Food stamp benefits will be cut, starting next Friday.
The cuts, totaling $5 billion, will mean less money for groceries for millions of people who rely on food stamps. It’s a tough time to have less food on the table, just a few weeks before the start of the holiday season.
Congress has the power to halt the cutback. However, experts say it’s highly unlikely at a time when Republicans are calling for even more drastic cuts to food stamps.
Food stamp benefits were bumped up in the midst of the recession. The temporary provision expires Nov. 1.
As families have struggled during the recession and also the slow economic recovery, enrollment has soared in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Some 47.6 million people, or nearly 15% of the population, get food stamps, according to September federal data. That compares to 26.3 million, or 8.7% of the population, in 2007.
The average benefit per person is $133.19 a month.
Families nationwide have already received emails and letters warning that their benefits will be reduced. For a family of four getting the maximum benefit of $668 a month in food stamps, the cuts would trim $36 a month, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service.
But conservatives say it was never intended to be anything more than temporary. They say extending the extra money is out of the question, mostly because they believe the food stamps program is already bloated and in need of changes.
“I don’t think calling it (the Nov. 1 drop in benefits) a cut is the right way to frame it,” said Rachel Sheffield, a policy analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “This was a temporary increase in spending.”
An unnamed Republican friend emailed me this article today with the following message:
The Democrats must have infiltrated the PR parts of the Republican
Party. Don’t the ramifications of being the cause of cutting food
stamps just before Thanksgiving occur to anyone? It has to be Democrat
plot.
Well said, anonymous emailer, well said!
It’s great to mouth “cut spending” and other sound-bytes, but hungry people are hungry people. Why is it when food prices, especially the cost of milk, meat and vegetables, is on the rise, should congress be cutting family benefits for food? $133 doesn’t go very far in a month. That is less than 5 bucks a day on food per person. Surely there are other places to make significant cuts without taking food away from families.
Then there is that question asked by the sender of the article? Why on earth would the republicans want to pin the “food miser” label on themselves right at the holidays? Why are members of the GOP trying to self-immolate? It makes no sense.
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2011/11/02/Food-stamp-use-up-62-percent-in-recession/UPI-88481320210193/
The hypocrisy by republicans is blatant, it makes me feel almost ill. They shed crocodile tears for all those “murdered unborn” babies and poor women suffering from “abortion PTSD” and yet in the same breath they screw those born babies and realized mothers out of food?
Culture of life my behind 🙁
I love how you blame the GOP for this. You do realize it was the Democrats that took the money out of the program, don’t you? Don’t believe me? Read it for yourself at that right-wing rag Huffington Post:
“The plan had been to leave the increase in place until inflation caught up through annual adjustments to SNAP benefit levels, which had been expected to happen in 2015. But congressional Democrats essentially raided the cookie jar, using the future planned spending to offset the cost of priority legislation in 2010. They said at the time that they would put the money back before any decrease could take effect, but they have not kept their promise.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/25/food-stamps_n_4158690.html
So the Democrats took the money out of the SNAP program but it’s the fault of the GOP for not fixing the problem the Democrats created? Providing money for food stamps wasn’t “priority legislation” for the Democrats when they took the money, so why is it a problem for the GOP now?
If the Democrats have changed their minds and now want to fund SNAP, they can come up with the $5 billion out of somewhere else. Until then the notices of the cut should read “This benefit cut brought to you by Congressional Democrats. Sorry, but feeding people wasn’t priority legislation.”
First of all Furby, let me say, I am totally entertained by the fact that YOU are siting Huffington Post. So let’s revisit history and facts.
The INCREASE to food stamps happened under the 2008 Stimulus Bill that I am pretty sure very FEW republicans voted for if memory serves me correctly. Since 2010, the House has been under siege by extremists. The food stamp increase was to run out November 1, 2013.
Now, follow me here, cause apparently you don’t watch the news much. The republicans have been trying to cut 38 billion from the food stamp program. So exactly, how in the hell could democrats stop SNAP increases from expiring when the House wants have CUT SNAP. You do know that the Republicans control the house right?
I have included a link that you may find elucidating. It’s about the SNAP program and how it keeps our most vulnerable from starving. You want the level of SNAP to continue, tell your brethren to craft the legislation. Cause if the House Republicans don’t create the legislation, the Senate can’t pass it. That old school house rock ditty!
