I intern at Street Sense, Washington, D.C.'s homeless newspaper. We rarely break news. But we did on September 26, when we wrote about the federal government's plans to cut food stamps, the program commonly known as SNAP, across the board.
"In the District, more than 144,000 people participate in the program, up 3,353 beneficiaries (or 2.4 percent) from the previous year," reported Ramanda Lazaris, my friend and coworker.
More than a month later, the Washington Post picked up the idea that we first broke, in Brad Plumer's article:
First up is a big automatic cut to SNAP scheduled for Nov. 1. This is happening because the food-stamp program was temporarily expanded in 2009 as part of the Recovery Act. That bill spent $45.2 billion to increase monthly benefit levels to around $133, on average.Homeless advocates (many of the people I work with at Street Sense) and the urban poor are quick to blame the GOP for these cuts, painting the political right as haters of the homeless and the poor.
I didn't really know how to deal with this as a defiant of political stereotypes. I'm a Christian, who was homeschooled--stereotypical of a Republican. I'm also half-black, lower-middle class (just a half step above receiving food stamps), and was raised in the San Francisco Bay Area--stereotypical of a Democrat.
I don't align myself with either political party, but I'm wary of hasty blame tossing. My skepticism was confirmed by the news that Michelle Obama's "Let's Move" campaign may be a reason that food stamps are being cut.
Andrea Peyser reported November 11, on the New York Post:
The great food grab began in 2010, when President Obama, with Michelle and US Department of Agriculture honchos at his side, signed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. At the time, he admitted taking cash from one pocket to feed the other. "Some of the funding [for the lunch program] comes from rolling back temporary increases in food-stamp benefits," he said, starting in the fall of 2013.The kids who qualify for lunch programs in schools are usually from families who receive SNAP discounts. Essentially, children's dinners are being taken away so as to give them a "healthy" lunch.
This might be justifiable if the overall health of American kids were improving as a result, and Michelle's "Let's Move" campaign was achieving its desired goals. But one report from Bizpac Review indicates otherwise:
Students complain they are still starving after the small lunches and say the food is just downright disgusting. "They say it tastes like vomit," one board member, Myra Mosley, said, according to the Enterprise. "Kids can't learn when they're hungry!" parents reportedly shouted to the assembled board (from Janeen Capizola's article "School kids to Michelle Obama: Our lunches 'taste like vomit'").So let's keep this straight...families now have less money to spend on groceries, and healthy foods are being wasted in schools because kids can't stand them. No matter where I turn, I see evidence that the government cannot fix all the problems of our nation or make choices for its citizens--we need the freedom to make those choices for ourselves.
Advocates will point to the heartbreaking stories of people who are going hungry because of the SNAP cuts, instead of the abusers using food stamps to purchase contraband and commit fraud.
There are two sides of the coin, and I don't claim to have an answer to the question: how do we feed people without wasting millions of taxpayer dollars?
It's complicated. Is this a Republican problem? Is this a Democrat problem? No, but it is an American problem. And all voting Americans need to put some thought into the food stamp dilemma before passing more legislation or electing someone who makes big promises with hidden drawbacks.