lifegoesonbrah
Well-Known Member
So part of my job is SNAP (food stamp) advocacy, fighting against proposals of policies that would reduce food stamp allotments or policies that restrict eligibility. As a libertarian leaning person, this is a philosophically difficult issue for me.
A little update on the farm bill for everyone. The senate has passed a comprehensive farm bill, which includes both agricultural legislation and nutritional legislation (SNAP and similar programs). This has been common practice since the seventies, that is combining anti-hunger initiatives with agricultural polices. The house recently tried to pass their own farm bill which included policy changes that would have cut $20 billion out of the food stamp program. This bill went to the floor and embarrassingly failed. Since then, the house has passed an agricultural only bill, which did not include SNAP, and has passed the house. Now, they are proposing a nutrition only bill that will cause the food stamp program to be cut by around $40 billion.
With the ending of the American Recovery and Reinvestment act approaching, the program will already be cut by around $5 billion coming in November.
The SNAP program does have stringent eligibility requirements, which varies by state, and the average allotment per person is only $4.50 per day, or $1.50 a meal. When determining allotment amount, the persons income and expenses are used in the calculation. In Michigan, you have to make less than $1200 a month to even be eligible. If you make anywhere near this you will generally be eligible for the minimum $16 per month.
There have been a lot of media attacks lately, including the fox news special "The great food stamp binge". My question to conservatives, out of all the money spent through government, why would you want to cut a social safety net that provides the most basic need to our population, food? Out of all of the bank/business bailouts that most conservative supported, and all of the wars that most mainstream conservatives support, it is absurd to me that you would make this a priority. We spend more money on killing people than we do feeding the needy in this country.
Many conservatives argue that charities can take care of everyone (this may have been my argument at one time), the food banks do not have the funds or donations to do this. There is no government crowding out in the charity sector. Many food banks even match fund state grants to provide SNAP outreach to their community, promoting the program. The public and private sectors work together well when it comes to nutrition programs. Furthermore, many food bank programs are funded by the state, such as Michigan farm to food bank, which allows food banks to purchase cosmetically challenged and unmarketable food (yet nutritional) with state funds. The charity sector would be in disarray without government funding.
Another qualm conservatives have is the argument that the program will grow out of control. The SNAP programs eligibility is determined by poverty rates, when poverty decreases the size of the program will automatically decrease.
Philosophically, conservatives argue that is immoral to take money by force and redistribute it. This is something that I do have a hard time with. However, in the world we live in, this is common practice for ALL government programs. So you cannot use this argument when independently arguing against food stamps. Food is life and people do have the right to life, as conservatives love to say. In this day and age, those that live in the city cannot be as independent as they used to be. Many people do not have the means to provide their own food source because of where they live.
I am urging conservatives to get their priorities straight and lobby to cut wasteful government programs that are actually wasteful and not used to keep people in America alive.
A little update on the farm bill for everyone. The senate has passed a comprehensive farm bill, which includes both agricultural legislation and nutritional legislation (SNAP and similar programs). This has been common practice since the seventies, that is combining anti-hunger initiatives with agricultural polices. The house recently tried to pass their own farm bill which included policy changes that would have cut $20 billion out of the food stamp program. This bill went to the floor and embarrassingly failed. Since then, the house has passed an agricultural only bill, which did not include SNAP, and has passed the house. Now, they are proposing a nutrition only bill that will cause the food stamp program to be cut by around $40 billion.
With the ending of the American Recovery and Reinvestment act approaching, the program will already be cut by around $5 billion coming in November.
The SNAP program does have stringent eligibility requirements, which varies by state, and the average allotment per person is only $4.50 per day, or $1.50 a meal. When determining allotment amount, the persons income and expenses are used in the calculation. In Michigan, you have to make less than $1200 a month to even be eligible. If you make anywhere near this you will generally be eligible for the minimum $16 per month.
There have been a lot of media attacks lately, including the fox news special "The great food stamp binge". My question to conservatives, out of all the money spent through government, why would you want to cut a social safety net that provides the most basic need to our population, food? Out of all of the bank/business bailouts that most conservative supported, and all of the wars that most mainstream conservatives support, it is absurd to me that you would make this a priority. We spend more money on killing people than we do feeding the needy in this country.
Many conservatives argue that charities can take care of everyone (this may have been my argument at one time), the food banks do not have the funds or donations to do this. There is no government crowding out in the charity sector. Many food banks even match fund state grants to provide SNAP outreach to their community, promoting the program. The public and private sectors work together well when it comes to nutrition programs. Furthermore, many food bank programs are funded by the state, such as Michigan farm to food bank, which allows food banks to purchase cosmetically challenged and unmarketable food (yet nutritional) with state funds. The charity sector would be in disarray without government funding.
Another qualm conservatives have is the argument that the program will grow out of control. The SNAP programs eligibility is determined by poverty rates, when poverty decreases the size of the program will automatically decrease.
Philosophically, conservatives argue that is immoral to take money by force and redistribute it. This is something that I do have a hard time with. However, in the world we live in, this is common practice for ALL government programs. So you cannot use this argument when independently arguing against food stamps. Food is life and people do have the right to life, as conservatives love to say. In this day and age, those that live in the city cannot be as independent as they used to be. Many people do not have the means to provide their own food source because of where they live.
I am urging conservatives to get their priorities straight and lobby to cut wasteful government programs that are actually wasteful and not used to keep people in America alive.
