-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
The Food Stamp program, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), is a target for Republicans who voted to cut $40 billion from the program. The reasons that Republicans have given are so divorced from reality that one can reasonably suspect their true motivations lie elsewhere. The primacy of fantasy in the GOP has been recently evidenced by Michele Bachmann who sees signs of the End Times, a wished-for global apocalypse.
First up on the list of fantasies is by Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Arkansas) who said “the food stamp program [grew] exponentially because the government continues to turn a blind eye to a system fraught with abuse.” In reality, SNAP participation closely tracks the long term unemployment rate, prolonged by Republicans. The sale of SNAP benefits for cash, called “trafficking,” has been cut to $1 in every $100 of SNAP benefits. The reality is a one percent abuse rate, the fantasy is SNAP is “fraught” with abuse.
The next fantasy is that able-bodied people are getting food stamps instead of working. The reality is that 83% of all SNAP benefits go to households that include a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person. The average individual gets $133 a month in SNAP benefits. It is ridiculous to imagine that a person is going to quit their job for $133 a month that can only be spent on food, but Republicans bear ridicule well.
The next fantasy is that SNAP recipients use their benefits to buy cigarettes and alcohol. The SNAP program uses Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards, similar to debit cards, that can be used in the supermarket checkout line only to purchase food. The Right likes to point to Jackie Whiton, a Peterborough, New Hampshire, store cashier who declined to accept an EBT card as payment for a pack of cigarettes. In reality, the EBT card contained state assistance money, not SNAP benefits, which can be used to purchase tobacco products. The store she worked for has a policy of accepting EBT cash benefits. In reality, Whiton was fired for violating the company’s policies.
The Republican war on programs that benefit Americans in need isn’t based on a philosophical commitment to small government. If it were, the $20 billion in farm subsidies, a welfare program for agribusiness, would be near the top of their hit list. According to a Greenberg report, the Republicans “are very conscious of being white in a country that is increasingly minority.” The report goes on to say that the “race issue [is] very much alive.” There you have it. Obama is taking their money and giving it to “Those People.”
H/T: Dave Johnson, Paul Krugman, Dottie Rosenbaum, Amanda Marcotte, Brian Tashman, WMUR.
Elaine, Great critical thinking skills on this one. I can’t wait to bring this up when you actually show some healthy skepticism of govt. reports in the future. You and Gene are diggin’ a deep hole. Cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind. I hope some other noncritical thinkers come in and agree.
“NSA reports no US citizen have been spied on by their agency.” Horseshit lie
“Pentagon reports no civilians were killed.” Bullshit lie
“FBI report the Waco compound was burned down by Branch Davidians.” Freakn’ lie!!
“Justice Department reports they have not tapped any reporter’s telephones.” Proven lie!!
“USDA reports they have conducted an investigation on fraud and it is a paltry 1.3%”
GeneH, “Very Good data.”
You can’t make this shit up!
pmjokes,
“No wonder people here have no clue what is going on in the real world.
They refuse to believe anything they can’t see for themselves.”
I thought you were the one who only believes what he/she can see for himself/herself–and you discount any data presented to you.
You believe what you want to believe. I’ll seek out all the information that I can on the subject.
And, pray tell, what has atheism got to do with this discussion?
No wonder people here have no clue what is going on in the real world.
They refuse to believe anything they can’t see for themselves.
Whats odd though is they will believe some data report as if their life depends on it, even though they have no clue how that data was even obtained.
In short, it appears people will only believe what they want to believe and make excuses to not believe what they don’t wish to know.
I am done here, this place is a complete waste of my time.
I thought debating atheists was like debating a wall but this place gives a whole new meaning to talking to a wall.
@nick spinelli
if you wish to, my email is gypsyr0ads at live com
hit me up sometimes.
I am always online 🙂
Elaine,
Seems like 1.3% is the most current number.
So, as stated, between 1-2%.
I particularly like Appendix G-H where they break down the estimation intervals. Very good data. Nothing awry with their methods.
rafflaw 1, October 15, 2013 at 4:06 pm
Elaine,
You have to stop bringing facts into this discussion of alleged food stamp fraud.
*****
I like facts. I think it’s of great import to seek out information when one is debating a subject.
bfm,
“We questioned whether it is representative – a very different concept.”
Precisely.
The Extent of Trafficking in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: 2009–2011
Nutrition Assistance Program Report August 2013
Food and Nutrition Service
Office of Policy Support
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_ZexM12e5xwJ:www.fns.usda.gov/ora/MENU/Published/snap/FILES/ProgramIntegrity/Trafficking2009.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
bfm, I found what you’re talking about. It’s the FNS investigating themselves. I had to laugh because the GAO website is working but FNS is not. The vagaries of being “essential” in a govt. shutdown. We do know the GAO did not audit this self investigation by FNS so I suppose it’s good for toilet paper.
