave away... this program is used and abused.
in 2009 when the recession was pretty deep I got laid off and had to go into recover mode... Sold alot of my assets and personal property to make sure I could pay bills and rent. I often had to as for rides to Food Banks & Sacred heart to get anything I could and was always appalled at the (and I do not say this to be racist or mean, but because this is what I actually observed) high number of heavy set folks ( Mostly hispanic in my area) in line with 4-5 kids getting as much as they could while having the kids make run after run at the bread rack, while they spend time texting or chatting on their fancy iPhone...
These same offenders would then get their food, and proceed to load it into a Cadillac, or other luxury SUV ( I'm not kidding) and drive off. meanwhile the old folks that stayed at the housing consortium would often get nothing cause these lazy welfare suckers with nice carts could drive and get in line faster than the old folks with the cart...
At the Social Security and Food stamp offices you see these same suckers with the fancy phones and cars lined up getting more freebies.
The issue as I see it is they on paper look poor, who is going to force them to pay taxes on what is speculatively illegal income or unreported income.
It is clear to me that as long as there is an under-regulated handout, the lazy and fraudulent ones who pretend they are poor are going to show up in droves for the freebies while the old bag lady gets nothing. This system is jacked up. I say cancel it...
We need to go back to soup lines. That way we cut the costs and fraud. Only the truly needy will benefit.
Hmm...can we tell which side is which?
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
[BRIEFING.COM] S&P futures vs fair value: -8.70. Nasdaq futures vs fair value: -18.30. The S&P 500 futures have recently notched fresh lows, and now trade nine points below fair value.
Markets across Asia ended mostly lower amid ongoing concerns over the health of the Chinese economy. Elsewhere, the Bank of Thailand cut its key rate 25 basis points to 2.00%, as expected. In economic data, Japan's BSI Manufacturing Index (12.5 versus 11.3 expected) and Tertiary Industry ... More
More Market News
The apparel chain takes a hard hit after blaming the weather for its quarterly sales decline. But cold temperatures don't explain the drop in full-year sales as well.
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'