Food Stamps in America - Readers Weigh In
By Patrick on Jul 7, 2008 in Personal Finance
Last Thursday I wrote an article about food stamps in America and how many people who rely on on food stamps are struggling to make it through the end of the month before their aid runs out. The article elicited quite a few excellent comments which brought up many good points about the food stamp program in the US.
Food stamps provide a necessary service to millions of Americans. Without it, millions of Americans, including millions of children and elderly people, would have nothing to eat. However, there are numerous issues with the food stamp program, none of which have easy solutions.
Background about food stamps . There are a few misconceptions about what people can buy with food stamps. Food stamps can be used to purchase food items for the household only. This includes any prepackaged foods, regardless of nutritional content (including chips, sodas, candy, etc.). However, food stamps may not be used to purchase cigarettes, alcohol, or other non-food items. For more information, read the Food Stamp Q&A page at the USDA website.
Is the Food Stamp program broken?
One of the biggest issues that food stamp recipients currently face is the rising cost of food and meeting their grocery needs with the aid provided. However, there are several other issues regarding the food stamp program. Several readers left comments about issues they saw and suggestions about how the program could be improved. It would be impossible to solve the world’s problems in a blog post, and the following are only a few current issues with the food stamp program and some thoughts left by readers.
Rising Food Costs
Inflation is real. I see it every time I go to the grocery store or drive by a gas station. Unfortunately, inflation and rising costs of fuel are pushing food prices ever higher, while the amount of aid people receive remains the same. For those on fixed incomes such as Social Security, food stamps, or other government aid, there is little that can be done to bridge the gap (at least quickly; changes to the amount of aid people receive happen on an annual basis as part of the government’s budget). You can only buy so much food with finite resources. This is an ugly and unfortunate situation, and one that I certainly don’t have the answer to.
Jarhead recommended the program use a voucher system similar to the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Program.
If the government were to replace food stamps with vouchers (just like WIC) then you could control what the government’s money is spent on. Just give vouchers that are for the purchase of 10 Lbs of potatoes, 3 lbs of cheese, a certain amount of boxes or bags of cereal, etc, etc, etc. This also helps rising food prices in that no matter how much the price of that 10 Lbs of potatoes or any other item goes up they still have the voucher for that amount of food.
This obviously has pros and cons. The effects of inflation against food stamps could be curbed for the recipients, but then people have less of a choice regarding their food options. Perhaps something like this could work on a limited basis where certain staples are provided for via a voucher system, while the balance is provided under the current system. Then again, where do we draw the line with government control?
Unhealthy Food Choices and Misplaced Priorities
One topic that popped up several times concerned those who use food stamps to buy large quantities of food with limited nutritional value, or those who use food stamps to buy food and then cash to purchase lottery tickets, cigarettes, and alcohol.
Kristen commented:
I absolutely would not deny people who need assistance food stamps. However, (and I’m sorry that I’m passing some judgment here), I get really aggravated when I see a mom or dad at the grocery store using food stamps to buy a bunch of junk food, like chips and soda, and then pulling out a wad of cash to buy lottery tickets and cigarettes. I think people need to do a better job of getting their priorities in order for the sake of their children.
I worked as a cashier in a grocery store during high school and I witnessed scenes like this on multiple occasions. A pack of cigarettes a day is a $150 per month habit. Add in lottery tickets and alcohol, and you have enough money to feed a family healthy meals all month long, especially with additional assistance from food stamps.
Unfortunately, under the current system, people can basically buy any food they want as long as it is not hot food (such as from a restaurant).
Lynnae mentioned adding nutrition education to the program so people could make healthier food choices, similar to the WIC program:
With WIC you can only buy what’s on your voucher, and it’s all nutritional food. You also have to attend a certain number of educational classes, if you want your WIC benefits to continue. If you don’t attend the classes (Usually one hour of classes per 6 months of benefits), you don’t get the benefits.
An educational program is a good idea and may help some people who don’t know much about nutrition or budgeting, but it may not keep people from making wise decisions regarding purchases like lottery tickets, cigarettes, or alcohol. In the end it comes down to people making good choices, and dictating choice is impossible.
Program Fraud or Misuse
There were several comments regarding food stamp fraud and how people misuse their assistance. Fraud against government programs has been around as long as government programs have been around. The food stamp program is federally funded by the USDA, but each state administers it, including the investigation and prosecution of violations of the Food Stamp Program rules. Read what the USDA is doing to combat food stamp fraud.
