-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.
The fraud is probably more than liberals think and less than conservatives think.
That isnt really the point, the challenge is to get more people off food stamps and become self sustaining members of society.
the libs have a point, you cannot let people starve and the conservs have a point, you cant pay for people who can work to live for free their entire lives.
Isnt there some common ground?
“The fraud is probably more than liberals think and less than conservatives think.”
Bron,
If you read my comment above you will know that my work in Food Stamp Fraud was extensive. The “fraud” is minimal and I say that not because of my politics but because its true. It was the Giuliani Administration Bron and I held a high position in my Agency. My work was monitored weekly by NY State and by USDA. How far do you think I would have gotten if I was working as a political operative. The facts are there and they’re really not open to dispute. The same is true by the way about Public Assistance. The computerized monitoring and computerized cross matches keep fraud at a minimum far lower than what industry would accept in its own operations.
Mike, their stats about food stamp fraud are evidently as bogus as the right’s consistent lies about voter fraud that have repeatedly been shown to be false.
ORO LEE:
Interesting web site. They are pretty generous with the money and the cuts are pretty small per month.
for example a family of 4 receives 668/month and will be cut to 632/month or a 5.5%/month reduction in their allocation.
If this is a supplement to work, I am not seeing a hardship that will be incured by the loss of $36/month. You may have to eat a lot of chicken, hamburger, rice, oats, potatoes, veggies, eggs and beans but your arent going to starve.
“According to the USDA’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, the average cost for a moderate meal plan for a family of four in the United States is $771.10.”
So the 632 is off by about 150/month. So 632 is still generous assuming the people can work.
It almost seems like it would be better to have a co-op store in communities with heavy food stamp usage which pools the purchasing power of the individuals. 4 can eat cheaper than one and 4,000 can eat cheaper than 4.
maybe even a co-op dining hall if the density of people allows for it. Each family could take turns cooking. serving and cleaning with the other families and individuals. They could also oversee food budgets and meal plans, maybe even start a community garden and raise chickens.
This would be good training for anyone interested in becoming a cook or chef or manager.
Funny about Nick’s use of the word “quickly”. The ad series was done in 2008. I’m unaware it they drew any opposition from the crazy right at that time. I presume not, since that was the Bush administration.
FIVE years later…
Funny about how “quickly” wrath was inflamed by the right when the same series is run in 2012 under an administration run by a “blah” person and the right has run a successful campaign to demonize the feeding the hungry.
The issue is an example of rank selfishness, hypocrisy, white racists, and political propaganda.
And sadly (sickenly?) this very blog provides plenty of commenters to evidence all
the above motivations.
As Charley says:
This is your America. Cherish it.
SHANNON DID YOU JUS COME OUT OF YOUR CAVE TO BE A CHEERLEADER TO THE REST OF THE IGNORANT WHO START SCREAMING HOORA HOORA AND DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE PARADE IS CELEBRATING
Sanchez, is their a point to your lunacy?
Anonymous:
According to the link in the post:
Only 3 percent of all SNAP benefits represented overpayments, meaning they either went to ineligible households or went to eligible households but in excessive amounts, and more than 98 percent of SNAP benefits were issued to eligible households.
“‘Fraud eliminated by the ebt system’!? The fraud does not come in at the spending of the benefits but by obtaining them!!! ”
1) Learn what the word “mitigate” means.
2) Realize that electronic transactions leave a more easily audited trail than paper transactions and thus reduce the black market attractiveness of the paper transactions.
3) If your objection is fraud in application, that is capable of mitigation as well as it is a systemic input problem, however, you must provide proof of income as it stands now to be eligible for these programs. Short of hiring psychics to screen for bad actors, there is realistically not much more that can be done to mitigate that kind of fraud which – like the “drug use” distraction – is simply not occurring at a rate that threatens the stability and function of the program as a whole.
Bonus) Stop watching so much FauxNews. It’s bad for you.
The fraud rate in the SNAP is 1%; waste (government screw up) is 3.8%.