The food stamp (SNAP) increase was put in place because of the great recession and included a sunset provision in hopes that the economy would improve by November 2013. We are certainly better off now than we were in 2008 or 2009 but the economy is still in the doldrums. Labor force participation is at historic lows and many people who are employed are working part-time or otherwise below the income-earning level they seek, or need to support their families. Certainly, there are moochers and fraud in the program. I saw the Fox News report with the surfer bum buying lobster with food stamps too. However, the correct approach is to address the fraud rather than cut food support to needy families. Is the Tea Party saying that the Obama economy has improved so much that the increased level of food stamps is no longer needed? It really surprises me to hear that they are acknowledging that Obama’s economic policies have worked so well. They must see something that I missed. Also, spending on food stamps goes right back into the economy and generates even more spending. That fact is not false just because someone in the Obama administration said it. I don’t think Congress should become the Grinch just before Thanksgiving.
First off, why are you so surprised I’d site Huffington Post? I knew Moon Howler who my post was originally directed at, only considers certain news sources legitimate, so I figured I’d use one on the left. Besides, the facts are the facts.
Speaking of facts, you missed a couple on your timeline. You left out the 2010 cut to SNAP by the Democrats. This was before the “siege by extremists” started, so don’t try to pin it on the GOP. House & Senate Dems passed the SNAP cuts and Obama signed the cuts to SNAP into law. That’s what created the current cuts that start in November. If the Democrats hadn’t cut SNAP in 2010, the funding from the stimulus bill would have gone until 2015. So come November 1st anybody who goes hungry is because the Democrats had more important priorities.
My point was how funny it is that you and Moonhowler can’t seem to see that the Democrats created this problem. Your go-to position is blame Republicans for everything, even the stuff they didn’t do. Why can’t you take a position like “SNAP is going to be cut and people need help” without having to twist the facts to try to make it all the fault of the GOP?
You talk about the House GOP wanting to cut SNAP in the future. That might be, but the House Dems (and Senate & Obama) beat them to it!
I think the point is, the House R’s could have been real heroes by not letting the increased benefits expire. Opportunity knocked and they didn’t go to the door.
Unlike the sunset of tax cuts that Republicans railed against allowing to expire Furby, that is what is actually happening, so I’m not sure if you don’t understand the legislation, or you are simply determined to obfuscate the truth.
The House was republican control in 2010. I think this is a circumstance where you either sign the bill with the crap in it, or don’t get a bill. It was to help job creation. They had no idea that the house would be over run with TEA party republicans and not only would a conversation about replacing cuts be possible, they would be fighting to stop even more cuts, precisely what Cantor proposed to do in the Farm bill. The dems were stupid in that they were strategically out maneuvered. I hate to admit it, but that’s not a surprise.
Here is the reality, Congress could undo this mistake and ensure that struggling families have food on the table. Ask Ted Cruz what he thinks about such legislation.
Elena,
You are 100% wrong about the House being under Republican control in 2010. I’ll give you a big hint, Obamacare passed the House in 2010. (March 21, 2010) And you think the GOP was in charge? The GOP won control of the House in the 2010 elections, but didn’t assume control until January 2011.
I agree the GOP might be able to fix the problem the Democrats created…assuming Harry Reid would allow a vote in the Senate. But why should they clean up the Democrat’s mess? The Democrats are the ones that stole the food off the table of those struggling families. The onus should be on them (the Democrats) to come up with a solution.
I’m sure Ted Cruz and every other Republican would gladly agree to restore SNAP funding in exchange for a one year delay on the individual mandate in Obamacare. And there are plenty of other ways find the $5 billion somewhere else. If the Democrats wanted to make a deal, they’d be able to. But they apparently don’t want to.
But I guess your instinctive blame everything on Republicans regardless of the facts will be helpful next year when every Democrat around will be blaming the failure of Obamacare on the GOP.
I count 10 Democrats in the senate now. They don’t want to put off implementation of ACA, they want to put off attaching a penalty past March 31. Some of them face primaries. However, I see nothing wrong with their request, considering how many problems there have been with the launch.