@Tony C.
You mad bro?
Since you are complete reduced to attacking me personally instead of actually debating the thread concept, you will now be ignored fully.
disclaimer:
Me not replying to you, means I am not even reading what you have to say and does not mean you are right and I can’t debate you.
I can and will ignore you, its no big deal to skim over your posts, unless there is a way to actually manually ignore you so your posts don’t show up.
Anyone know if that is possible?
In closing, Tony, I am also guilty of making cheap shots at you, and apologize, but since it is now happening fully on your end, it is best to just ignore you fully so I am not reduced to your level of “debate” style.
ad hocs are not actual debates and get the real debate no where.
USDA Releases New Report on Trafficking and Announces Additional Measures to Improve Integrity in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
Release No.
FNS-0012.13
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Alw5I_C8PBoJ:www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2013/fns-001213+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Excerpt:
WASHINGTON, August 15, 2013 – Agriculture Undersecretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services Kevin Concannon today released a report that examines the trafficking rate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and better pinpoints where the vast majority of SNAP trafficking occurs—smaller stores that typically offer minimal access to the healthier foods encouraged by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. In response, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will begin gathering public input on establishing stricter “depth of stock” requirements for SNAP retailers in order to discourage bad actors from entering and abusing the program. This move also supports USDA’s continuing efforts to improve SNAP recipients’ access to healthy foods.
The report indicates that the vast majority of trafficking – the illegal sale of SNAP benefits for cash or other ineligible items – occurs in smaller-sized retailers that typically stock fewer healthy foods. Over the last five fiscal years, the number of retailers authorized to participate in SNAP has grown by over 40 percent; small- and medium-sized retailers account for the vast majority of that growth. The rate of trafficking in larger grocery stores and supermarkets—where 82 percent of all benefits were redeemed—remained low at less than 0.5 percent.
While the overall trafficking rate has remained relatively steady at approximately one cent on the dollar, the report attributes the change in the rate to 1.3 percent primarily to the growth in small- and medium-sized retailers authorized to accept SNAP that may not provide sufficient healthful offerings to recipients. These retailers accounted for 85 percent of all trafficking redemptions. This finding echoes a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that suggested minimal stocking requirements in SNAP may contribute to corrupt retailers entering the program.
pmjokes, You will learn the players and pathology soon enough.
bfm, The most recent GAO publication is from 7/2012 and it reviewed FNS stats on eligibility requirements and guidelines. Nothing to do w/ trafficking, fraud, etc. What report are you talking about?
Sorry to talk out of turn. I did not realize you were addressing that specific report.
A number of secondary sources, mentioned here, seem to refer to:
U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Extent of Trafficking in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: 2009-2011. August 2013. http://www.fns.usda.gov/ORA/menu/Published/SNAP/FILES/ProgramIntegrity/Trafficking2009.pdf
There also is a GOA report that I just noticed and have not read that may be relevant:
Statement of Kay E. Brown, Director
Education, Workforce, and
Income Security Issues
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10956t.pdf
I agree it is important to remain skeptical. But the is a difference between reasonable skepticism and rejection. I don’t think we can reasonably criticize USDA till we actually see their report.
@nick spinelli
There are doctors here too?
Boy, they probably really think I am a real nut job then.
You would think people would want to hear the perspective of someone who been there, seen it, and knows what goes on and such.
As for the experts on substance abuse, I must have woke up on a different planet or something, because I am completely confused.
But doing my best to understand how someone who has been involved with drug rehab for 35 years yet claims the stuff I discuss don’t happen.
The town I live in has nothing on big cities like NYC.
I am waiting on someone to tell me I don’t know what goes on in other states.
I have a big shocker for them.
I have 15 yrs OTR trucker experience, been in every single major town, in all 48 states.
Its basically the same where ever you go, people are people.
want proof?
too bad, i am not about to give out my SSI, so you can look up my work history.
“yet claims the stuff I discuss don’t happen.”
Nobody said the stuff you discuss doesn’t happen.
We questioned whether it is representative – a very different concept.
i
“You would think people would want to hear the perspective of someone who been there, seen it, and knows what goes on and such.”
PMJ,
Yes you would think so but then again I’ve been there, done that and you’ve rejected my perspective, so I’m not quite sure you mean what you say.
pmjokes: Also, you really fail at debating
You make a bigger failure: Whether somebody succeeds or fails at debate is not up to the participants, particularly not up to their opponent. There would be a conflict of interest in their judgment, or do you fail to see that?
