Print Page | Close Window

Trump Wants to replace food stamps with FOOD!

Printed From: Main Street Monroe
Category: Voice Forums
Forum Name: Political Voice
Forum Description: Regional and national political opinions
URL: http://voice.mainstreetmonroe.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3348
Printed Date: May 23 2018 at 6:19pm


Topic: Trump Wants to replace food stamps with FOOD!
Posted By: John Beagle
Subject: Trump Wants to replace food stamps with FOOD!
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 3:04pm


Liberals Furious That Trump Wants To Replace Food Stamps With Actual Food

ByJOSEPH CURL @josephcurl

In his big budget proposal on Monday, President Trump offered a novel idea: Instead of giving people in need government stamps they can redeem for food, why not just give them actual food?

As you might guess, liberals were enraged by the notion. How dare Trump try to take away food stamps from hungry people and give them — of all things — food!

Here's how the liberal HuffPost saw it: "Facing a trillion-dollar deficit because of his just-passed tax cuts, President Donald Trump has an idea for how to get some of that money back: making poor people eat beans and rice."

Oh the humanity!

Currently, food stamps — known officially as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — are provided for some 42 million people, 80% of whom get food vouchers each month worth at least $90 per person. They can be redeemed at many stores for food, but the program is rife with abuse.

For example, an Oregon minimart owner was recently sentenced to nearly two years behind bars after being convicted for food stamp fraud totalling $189,000. In that case, prosecutors said the minimart owner allowed his customers to exchange cash for benefits. He charged high prices for food to food stamp recipients’ benefit cards, and then gave them back half the cash.

In January, a Baltimore man was found guilty of fraud involving $1.5 million worth of food stamps. The list goes on and on.

Under the Trump proposal, 80% of all SNAP recipients would get about half of their benefits in the form of a "USDA Foods package," NPR reported. "The package was described in the budget as consisting of 'shelf-stable milk, ready to eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans and canned fruit and vegetables.' The boxes would not include fresh fruits or vegetables."

The program would be called "America’s Harvest Box." Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue called it “a bold, innovative approach to providing nutritious food to people who need assistance feeding themselves and their families ― and all of it is home-grown by American farmers and producers.”

Here's the nut graf from the NPR story:


The USDA believes that state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP recipients currently pay for food at retail stores — thus reducing the overall cost of the SNAP program by $129 billion over the next 10 years. This and other changes in the SNAP program, according to the Trump administration, will reduce the SNAP budget by $213 billion over those years — cutting the program by almost 30 percent.

Good plan, right? Wrong.

Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, a hunger advocacy group that also helps clients access food-assistance services, said the administration's plan left him baffled. "They have managed to propose nearly the impossible, taking over $200 billion worth of food from low-income Americans while increasing bureaucracy and reducing choices," Berg says.

He says SNAP is efficient because it is a "free market model" that lets recipients shop at stores for their benefits. The Trump administration's proposal, he said, "is a far more intrusive, Big Government answer. They think a bureaucrat in D.C. is better at picking out what your family needs than you are?"

Douglas Greenaway, president of the National WIC Association, echoed that sentiment. "Removing choice from SNAP flies in the face of encouraging personal responsibility," he said. He says "the budget seems to assume that participating in SNAP is a character flaw."

Well. Trump's succeeded in getting to suddenly decry Big Brother and embrace the free market! Amazing.

And a far cry from the last eight years. Former President Barack Obama will be remembered for driving millions to seek aid from the government (as Democrats love to do). During his time in office, people living on food stamps soared 32%. In 2009, when he took office, there were 33.5 million people on food stamp benefits; in October 2016, just a few months before he left office, that number had skyrocketed to 44.2 million — a jump of 10.7 million people.

The cost of the program to taxpayers rose from $50.3 billion to $66.6 billion — all while Obama's administration pushed the idea that the economy was booming (it wasn't). As the unemployment rate dropped (mainly due to Obama officials reducing the number of people considered in the "work force"), millions were forced onto food stamps.

But that "hope and change" has been replaced by four simple words: "Make America Great Again."

New statistics from the U.S. Department of Agriculture show nearly 1.5 million Americans have gotten off the food stamp rolls since Trump took office in January 2017. That's a 3.5% drop in less than a year.

But liberals say it would be embarrassing for food stamp recipients to receive free food.

Critics of the proposal said distributing that much food presents a logistical nightmare. "Among the problems, it's going to be costly and take money out of the [SNAP] program from the administrative side. It's going to stigmatize people when they have to go to certain places to pick up benefits," says Jim Weill, president of the nonprofit Food Research and Action Center.

Well, there's a way to change that: Get a job and get off food stamps. There's a free market idea for you.


-------------
The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are.
-Joseph Campbell



Replies:
Posted By: basser
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 7:23pm
This article lays the blame for the welfare increase on Obama. In fact, George W. Bush’s Great Recession made a huge impact on welfare spending. Forbes estimated the cost of the 185 welfare programs in 2010 at $ 717 billion: for the federal government alone. Adding in all states spending over $210 billion, total spending was up 24.3% since 2008. The easiest solution is to stop all welfare. This would include stopping subsidies to individuals, but also must include stopping subsidies for any corporation or business. Energy, agriculture, defense contractors, airports, rail service, sea ports and bank failures must be included.

-------------


Posted By: John Beagle
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 8:22pm
So what does that have to do with giving people food instead of stamps?

-------------
The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are.
-Joseph Campbell


Posted By: basser
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 8:40pm
I guess give them a can of beans or a stamp. What difference does it make. It’s still welfare.

-------------


Posted By: MElass
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 10:12pm
Except if you give them actual FOOD they will have adequate nutrition. Food stamps/cards can be sold for cash to buy cigarettes, alcohol and drugs.


Posted By: Houndog
Date Posted: Feb 13 2018 at 10:29pm
This is the federal governments equivalent of putting on last years winter coat and finding a $20 bill in the pocket.
I say end any and all programs, effective immediately, there by forcing some of the most profitable corporations this world has ever known to actually pay the low level employees enough to house and feed themselves.
Without government assistance Walmart and McDonalds, et al couldn’t retain large portions of their work force.

-------------



Print Page | Close Window