Why does Cruzie want a year’s delay? What about all those people who were anxiously awaiting health care? How about the medicare folks looking forward to those drug breaks? How about those who had previously been locked out because of pre existing conditions? Are they supposed to be put on hold for a year?
Nothing doing. I would not have a problem extending the penalty until June even. By that time, everyone needs start acting like its real.
But Furby, it’s so easy to do these days. (Blame republicans) They have drawn a bulls eye on themselves.
Tell me Furby, would you describe yourself as a republican or a tea party-ite?
Speaking Republicans, I posted a rather nice, if I do say so myself, memorial to Congressman Bill Young. Congressman Young was the longest serving Republican in the House of Representatives. I didn’t see ONE Republican stop by and say something about Congressman Young.
I don’t want to hear that *I* am partisan. If I were partisan I wouldn’t have mentioned Congressman Young. Frankly, I think some of you all run on ideology and not much of anything else. The very least you could do is at least acknowledge that Congressman Young had died. He was a favorite on mine. His decency and old school good manners transcended any differences we might have had over policy.
Moon-howler,
I don’t really describe myself as either. I tend to lean towards the right when the Democrats are in power and lean a little more to the center when the GOP is in power. For my own personal pet issue, the Democrats at least talk the talk better than the GOP, but don’t do squat about it. If you had to pin me down to a specific group, I’d be closest to a Reagan Democrat. The GOP is more interested in rich people than the middle class, but I don’t like the direction the Democrats are going these days. Democrats talk the talk about helping the middle class, but in reality they are all about helping their special interest groups just like the GOP.
If the stimulus bill had been more like the New Deal and created millions of jobs building stuff (highways, bridges, high speed rail) it could have been great. Instead we wasted a bunch of money to keep more government bureaucrats from getting laid off. Because God forbid a government worker should have to worry about their job like people in the private sector.
So I’m just one of those New Deal loving Tea Partiers, huh?
PS – I criticized Cuccinelli, so does that mean I’m not partisan too?
PPS – As for the one year delay on the individual mandate. As I understand it, it would not change any of the features of Obamacare except that you would not be required to sign up for it for another year. You could if you wanted to (assuming the website works!) but you wouldn’t be forced to sign up for it. At least that’s what I read about the idea. The website is so screwed up they’ll probably have to delay it for a while anyway.
I guess I just hadn’t seen you lean left. I will watch more closely.
I like parts of the New Deal myself. I like it even better when I think of some of the infrastructure that got built. My personal fave is the Merrit (sp) Parkway in Connecticut.
Hey, I love the Merrit in Connecticut. Those crazy-short exit ramps are awesome. And about once a year some stupid trucker will crunch his 18 wheeler on one of the bridges.
As for leaning left, here’s a couple:
1. Increase the minimum wage
2. Increase (but not eliminate) the social security wage cap
3. Put in some form of transaction tax on high frequency trades on Wall Street. Something that doesn’t cost the average guy one penny but makes it too expensive to do these microsecond trades
4. Come up with a real program to help people with underwater mortgages refinance their mortgage and stay in their home.
I doubt you’d cal those Tea Party ideas. What about you? What are your secret conservative wishes?
I actually agree with all 4 of your leftie ideas. Let’s see, my rightie ideas….I would expand who would be eligible for the death penalty as long as DNA was involved. For instance, I would make anyone convicted of child rape eligible for death by lethal injection. I would probably put a limit on age…like 12 and under. I don’t think that 13 year old’s should be raped, don’t get me wrong. But at some point other social conditioning comes into play, like girls acting like and looking like they are older. Just regular rape laws would work for those people. I won’t execute them.
There are others. But that’s a start.
“But I guess your instinctive blame everything on Republicans regardless of the facts will be helpful next year when every Democrat around will be blaming the failure of Obamacare on the GOP.”
That would be somewhat feasible. The Republicans did shape Obamacare, by virulently objecting to its original form. The argument could always be made that “if we were allowed to do this the way we wanted, it would have worked. but those petulant babies in the GOP messed it up, because they are destructive whiners”.
No good comes out of a public temper fit.
The GOP has crystalized a reputation as petulant babies, who seek to destroy rather than build. When you consider that women make up 50% or so of our voters, and that they are presumably “turned off” by watching these immature fits of infant-like temper masquerading as patriotism, I think really that the GOP has hurt itself pretty badly. You can’t win elections based on white males alone. If just a few less white woman consider the GOP to be a party of serious men and women, they can’t win a general election.