The percentage recipients using drugs is slightly greater than that of the general population, which i thought might be higher given the socio-economic status of that population.
http://billmoyers.com/2013/10/08/six-myths-about-food-stamps/
Elaine,
You drew the comparison beautifully.
Targeted genocide of the vulnerable.
Bron, that’s $40 billion over the next ten years that the House proposed to cut; that still leaves $700 billion plus in the House bill to be spent over the next ten years.
Recipients will face a cut in SNAP amounts starting Nov. 1, It’s complicated —
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3899
Haha! “Fraud eliminated by the ebt system”!? The fraud does not come in at the spending of the benefits but by obtaining them!!! If you know someone in a 2 parent household where an adult is working, most likely they obtained benefits fraudulently! Income limits for many single parent homes with only one child are so low that many single mothers can’t qualify if they have a decent job. This isn’t an outsider looking in perspective either. I work in fraud division of this program in Texas and most cases are made by falsely claiming someone (the breadwinner) is not in the home. Statistics are all wrong. “Single moms” are the majority but they are only that based on their omission of the truth. People who don’t deal with these people on a daily basis have absolutely no clue. I enjoy prosecuting and withholding wages from those who abuse the system because SNAP is an excellent program to those who QUALIFY. People who comment fraud don’t think about the ripple effect their selfishness causes and how much money is spent prosecuting and investigating these cases. But if people didn’t feel like they were entitled to tax dollars they don’t contribute to, we wouldn’t be in America!
“If you know someone in a 2 parent household where an adult is working, most likely they obtained benefits fraudulently! Income limits for many single parent homes with only one child are so low that many single mothers can’t qualify if they have a decent job.”
Anonymous,
Factually incorrect. Part of the work I did on Food Stamp Overpayment was to work with IT people who set up computer match via government databases. If you’re working on the books they will know it. If you are working off the books there are ways to find that out as well. Food Stamp fraud is extremely low and you can’t provide evidence that that is not the case, because it is the case.
Back in 2011, I wrote a post about rich people who were “working the system” to qualify for real estate tax breaks meant for “real” farmers.
Wealthy “Faux Farmers” Get Huge Agricultural Tax Breaks on Their Properties
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/04/17/wealthy-%E2%80%9Cfaux-farmers%E2%80%9D-get-huge-agricultural-tax-breaks-on-their-properties/
Excerpt:
Today, while many working class and middle class people are trying hard to survive from paycheck to paycheck and when millions of Americans are out of work and unable to find new jobs that pay them a living wage, it’s hard to accept the fact that huge corporations like GE may not be paying any taxes at all while receiving tax rebates. It’s also maddening to see millionaires and billionaires who blew a hole in our economy and nearly caused a financial meltdown getting bailed out with OUR tax dollars.
It appears that the ultra-rich get all the breaks. Still, it seems many of them keep looking for different ways to hold onto their wealth by avoiding taxes while letting those of us who are less fortunate financially pay more than our share. Some of the well-heeled have even found a way to pay less than their fair share of local property taxes. They do that by claiming their large estates and properties as agricultural land. Here are the names of some of the “faux farmers” in New Jersey who have had their real estate taxes drastically reduced: Malcolm “Steve” Forbes, Jon Bon Jovi, E Street Band drummer Max Weinberg, Publishing magnate Donald E. Newhouse, former CEO of Commerce Bank Vernon Hill II, and Robert Wood “Woody” Johnson IV, heir to Johnson & Johnson and owner of the New York Jets football team.
Wealthy gentleman “farmers” haven’t just been gaming the system in New Jersey—they’ve been doing it in Texas, Florida, Iowa, Colorado, Alabama, and in many other states across this country. The tragedy of this tax avoidance by those who can well afford to pay more is that it is costing local governments the revenue they need to run their communities properly.
Several years ago, Art Cory, who was the chief appraiser for Travis Central Appraisal district in Texas, said: “It just seems to me that everyone ought to pay their fair share. That’s not happening now (American-Statesman, 2003). In regard to the agricultural tax break, Cory added, “You can go out and cut some brush, put out some feed and count the deer once a year and qualify.”
