Food stamps brings out a host of resentments from those not on food stamps. People seem to resent luxury items such as crab legs even more than they resent poor people using food stamps to buy junk food.
WASHINGTON — More Americans are annoyed by the idea of food stamp recipients using their benefits to buy expensive food than their using them to buy junk food, according to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll.
According to the survey, 54 percent of Americans think people should not be allowed to use food stamps to buy expensive items such as crab legs, while only 32 percent said that they should be allowed to do so.
By contrast, respondents were split on allowing those on food stamps to buy junk food, like potato chips, candy and soda. Forty-five percent said they should be allowed to buy those items and 42 percent said they should not.
You can take the poll by clicking on the HuffPo link above. Meanwhile, the question becomes a matter of whose business it is. Let’s set the record straight, food stamps are hardly eating in the lap of luxury. The average allotment certainly doesn’t allow for luxury. Let’s look at a few basic facts from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program) is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program. In 2012, it helped almost 47 million low-income Americans to afford a nutritionally adequate diet in a typical month.
Nearly 72 percent of SNAP participants are in families with children; more than one-quarter of participants are in households with seniors or people with disabilities.
After unemployment insurance, SNAP is the most responsive federal program providing additional assistance during economic downturns. It also is an important nutritional support for low-wage working families, low-income seniors, and people with disabilities with fixed incomes
Not all poor people are eligible for benefits. The CBPP reports:
◾Its gross monthly income generally must be at or below 130 percent of the poverty line, or $2,069 (about $24,800 a year) for a three-person family in fiscal year 2013. Households with an elderly or disabled member need not meet this limit.
◾Its monthly net income, or income after deductions are applied for items such as high housing costs and child care, must be less than or equal to the poverty line (about $19,100 a year or $1,591 a month for a three-person family in fiscal year 2013).
◾Its assets must fall below certain limits: households without an elderly or disabled member must have assets of $2,000 or less, and those with an elderly or disabled member must have assets of $3,250 or less.Some categories of people are not eligible for SNAP regardless of how small their income or assets may be, such as strikers, most college students, and certain legal immigrants. Undocumented immigrants also are ineligible for SNAP. Most unemployed childless adults are limited to three months of benefits in many areas of the country, though this limit may be waived in areas of high unemployment.
One source of confusion might that undocumented immigrants can shop for their American born children if their income qualifies the child for the SNAP. Otherwise, the undocumented get to go hungry. A family of 4 has less than $200 a month to spend. How many of us stretch a food budget that far?
Back to the question about it being our business. Most people answer yes, it is our business since our almighty tax dollars are paying the bill. However, contrast those who feel this way with…oh say, Mayor Bloomberg’s restrictions on buying sodas. Many Americans are outraged. How about other nanny state notions like posting caloric and sodium intake on fast food menus? How does this differ from the average Joe getting to comment on what perfect strangers buy with their food stamps? When it is no longer “OUR” money?
Should we resent those crab legs and steaks more than we do children being allowed to eat moon pies and RC colas for a meal? Middle class Americans have a hard enough time with eating nutritious meals with low caloric and sodium intake. How on earth do we break people of cultural traditions that might be unhealthy? Try telling a middle class southerner no catfish and hush puppies on Friday night. You might see a fist in your face.
The perfect illustration of this is the school lunch program. Stand by the garbage can where the food trays are put up to be washed for the unvarnished truth. The broccoli and brussel sprouts end up in the garbage cans. Pizza, not so much. Even kids have well established eating habits by the time they hit schools.
So what is the solution?
It’s easy to sit in suburbia and think that “those people” should make more nutritious choices with “our” tax dollars. Think about the routine we employ to buy our food. If we plan our menus, we can hop in our cars and go to a choice of grocery stores. Without a car, a person has to figure public transportation into the cost of food – or walk and use a small local market. Now imagine you’re having to walk to the equivalent of 7-11 for your ingredients or meals. How much fresh food could you buy and how far would your money stretch? Or how many bags of food could you lug home with a small cart and a couple kids in tow?
I would think that the people buying rib-eye steak and crab legs are those that are gaming the system – ie, they qualify for SNAP, but are living as a family with an unmarried partner.
Those that are truly in need, I doubt are buying crab legs. Unfortunately, crappy junk food is cheaper, and does lead to obesity.
and malnutrition.
I have always heard that everyone can go first class. Some of us just can’t stay very long.
It sounds like a money management issue to me. How far can I stretch the dollar? That financial training or responsibility should go hand in hand with the program.
Where are the resources to teach the people to get more bank for their buck. something like 42 million Americans on food stamps of some sort.
SNAP is not food stamps like we all think of it. A single mom with 4 kids would qualify for around $164 of SNAP per month. In total. That just go very far, even when buying crab legs…it’s meant to be supplemental.
That is just bare bones.
Just to clarify what the Virginia SNAP program is for. Note that it is to allow, “families to buy NUTRITIOUS [emphasis supplied] food…” The food must be, “eligible food”. Crab legs would seem to qualify as “nutritious” as well as “eligible” although I’m not certain about the “eligible” part since I’ve never been on food stamps; Pepsi and a Moon Pie, may be “eligible” but as to “nutritious”, not so much.
Virginia Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
Managing Agency Virginia
http://www.myvirginia.org
Program Description
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) serves as the first line of defense against hunger for Virginia residents. It enables low-income families to buy nutritious food with coupons and Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards. SNAP recipients spend their benefits to buy eligible food in authorized retail food stores. The program is the cornerstone of the food assistance programs, and provides crucial support to needy households and to those making the transition from welfare to work.
General Program Requirements
In order to qualify for this benefit program, you must be a resident of the state of Virginia and fall into one of two groups: (1) those with a current bank balance (savings and checking combined) under $2,001, or (2) those with a current bank balance (savings and checking combined) under $3,001 who share their household with a person or persons age 60 and over, or with a person with a disability (a child, your spouse, a parent, or yourself). For either group, you must also have an annual household income of less than $14,079 if one person lives in the household; $18,941 if two people live in the household; $23,803 if three people live in the household; $28,665 if four people live in the household; $33,527 if five people live in the household; $38,389 if six people live in the household; $43,251 if seven people live in the household; or $48,113 if eight people live in the household. For larger households, add $4,862 for each additional person in the home.
The problem with SNAP vs. WIC is that SNAP is basically a debit card for food, and WIC is a voucher program and has specific, nutritious foods that can be purchased. I agree with Watching that most people receiving SNAP don’t get huge amounts of money. The problem lies in how they use what little money they receive. Do they spend it at 7-11 for chips and slurpees (which are SNAP approved), or in the grocery store on items like cereal or milk? Each person differs, but buying items such as pre processed foods and junk will eat thru a family’s allotment quite quickly. Yes, I realize that people in urban areas have less ability to access healthy food choices, but at the same time, how do SNAP recipients in a place such as Manassas, with a plethora of grocery choices, manage to run out of money prior to the month’s end? And why does SNAP allow the purchase of soda, Little Debbie snacks, and chips but NOT the purchase of pampers or water? I firmly believe the SNAP program needs a serious overhaul as to permitted purchases.
SNAP recipients also get less than $200 a month. I don’t know how anyone stretches that small amount.
Just to hammer my point home (because I can’t resist): This summer in WAPO I read about a summer feeding program somewhere in Appalachia. Summer feeding is good…but at one point the reporter ended up at a trailer of a hard working woman whose food stamps were at an end, so her children were hungry, and the subject’s eldest child fed the baby Mountain Dew. Really? Mountain Dew? What? She had no generic soda opportunities? It was so sad on so many levels.