The political ramifications of the party failing to pass the Farm Bill have been thoroughly analyzed, but less discussed has been the life-or-death implications of what will happen to the program now. And on that score, there’s a strong chance that Republicans’ unholy combination of malice and dimwittedness might actually yield the reverse of its desired effect: fewer cuts than they sought, not more.

First, some background. The Democratic-controlled Senate passed its own Farm Bill that would cut SNAP by some $4 billion, an amount already troubling to people concerned about hunger in America. The House then took that $4 billion cut and multiplied it by five, calling for a $20.5 billion reduction.

Continue Reading...

SNAP rolls increased sharply in the recession, as you’d expect—along with UI, SNAP was and is highly elastic to increased need—[and] they’ve decelerated of late as the economy has slowly improved, though here again, it’s not improved as fast for those more exposed to food insecurity.

But did they increase more than they “should have” over the past few years?  One simple way to answer that question is to build a statistical model of SNAP caseloads as a function of the economy, estimate the model through 2007, and then project caseloads over the next few years based on actual economic outcomes. Then compare your forecast to the actual path of food stamp rolls.  If the conservatives are right (and you’ve got a solid model), then your prediction should be well below the actual caseload path.

Continue Reading...

The White House would prefer, if we are in a cutting mood, to cut direct subsidies to farmers and crop insurance, two longtime mainstays of the farm bill that have basically totally fucked up our entire food system for decades but that also have made a few giant food companies quite rich. Here is how House Republicans made their bill:

The bill, which costs nearly $100 billion a year, would save a total of about $4 billion annually, including the food stamp cuts. It would eliminate some subsidies while creating others, raising subsidy levels for several crops. It would expand the current crop insurance program and also create a new type of crop insurance that would kick in sooner than the paid insurance farmers have now.

Good one, guys. Good policy, good attempt at deficit reduction, good governing.

Continue Reading...

“Under current law, there is a lifetime ban for convicted drug felons, though many states have opted out of or modified that ban,” reads a statement from Vitter’s office. “Vitter’s amendment would extend the lifetime food stamp ban to dangerous sex offenders and murderers.”

Timothy Smeeding, director of the University of Wisconsin’s Institute for Research on Poverty, called the amendment “ridiculous.”

“It doesn’t save anyone any money,” he told MSNBC. “It just makes sort of a political statement that we don’t forgive people for crimes once they pay their dues. We’re just going to punish them forever.” He argued that making it more difficult for convicted felons to meet their basic nutritional needs would encourage recidivism.

... The House Farm Bill includes yet more draconian cuts to SNAP benefits. Last week, the House Agriculture Committee approved legislation which would cut $20 billion in SNAP funding over the next decade.

Continue Reading...

The amendment was clearly created as a wedge issue, a perennial Republican effort to get Democratic senators to vote for something that can get used against them later in attack ads. Tom Coburn is a master of this; during the healthcare bill he offered an amendment banning sex offenders from receiving health insurance benefits for Viagra.

Continue Reading...

The panel rebuffed Democratic efforts to keep the food stamp program whole, as debate on the farm bill turned into a theological discourse on helping the poor.

The House bill would cut about $2.5 billion a year — or a little more than 3 percent — from the domestic food aid program, which is used by 1 in 7 Americans. The committee rejected a Democratic amendment to strike the cuts 27-17, keeping them in the bill.

The legislation would achieve the cuts partly by eliminating an eligibility category that mandates automatic food stamp benefits when people sign up for certain other programs. It would also save dollars by targeting states that give people who don't have heating bills very small amounts of heating assistance so they can automatically qualify for higher food stamp benefits.

Republicans argued that the cut is small relative to the size of the program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and that people who qualify for the aid could still sign up for it, they just wouldn't be automatically enrolled. They defended the cuts after Rep. Juan Vargas, D-Calif., quoted the Book of Matthew in opposing them: "When I was hungry you gave me food. When I was thirsty, you gave me drink."

Continue Reading...

Food stamps! For immigrants -- possibly illegal ones! -- from Mexico! It’s a veritable orchestra of dog whistles. That was Daily Caller founder Tucker Carlson speaking with Laura Ingraham Tuesday, but he’s hardly alone. Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe told NewsMax this week of undocumented immigrants, “As long as we supply their demand here in this country, they’re going to figure out a way to get through. And I’m talking about with the food stamps.”

“In Mexico, there is no welfare. No food stamps. Now, a lot of them -- Mexicans -- want to come here,” Fox News host Bill O’Reilly said Monday. (Mexico actually has an expansive welfare state, including universal healthcare rights, social security and food assistance programs, though actual access is substantially lower than what’s technically on the books.)

