R
rdean
Guest
How conservatives learned to love the federal food stamps program.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (under Bill Clinton)—welfare reform—tightened eligibility rules. Between 1996 and 2000, with stricter rules and a booming economy, participation rates plummeted.
Fast forward two years. President George W. Bush appointed Eric Bost as his undersecretary for food, nutrition, and consumer services at the USDA, and the two went on a quiet crusade to expand eligibility, increase enrollment, and reduce stigma around nutrition aid. In 2002, for instance, Bush announced his support for letting legal immigrants apply for benefits, and he pushed the provision into the farm bill—granting about 300,000 more people eligibility at a multibillion-dollar federal cost. Bost also expanded the size of and outreach for SNAP, "reflecting the administration's commitment to the nutrition safety net"—no mention of welfare there. In negotiations around the 2008 farm bill, the Bush administration took a final, fateful step to reduce stigma and pull the program into the 21st century. The USDA officially rebranded food stamps as SNAP benefits, with a focus on nutrition rather than free food.
The cocktail of rising unemployment, stagnant wages, eased access to support programs, and purposeful destigmatization during the Bush administration meant that rolls swelled—from 17 million when he took office to 28 million when he left. That caused some consternation among conservatives. But the administration pushed back. "I don't have any problems with those programs growing, and indeed, they were intended to grow," Ron Haskins, a Bush adviser, told the Associated Press in 2007.
========================================
Facts Show Little SNAP Food Stamp Fraud or Abuse - US News
Map of Food-Stamp Enrollment by County Interactive TIME.com
TIME analysis of county-by-county food-stamp-enrollment data compiled by the nonprofit Feeding America, it appears that House Republicans represent more districts with high levels of participation in the program than House Democrats. Of the 350 congressional districts in which TIME was able to estimate the percentage of people enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), 76 had levels of 20% or higher. Of those, 43 are held by Republicans while 33 are controlled by Democrats.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/opinion/the-plot-to-cut-food-stamps-foiled.html?_r=0
The states are doing exactly what the farm bill — which Mr. Boehner supported — encouraged them to do: pay more to some of the poorest families in America so they neither freeze nor starve during a brutal winter. Mr. Boehner seems unaware of it, but millions of families have never recovered from the recession, and his chamber has not only refused to help them by stimulating the economy but is trying to push them through the safety net.
In a letter to Mr. Boehner, Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut said it was “shameful” to describe the states’ efforts as cheating. “Your demonization of states that have elected to provide this benefit impugns the children, the elderly, the disabled, the low-wage workers and veterans who receive such aid by implying that they are a party to something criminal,” he wrote. “To the contrary, I think most would argue that denying residents of my state $112 a month in nutrition assistance is morally wrong.”
If Mr. Boehner really wants to crack down on cheating, he might look to the carried-interest tax loophole, which allows hedge fund managers to mischaracterize their income as capital gains and costs the Treasury $11 billion a year — far more than extra dollars for food stamps. In his world, fraud occurs only when the government helps those who need it the most.
=============================================
Every time I start reading about the many ways Republicans work to screw over as many Americans as possible, it makes me want to puke. On them.
And USMB Republicans defend these creeps. I don't understand why.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (under Bill Clinton)—welfare reform—tightened eligibility rules. Between 1996 and 2000, with stricter rules and a booming economy, participation rates plummeted.
Fast forward two years. President George W. Bush appointed Eric Bost as his undersecretary for food, nutrition, and consumer services at the USDA, and the two went on a quiet crusade to expand eligibility, increase enrollment, and reduce stigma around nutrition aid. In 2002, for instance, Bush announced his support for letting legal immigrants apply for benefits, and he pushed the provision into the farm bill—granting about 300,000 more people eligibility at a multibillion-dollar federal cost. Bost also expanded the size of and outreach for SNAP, "reflecting the administration's commitment to the nutrition safety net"—no mention of welfare there. In negotiations around the 2008 farm bill, the Bush administration took a final, fateful step to reduce stigma and pull the program into the 21st century. The USDA officially rebranded food stamps as SNAP benefits, with a focus on nutrition rather than free food.
The cocktail of rising unemployment, stagnant wages, eased access to support programs, and purposeful destigmatization during the Bush administration meant that rolls swelled—from 17 million when he took office to 28 million when he left. That caused some consternation among conservatives. But the administration pushed back. "I don't have any problems with those programs growing, and indeed, they were intended to grow," Ron Haskins, a Bush adviser, told the Associated Press in 2007.
========================================
Facts Show Little SNAP Food Stamp Fraud or Abuse - US News
Map of Food-Stamp Enrollment by County Interactive TIME.com
TIME analysis of county-by-county food-stamp-enrollment data compiled by the nonprofit Feeding America, it appears that House Republicans represent more districts with high levels of participation in the program than House Democrats. Of the 350 congressional districts in which TIME was able to estimate the percentage of people enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), 76 had levels of 20% or higher. Of those, 43 are held by Republicans while 33 are controlled by Democrats.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/opinion/the-plot-to-cut-food-stamps-foiled.html?_r=0
The states are doing exactly what the farm bill — which Mr. Boehner supported — encouraged them to do: pay more to some of the poorest families in America so they neither freeze nor starve during a brutal winter. Mr. Boehner seems unaware of it, but millions of families have never recovered from the recession, and his chamber has not only refused to help them by stimulating the economy but is trying to push them through the safety net.
In a letter to Mr. Boehner, Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut said it was “shameful” to describe the states’ efforts as cheating. “Your demonization of states that have elected to provide this benefit impugns the children, the elderly, the disabled, the low-wage workers and veterans who receive such aid by implying that they are a party to something criminal,” he wrote. “To the contrary, I think most would argue that denying residents of my state $112 a month in nutrition assistance is morally wrong.”
If Mr. Boehner really wants to crack down on cheating, he might look to the carried-interest tax loophole, which allows hedge fund managers to mischaracterize their income as capital gains and costs the Treasury $11 billion a year — far more than extra dollars for food stamps. In his world, fraud occurs only when the government helps those who need it the most.
=============================================
Every time I start reading about the many ways Republicans work to screw over as many Americans as possible, it makes me want to puke. On them.
And USMB Republicans defend these creeps. I don't understand why.
