The Trump administration has proposed three changes this year to the federal food stamp program, one of which was adopted last week by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and would deny food stamps to nearly 700,000 Americans. This, as explained by the Center of Budget and Policy Priorities, is because a person enrolled in the program receives monthly, on average $127, or $1.39 per meal, in food stamp benefits, but under this proposed rule, people whose gross income is 130 percent above the federal poverty line (slightly more than $16,000 for one person) or have more than $2,250 in assets, will no longer qualify to receive federal food benefits.
According to the Urban Institute, the second proposal under consideration would eliminate “categorical eligibility,” which allows people to enroll in food stamps automatically if they qualify for other aid programs. The third proposal would reduce the amount of home heating costs used to calculate a food stamp recipient’s net income, effectively making their income seem higher thus reducing the benefits to households in cold-weather states. According to the Urban Institute, if all three proposals are accepted, a total of about 2.2 million households could lose access to government food assistance, while another 3.1 million may see reduced benefits.
Of the 700,000 who we know will lose their food stamps because of this new rule, many are homeless or have mental health issues or disabilities that preclude them from working. An unintended consequence of these cuts will be that as many as 500,000 children also could lose eligibility for free school lunch programs. That’s because states that automatically enrolled people to receive SNAP benefits, also enrolled children in the household to receive free school lunches.
An analysis from policy firm Mathematica suggests a 9 percent decrease in the number of families currently receiving food stamps with the new USDA rule, but that percentage could be much higher in certain states like Arkansas where the percentage of residents qualifying for food stamps is among the highest in the nation. In the Jonesboro metro area, 16.7 percent of households (8,087) received food stamps, that’s the ninth highest in the state. To give these figures some context, the average income of food stamp recipients in Arkansas is $17,100, for families not on food stamps, the average income is $48,000.
Policy makers in the Trump administration are under the mistaken belief that the reported unemployment rate accurately reflects the true or real rate of unemployment and thus the true or real need for food stamps. While the official unemployment rate in November of this year was 3.5 percent, the real rate was 6.9 percent. The reason for the difference is because two distinct groups of individuals are not counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) when calculating the unemployment rate.
The first group is those who are “marginally attached” to the labor force. They aren’t counted among the unemployed because the BLS only includes those who have looked for a job in the last four weeks. The “marginally attached” have looked for a job sometime during the last year, would like to work, and are available, but as yet have not found employment. The second group is those who have just given up looking for work altogether. The BLS calls them “discouraged workers.” By not counting both sets of individuals, BLS statistics give a distorted picture not only of unemployment but those most in need of food assistance.
There’s an unstated belief that food banks will fill the gap if all three of the proposals move forward. That is totally unrealistic, food stamps provide nine meals for every meal provided by food banks and other charities. In Craighead County there are 22 food pantries of various sizes, but not all of them are part of the Food Bank network. Even among the largest, a drop in contributions has lead to cut backs in food distribution. One pantry serving Joneboro’s West Side, had to forgo its traditional supplemental Thanksgiving food distribution due to a lack of funds.
It’s been reported that the Department of Agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, in criticizing the food stamp program, stated that these cuts would help restore the “dignity” of work. One definition of dignity is, “inherent nobility and worth,” and while everyone would agree there is dignity in honest labor, we have to wonder how much conservative legislators pay only lip service to the idea of “dignity in labor.” If we wanted more people to benefit from the “dignity of work,” wouldn’t finding ways to raise wages be more effective (not to mention decent) than denying them access to food.
ew