Continue Reading...

When the federal law was passed, House Republicans initially wanted to let states have all 7.5 million people collecting unemployment compensation pee in a cup. A compromise was reached, which authorizes states to test applicants for benefits in two circumstances: if they were fired for using drugs, or if the only occupation they’re suited for is one the Department of Labor lists as commonly requiring drug testing. Which jobs the department might include in the provision is not yet determined (Democrats say a small number of professions, Republicans say most), but in the meantime GOP state legislators are pushing forward with drug-testing proposals.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has asked lawmakers to push through legislation requiring not only unemployment beneficiaries to be drug tested, but also individuals applying for food stamps -- a particularly draconian move on the governor's part, especially since in the few states where where drug testing of welfare beneficiaries has been attempted, like Florida, there has been no evidence of reduced drug use.

Continue Reading...

Without much prodding she admitted to me that she had retuned to prostitution: “I am putting myself at risk for HIV to get my kids a f---ing happy meal.”

Despite looking high and low for a job, Carla explained, she was still unemployed. Most entry-level jobs felt out of reach with her drug record, but what’s worse, even the state wasn’t willing to throw her a temporary life preserver.

You see, Carla is from one of the 32 states in the country that ban anyone convicted of a drug felony from collecting food stamps. With the release of the Global Burden of Disease Study last week, it bears looking at how we are perpetuating burdens among the most vulnerable Americans with our outdated laws.

Continue Reading...

Continue Reading...

On Nov. 18, the mayor busted out a little Plutarch for his Twitter followers, quoting, "An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics." Those were fighting words to some who took umbrage with the notion, prompting Booker to follow up: "We pay 4 HUGE back end govt programs: prisons, police, etc. If we invested in Schools, nutrition, etc we’d save $ & create wealth."

Continue Reading...

Watch:

Via MediaMatters

Continue Reading...

I wasn’t crazy about the idea, but we were doing our best to cut expenses. We had just moved to save money on rent, and we had no cellphones, or Internet access, or cable or even call waiting. Our vehicles were a used Prius, a bike and a double stroller. We were wrapping both our babies’ bottoms in cloth diapers and washing them ourselves. After buying food, rent and utilities, we were barely breaking even.

And winter was upon us. So there I would stand in line at the grocery store assembling my WIC items with the correct WIC checks and reminding myself that by harnessing the federal government's money (which is to say, our collective tax dollars) and spending them on groceries at my local grocery store, I was both helping keep grocery baggers employed and making it possible for us to heat that drafty apartment full of babies.

Continue Reading...

New Yorkers on the state's food stamp program receive money for food necessities electronically, through Electronic Benefit Cards (EBTs). However, with Manhattan from 39th Street southward in power blackout along with parts of Brooklyn, most stores are only able to sell goods for cash. Power is expected to return by Saturday.

In a WNYC report (listen below) a resident of a Lower East Side public-housing complex in Manhattan explained, "The supermarkets don’t even really want to sell anything. They’re open but if you don’t have cash, you messed up. And everybody in these projects, they take EBT … food stamps.” [h/t Colorlines]

Continue Reading...

One day this summer, my husband came home early from work with the news he’d lost his job. Since then, we've gone through all the stages of grief, with a few additions of our own. I’ve gone into what I’ve dubbed “Mama Bear mode,” wanting to do everything with my husband and our two small children, maybe because I just don’t want to face anyone alone. “How are you doing?” is a hard question to answer in the rush of school pickup. So I keep my mate and cubs close, or we hibernate at home, trying to avoid scrutiny.

But even Mama Bears can get caught off-guard. A couple of weeks ago, I was out with my running group, and we got to talking about Romney’s now infamous 47 percent. A heated back and forth ensued about federal assistance and those who abuse it, with a few anecdotes tossed in for good measure. “Abby, you know you’ve seen the woman at Safeway using her food stamps and then hopping in her Mercedes,” one woman said.

Continue Reading...

The percentage of food-stamp payments that were above program guidelines fell to 2.99 percent in the year ending Sept. 30, 2011, the most recent available, according to the department. The overpayment rate was less than half what it was a decade earlier, while the number of recipients more than doubled to 44.7 million people on average in 2011.

Despite an oft-repeated conservative narrative that the food-stamp program is regularly abused, recent government data shows that food-stamp spending lost to fraud or abuse (as opposed to overpayment, or payments being higher than they should have been) amounts to only 1 percent of expenditures.

Continue Reading...