UAH Presentations & Op-Ed Articles

Utahns Against Hunger presentations

 To view a UAH conference presentation, click on the title below:

• Federal Policy Update 10-18-11 (pdf)
• Food Stamp Training 10-11 (pdf)

UAH Op-Ed Articles

Food Stamps and Society – A look into our past and possible future

-Oct 11, 2011 by Nathan at Utahns Against Hunger-

Since its beginning the food stamp program has been a controversial but undeniable life-saver to those who use it.  After all everyone needs to eat.  Few would argue that a growing child or a destitute senior citizen should be denied food because of their lack of financial means.  Current proposals in congress would do just that and there is not enough food in every food bank, pantry, and soup kitchen in the country to make up for it.  But first it is important to know how food stamps started.

In the summer of 1939 Europe sat on the brink of war, the invasion of Poland would take place that September, and after nearly ten years the United States was still mired in the Great Depression. With unemployment over 15 percent and malnutrition rampant, it wasn’t the plight of all these hungry people that initially motivated the government to step in, but a novel way to support farmers and stabilize the price of important food crops. With the original Food Stamp Program, those deemed most at risk, after buying a $1 red stamp, would also receive another blue stamp worth 50 cents which was redeemable for specific food items currently in surplus. It helped poor people stretch their food dollars just a bit further, but mainly it provided an outlet for farmer’s surplus crops and kept the price of these items from getting too low.

The government ended the Food Stamp Program in the middle of World War II but the debate continued for almost 20 years until an agreement was reached that brought it back in 1961. This time the requirement that the stamps be only used for specific surplus foods was dropped, but only after extensive price supports for agricultural commodities were included. Participants also continued to be required to buy a certain amount of food at full price before receiving discount stamps for the rest. Still the program helped a great number of people, increasing from half a million in 1965 to 10 million in 1971.

1977 finally saw the elimination of the requirement that food stamps be purchased and instead based the amount received on the recipients’ net income as it related to the poverty line. Accommodations were also made for the elderly and disabled to be certified at home or over the phone. Nutrition education and healthy eating became goals of the program.
Attempts to cut back spending on food stamps in the early 80′s and late 90′s added many new requirements and restrictions to the program. A maximum gross income test was initiated so that those with a higher income, regardless of expenses, were ineligible. In 1996 Congress passed and President Clinton signed The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity act of 1996. Severe restrictions for the program were imposed of legal immigrants and adults without children. The limit was placed on “able-bodied adults without children” so that these so-called “ABAWDs” could not receive more than 3 months of benefits in three years. Legal immigrants were initially denied food stamp benefits entirely, until some changes were made allowing immigrant children to receive them.
One of the criticisms of the Food Stamp Program, over the years, has been that it’s rife with fraud and allows unscrupulous individuals to use the money to buy alcohol, cigarettes, and even illicit drugs. The truth is food stamps have never been permitted to be used for any of these items, even essential non-food items such as soap and toilet paper. The United States Department of Agriculture has done extensive investigation of food stamp trafficking and found that between 2006 and 2008 only about 1 percent of the total benefits were diverted. These investigations have found that nearly all of this fraud is perpetrated by retailers and employees of small stores and not by food stamp recipients acting alone.

It is also helpful to remember that most food stamp recipients are not single jobless adults but children and especially working households with children. 76% percent of all benefits go to families with children and 49% to the children themselves. Also most of these households have at least one family member working, just not earning enough to make ends meet otherwise.
Food stamps (or as it is now known, The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) is an entitlement program, which means that the budget is not set by congress but the money must be spent if needed. Since the recession of 2008, the program expenditures have more than doubled from $33 billion to $77 billion and are now helping about 44 million people. This may sound like a lot of money, but the recently extended Bush tax-cuts are currently distributing about $265 billion, or more than 3 times that amount, every year to the wealthiest members of our society.
So far food stamp benefits have not been affected by the current debate over the budget in congress. There are proposals to either greatly reduce the number of people eligible or only send a set amount of money to each state and let them decide how to ration it, a policy called block-granting. With these conversations going on, it is good to remember how critical this program is to those who depend on it. Food pantries and soup kitchens fill an important need for those recently impoverished or without the stability to seek out more permanent support. However, these charities provide only about 3.6% of the total meals given to the estimated 35.5 million food insecure Americans. The rest either comes from Federal nutrition programs like food stamps or those meals are simply missed. If we, as a society, decide having enough food to eat, regardless of income, is an important value to uphold – these programs must not be sacrificed.