All you are winning is a race to show the full depth of your ignorance and duplicity. And congratulations are in order, I suppose, you are pulling away from the pack on that one.
pmjokes:
1) You are a liar if a survey demands credentials you do not have and you claim you do have them in order to collect the fee (not just a liar, but a fraud and a thief);
2) If you lied about the surveys existing then you are a liar, not necessarily a fraud or thief;
3) If you lied here about lying on the surveys then you are still a liar.
I think that covers all scenarios and there is no paradox; what we can derive from your statements is a constant: You are a liar.
pmjokes, Like I said, you provide a very different perspective, and that is considered dangerous by some folks here. If you discuss substance abuse w/ MikeS, you should ask his opinion on AA. He has the same opinion on it as the other shrink here, Otteray Scribe. They’re experts on the subject of substance abuse!
@Tony C.
Ad hocs now?
How am I being dishonest by giving the advertisers of said surveys what they want?
If anything, I am being more than honest about my life and what I say here.
But I will bite,
Since I am “hardly a reliable source”
how can you even believe me about the survey sites?
Doesn’t that sort of become a paradox?
Also, you really fail at debating brother, because you been claiming I am guilty until proven innocent long before I brought up survey sites.
So your ad hoc isnt even relevant.
pmj says: claiming I am guilty and you have nothing of a valid source
You are right, I was relying on your description of your own behavior, in which you claim you are dishonest and willing to lie for trivial amounts of money. By your own description, you are hardly a reliable source.
@Mike Spindell
You claim to have several years working in some of the worst parts of NYC dealing with drug addicts and you claim you didn’t witness the things I discussed?
When did these people get their money for drugs, if they were not using their welfare benefits to obtain them?
Please explain this to me so I can relate.
I will also remind you that I am from the other side of the table and have personally witnessed friends and neighbors of mine deceive their case managers,
I probably have as many years indirectly involved as you do, the only difference is I know the truth, because I have seen it first hand and you only know what the drug addicts tell you and want you to know.
One instance, both parents were full blown heroin addicts and the mother in law constantly called child services on them, they would show up to check on the situation and we all know they have to call first and can not just show up at random times.
I was actually there, in the house when her case manager showed up.
Both parents had used make up to hide their track marks.
Their excuse for very little food in the refrigerator was that she was waiting on next week to go shopping as such and such store was having a huge sale that week, which was actually true, except for the fact that she had no money left on the card.
Their excuse for the gas being turned off was because their van broke down and they had to rob peter to pay paul and was waiting on his unemployment check to pay the gas bill, which was a complete lie, his check also ended up going on drugs, the van was never broke down.
Since it was summer time, the gas isn’t actually required to be turned on.
Their case manager actually talked to her about filing charges against the mother in law for making false reports.
Eventually they did loose the kids though, because of being caught and convicted of purchasing heroin and being involved in a drug raid at a drug house.
This was about 3 years ago and the mother in law, still has custody of the kids and they are both still heroin addicts.
I can give you story after story after story of parents pulling fast ones over on their case managers who then probably end up on blogs like this claiming the stuff doesn’t go on right under their noses.
Plus, every single day on the news all over the country are drug houses being busted, parents loosing their kids over drugs and abuse, drug addicts being caught, etc.
Recap, I find it very hard to believe that you were involved with drug addicts first hand for 35 years and claim the things I discuss don’t happen.
But then again, no offense, social workers, case managers, drug rehab workers, probation officers, etc, are either naive, or just don’t care.
Plus, if teens can be hooked on drugs,having sex, skipping school and such right under their parents noses, then its obvious that adults can pull fast ones over on their case managers etc.
Its a no brainer.
You may have spent 35 years in the system, but at 11 years old, my parents divorced, and ever since that day, I been in gov housing in various states and am now 47.
In short, I am in the mix and know whats up.
“When did these people get their money for drugs, if they were not using their welfare benefits to obtain them?”
Oh let’s see now.
Theft
burglary
mugging
murder
dealing
conning
their parents
pimping
If you understood the economics of it than you can’t understand that food stamp fraud doesn’t generate enough money to cover the daily expenses. One of the sober houses I ran unfortunately had a crack dealer open up down the block. Let’s look at it another way though. If 10,000,000 people let’s say get food stamps than 1% of that equals 100,000 people. Since this type of activity normally would be centralized to poor neighborhood there are enough to go around so that you might run into the small minority that due, since the distribution is no random, it is dependent on an areas median income per household. The problem with your anecdotes is that you are theorizing from a microcosm to a macrocosm without any intervening connections.