Are There Solutions to These Problems?
As with any large program, there are inherent flaws and there is room for improvement. But I am not certain the system is broken. Millions of people are getting the assistance they need every month and are able to buy food. Hopefully that means buying healthy foods that provide a balanced diet. But it isn’t the government’s place to dictate which foods people buy.
However, with rising food costs, more money is needed. But how much money is needed, and at the expense of which other government programs? That is an answer I don’t have.
Are food stamps a band-aid or a cure?
Something on the CBS report really hit home with me. Almost 28 million Americans receive food stamps. Out of a population of 301 million, that is roughly 9% of the US population . In my opinion, that is too high. We are one of the world’s wealthiest and most advanced nations, but more than 9% of our population is struggling just to put food on the table (not accounting for those who do not receive benefits; how many people are actually struggling is certainly much higher).
David wrote:
I think society needs to look at the reasons why people are on welfare and work on fixing that rather than just continuing to come up with new ways to give out food stamps/WIC/monetary assistance, etc. I am all for giving help to anyone who needs it, but there is a much bigger problem going on behind the scenes that creates these situations with many of these people, and maybe that should be worked on as well.
While there are some people who may never be able to take care of themselves due to disabilities, old age, or other reasons, there are others for whom this may be a temporary situation. The latter group of people is the group David is talking about reaching.
Food stamps and similar forms of assistance are necessary. I don’t want to see the service stopped, but I’m sure there are improvements that can be made. I’m interested in reading your thoughts on the topic.
Print This Post
|
|
PF Buzz It!
|
Tip it!
~/~
Do you like what you're reading? Then please consider leaving a comment below, subscribing to my feed, or visiting my Greatest Hits page for more!
Loading ...
13 Comment(s)
By Momma on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
Very well thought out follow-up to your previous post. This is one of those topics that EVERYONE has an opinion about, but few realistic solutions. I’m just glad that it’s being discussed in a respectful manner. Thank you for setting that tone, and providing the forum.
By Nancy on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
I really have no comments right now, but I do want to stay abreast of what others are saying. There are definitely problems with the program, but it is a necessary program for many. Thanks for bringing up the topic and keeping the discussion going.
By deepali on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
Patrick, Thanks for tackling the issue! It’s a tough one. I think you’ve summed it up nicely.
One thing I want to point out - WIC and food assistance are not really comparable. WIC is a public health prevention program at its heart. Its intention is to prevent infant and child mortality (which is higher in the US than many other developed countries). I worked on the redesign of the program, and it is very clearly geared towards providing a solid nutritional foundation for infants and children. In this ay, we *can* be more restrictive in the program because we’re talking about children vs adults.
Food assistance is meant to be a social welfare bridge - providing assistance to the working poor who need a little temporary help. In this case, we’re talking about adults, and all the legal, ethical, and constitutional issues that go with. While I would love to make it more like WIC, I think you get into a sticky area, which is why it’s a difficult thing to “fix”.
I think David is right - the solutions don’t lie in the program itself, but in the root causes of poverty in America.
By Patrick on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
deepali,
Thanks for pointing out what WIC is and what it is meant to accomplish. I think that there may be some validity to the idea of offering vouchers as part of a food assistance program - if only to provide staples at an inflation protected manner (to the aid recipients anyway). Of course, that would make accounting much more difficult for the government.
By plonkee on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
I still think that cash is the way to go. Yes, people could spend the money on something else, but at the end of the day they’ve still got to eat.
The figures for the proportion of people on food stamps should come as no surprise, the US is one of the most (if not *the* most) unequal developed countries. Loads of really, really rich people, loads of really, really poor people.
One of the things that I know does actually go on is giving free classes in cooking and nutrition. This is a good idea, although it helps if people have cooking utensils at home as well.
By deepali on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
Personally, I think if food assistance is what we’re after, then food should be the currency. Many of the people in my nutrition classes (which I teach through the local food bank) are on food assistance. After the class, they get a bag of food such that we talked about/cooked with in class. It would make sense to funnel food assistance through food banks and actually give people a box of food.
I will admit that I don’t like the idea of cash. 1) I don’t think it would be handled well at all by USDA, and 2) it doesn’t really address the point of the food assistance program. And 3) people on food assistance tend to live in areas that don’t have very good grocery stores, so they end up at the local corner store. They’ll find food… and a whole host of health issues as well.