According to an article in The Nation, that’s what Michael Dell did with his second home—a suburban ranch in Austin. Because he hunted there periodically and maintained a “well-managed deer herd,” he was able to reduce the property’s 2005 market value from $71.4 million to an agricultural value of $290,000. That saved Dell—but cost Texas—$1.2 million. In 2007, The Wall Street Journal reported that Korea’s Samsung Electronics was able to qualify for a “wildlife management” agricultural tax exemption on more than fifty acres of land outside its semiconductor plant in Austin simply by erecting some birdhouses, eradicating ants, and taking a wildlife census. By doing that, the company reduced its tax bill by nearly 100%–from $21, 080 to $135! It’s sad to note that all the agricultural tax breaks in Texas have cost public schools in the state $1.5 billion in lost revenue.
*****
Let’s give the wealthy big tax breaks. Let’s let the wealthy game the system. After all, they worked hard for their money. But don’t ever let someone who is poor, who is down on his luck, or who has lost her job have access to any social safety nets. Do away with SNAP, Medicaid, unemployment insurance. If these folks can’t make it in this world maybe it would be better that they starve and decrease the surplus population!
Ahh, crud, in such a hurry to get to work… I just looked at the previous comment above yours Shannon… all apologies.
K.. lets hope, Shannon, that your comment was not directed to me? But, in the unlikely event that it indeed was… “Shame on you”… for being so oblivious to what a bully is… You made it quite apparent with your “idiot” name calling which is number one when you think of a “bully”… try the mirror. and perhaps a dictionary. I am done with this forum.. thanks to a bully named Shannon.
Tina, my comment was not directed to you.
I did not read the entire political lingo article… I clicked on this site as it was the only one that listed a recent comment about the ebt cards that are not being able to be used…. Although, I do not have the snap card, I do have a child support card which I cannot access now.. I went to get food and the card was declined… I did not know what to do? This card is processed through the state/government… The lady ahead of me in line was using her snap card and could not purchase her milk and bread (all she was getting) … I offered to buy it with the little money I had on my Ohio E-quickpay (child support) and it was declined… sad. I used an emergency…high rate.. credit card to purchase my food and hers. comment on that!
‘Sure, I will call and tell the Bigg Wigg and Turtle are using their benefits fraudulently. What an absolute moronic statement.”
“Let who eat cake? What does that have to do with anything? I am shocked how an intellectual debate can quickly turn into a bunch of children fighting in the sandbox….”
Both written by Shannon. Fair and balanced? You decide,
Another idiot with nothing positive to add to an intellectual debate. It is bullies like you who have brought this country to its knees. Shame on you.
“Another idiot with nothing positive to add to an intellectual debate. It is bullies like you who have brought this country to its knees. Shame on you.”
Childish behavior?
Perhaps when you have something to say which you can back up with evidence people might have a discussion with you?
“Do you not think that I as a taxpayer would not report if I had the information to do so?”
So if you don’t have the information how do you know it’s true?
oro lee:
I never thought of that, it is a subsidy to agriculture even though individuals are benefiting. That is an additional 40 billion spent on food/agricultural products directly that might not have, otherwise, been spent on food products. Wow.
I am sure big Ag has plenty of lobbyists protecting that bit of change.
We see 40 billion spent on individuals, failing to realize it is nothing more than a business subsidy in the end.
If that is the case then food stamps should be able to be spent on any commercial product at the discretion of the individual.
Gene,
Most certainly and there is a wealth of material. You might want to begin with the difference between morals and ethics … just to weed out the simple minded.
Bascally there trying trying to kill off the poor people who are denied decent jobs. Not everyone thats poor is on drugs and alcohol. Some people may need a simple hair-cut or a pair new shoes so they can go out and look for a job. Do we really want millions of poor citizens that actually qualify for these benifits to be pan-handeling on the streets depending on working class citizens to actually be warm hearted and giving. No.. because its not gonna happen. The truth is normal class citizens depends on the government to do that so they don’t have to. People love their money. They cling on to it like a football on the 20 yardline. As they should. Especially if they have to worry about our government failing us for assistance.