Ah ha! Rick, you seem to be telling us this is a math problem?
I stand corrected. New house members were sworn in January 2011. They won in November 2010. I stand by underlying premise that TEA party republicans and their conservative brethren would be thrilled to cut 39 billion from food stamps. In fact, they would be thrilled to cut most safety net programs to a standard that would leave many starving or depending on the good nature of the community to feed them. So, technically you are correct, but I guarantee you, if the House put up legislation replacing these cuts, it would be pass.
My statement regarding the republican hypocrisy for those in our society most at risk, single mothers and children, still stands.
Obama tried to pass an infrastructure bill, republicans wouldn’t have it. G-d forbid the government do something that we know has worked in the past. Oh wait, if an Republican comes up with the solution its good, when it’s a Dem its bad!
O.K., my horns are in. I actually agree with most of you have proposed comment #14 Furby.
That sure stopped everyone in their tracks. NO comments since right before noon?
Listening to a great speech by the Pres.
Furby, that’s a real stretch to try to hang the food stamp cuts on the Dems. It was Cantor and the House Republicans who split the farm bill earlier this year, separating SNAP out. It is the House Republicans that ignored the bi-partisan Senate funding bill that already passed and passed a separate partisan bill without a single Democratic vote that would cut 39 billion from food stamps.
Tell me again how the above is the fault of the Democrat’s?
Ah, middleman, you went and ruined our little kumbaya moment.
Ok, I’ve already explained this a couple of times, but I’ll go really slow this time.
Here’s what happened: And you can get all of this from the Huffington Post article I posted so don’t take my word for it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/25/food-stamps_n_4158690.html
Step 1: Back in 2009 as part of the stimulus bill, SNAP was increased. The Democrats passed the stimulus bill with next to no GOP support. It was supposed to be a temporary increase but instead of there ever being a cut back down to a lower level, there was supposed to be enough money so that the benefit would stay at the same amount until 2015, when inflation would have caught up with it. (That’s actually a pretty smart idea by Washington DC standards)
Notice how the GOP had nothing to do with step 1.
Step 2: In 2010 the Democrats changed their mind and TOOK MONEY OUT OF THE SNAP PROGRAM. Here’s the money quote from the Huffington Post article
“But congressional Democrats essentially raided the cookie jar, using the future planned spending to offset the cost of priority legislation in 2010. They said at the time that they would put the money back before any decrease could take effect, but they have not kept their promise.”
So there was enough money to avoid a cut and last until 2015 until DEMOCRATS took the money to use for something else.
Again, notice how there aren’t any Republicans involved.
Ok, now here comes the important step 3 that I think you are missing.
Step 3: There is no step 3. The GOP hasn’t changed SNAP in any way for better or worse. The bills you are talking about didn’t pass. The SNAP cuts that start tomorrow are because of step 2, when the Democrats took money that was already set aside for SNAP and used it for something else. (I don’t know what they used it for, but I’d love to know.)
The reason I “hang” this on the Dems is because they were the idiots that CUT SNAP FUNDING in 2010. News flash: If you don’t want to cut funding for SNAP, DON’T VOTE to cut funding.
By your logic, if a burgler robs my house and the police never catch him, it’s the cops fault I didn’t have my stuff because they didn’t recover it.
Capiche? I don’t think I can explain it any easier so if you don’t get it, I give up.
PS – Moonhowler, your idea of the death penalty for child rapists isn’t conservative. It’s moderate. The conservative position involves a dull and rusty knife to prevent repeat offenders.
Thanks, Furby, for that tutorial on recent SNAP history, but I pretty much got your point the first time. Thanks for repeating it real slow, though.
The reality is that you’re ignoring Cantor splitting SNAP from the farm bill and the existence of the bi-partisan Senate bill that would restore funding for SNAP, neither of which can really be ignored by any serious observer. The House approving the Senate bill or leaving SNAP with the farm bill when it was passed would have restored the money.
So…by your logic, if a burglar robs your house and the police could catch him and return your belongings, it’s ok if they don’t because the burglar shouldn’t have robbed your house in the first place!