By Alisa on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
I read somewhere in the commments that someone said they get mad when they see people purchase a lot of junk food with their food stamps. I am learning more and more that a lot of people just don’t know the importance of a healthy diet and they don’t know how to make better food choices. We are bombarded with advertising for “junk food” so much that, for some people, its really hard to resist the pressure to buy junk.
I think that on-going education (informal) about healthy eating for all age groups would help in this area.
Be well.
By Kirk on Jul 7, 2008 | Reply
This is a toughie. I would like to see some sort of limit on how long folks can be on food stamps so it motivates them to get off of them. However, when compared to how much we subsidize corporations, the money given to poor folks is a drop in the bucket.
I am a hard core free market guy. I believe that private charities such as churches, food banks, etc. would do a much better job of helping needy folks. Just imagine the power if we could reduce our taxes across the country equivalent to what the USDA receives for running this program. Then if people donated this money to the charities that would help these folks out. I realize many would just spend the money, but that could help these folks out by finding jobs as the economy is spurred.
Government programs waste half our tax dollars in bureaucratic inefficiencies. If you don’t beleive me, work for the gov for a few months. I think moving to private charities is the long term solution. Of course, that would be a tough task considering DC would never give up the tax dough.
By plonkee on Jul 8, 2008 | Reply
I can’t be the only person in the world who thinks that every country that wishes to call itself civilised and developed should have a safety net for the least fortunate. And also, that no developed country should be having a problem with starvation. Based on something Mrs. Micah’s Mom said, I think that’s what would happen if you got rid of the food stamps and didn’t replace them with a similar program.
You know, it probably wouldn’t be the children that would be getting sick (and worse, dieing off) first, it would be their mothers. That’s what used to happen before safety nets - basic human nature hasn’t changed all that much.
By Patrick on Jul 8, 2008 | Reply
Plonkee, I agree, and I don’t think anyone is suggesting doing away with food stamps or other government assistance. I think it is necessary in our country, and in every country. But I also think people should be concerned about whether people are receiving enough aid or if there are ways to run the program more efficiently.
By deepali on Jul 8, 2008 | Reply
Plonkee, mothers and kids under 5 are covered under WIC. I don’t think anyone is opposed to WIC or the way it is run. The whole point of WIC is so that kids don’t die off (which is why it is directed at mothers). As I mentioned before, it’s a public health prevention program.
There are definitely people who would say we should do away with food stamps and welfare. But it will never happen - the American people will never allow it.
By Katie on Jul 8, 2008 | Reply
Mothers only get WIC when they are pregnant and for a short while after pregnancy. Children can only receive WIC up to what, age 5?
WIC certainly helps, but with my own experiences with WIC, some of the food items tend to just “pile” up in the home. For instance, milk and eggs get used faster than they are given, whereas peanut butter and cheese does not get used as fast. Also, with WIC you can buy juices, like “Juicy Juice” which is, in my opinion, not very healthy for a child OR the child’s teeth.
Also take into account that a person applying for food stamps can not have more than $2,000 COMBINED in any savings or checking accounts. It is not based strickly on income; it is also based on the total resources one has available to them. So someone who tries to save money for a rainy day or medical treatments or who is actually saving for some type of higher education to change their path in life, does not qualify for assistance.
These rules were obviously inacted to keep people from abusing the system, but these same rules keep hundreds of thousands of people from being able to change their own path in life by having a safety net of cash that they call their own.
Then take into account the HOURS it takes to apply for benefits, be interviewed for benefits, submit the proper paperwork for benefits….. and an average hourly wage employee LOSES hundreds of dollars in wages sitting around a government office building. Instead of telling people everything they need to bring at once, it usually ends up being 2 to 4 trips to the office, as well as 30 days awaiting benefits to be started. After all that and the loss of wages due to sitting around waiting at a food stamp office, it becomes even more challenging for those who actually could benefit POSITIVELY by receiving such benefits.
The current system does not provide any incentives to change one’s path. A max of $2,000 in checking and savings accounts is ridiculous. What is in incentive to save money to better yourself when you are basically punished for doing so?
By Patrick on Jul 8, 2008 | Reply
Katie,
Thanks again for weighing in on this topic. This is something I really don’t know much about, so I run the risk of looking at the situation with jaded eyes, or thinking I have a solution for things I have never dealt with. I think it is easy for a lot of people to fall into that trap.
You are right, there are many things many of the commentators and myself didn’t take into consideration, including the amount of time and energy involved. I sincerely appreciate your contributions to this discussion.