RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Entralgo writes: "Next week, the House will vote on a farm bill largely constructed by Republicans. The bill, which traditionally has been a bipartisan effort, will re-authorize a number of farm and nutrition assistance programs - this includes funds for food stamps, officially known as Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP)."

Shopping in Boston. (photo: ThinkProgress)
Shopping in Boston. (photo: ThinkProgress)


The GOP Farm Bill Actually Punishes Working Families Receiving SNAP

By Rebekah Entralgo, ThinkProgress

13 May 18


The devil is in the details.

ext week, the House will vote on a farm bill largely constructed by Republicans. The bill, which traditionally has been a bipartisan effort, will re-authorize a number of farm and nutrition assistance programs — this includes funds for food stamps, officially known as Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP).

One of the most controversial parts of the farm bill are the tough work requirements for SNAP recipients. The work requirements are sure to please outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has tried to restrict access to government assistance programs ever since he was elected to Congress 20 years ago.

They are also sure to make President Donald Trump happy. Reportedly Trump will veto the bill unless even tougher work requirements are implemented. As ThinkProgress has previously reported, SNAP recipients are already subject to some work requirements.

Data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation show 58 percent of working-age, nondisabled SNAP households are employed while receiving benefits; that figure rises to 62 percent for households with children.

Hidden in the House farm bill draft, however, is a sinister measure that could harm families receiving SNAP who are already working, the very group the GOP claims to support. The move exposes the Republican party’s true end game: the goal has never been to lift low-income families out of poverty, but rather to punish them by creating more bureaucratic hoops for them to jump through.

The farm bill will strike a provision called “broad-based categorical eligibility,” which allows states to enroll their residents in SNAP if they can prove they qualify for other income-based public assistance programs. It provides a safety net for families and individuals working low-wage jobs that put them right above the income cutoff for SNAP.

The policy is extremely popular, with 42 states currently using broad-based categorical eligibility.

Those who benefit from the program are mainly low-income working families with an income close to SNAP’s cutoff of 130 percent of the federal poverty level, which amounts to roughly $1,702 a month for a family of three. These families are earning an income, yet still face significant costs like child care, transportation, or medical expenses, which make it difficult to afford food.

“A single mother with two children working full time at $12.50 an hour would have income at 129 percent of the poverty level and receive about $142 a month from SNAP, making up about 7 percent of her total monthly income,” the Center on Budget Budget and Policy Priorities estimates. “If her hourly wage increased by just 50 cents (or $87 a month), lifting her income just above 130 percent of the federal poverty limit, the family would become ineligible for SNAP under the federal income eligibility cut-off.”

This is where categorical eligibility comes in.

The 42 states that adopted the policy can create a SNAP cutoff level to reflect their own cost of living. In California, for example, the cutoff is 200 percent of the federal poverty level because rents and childcare costs are much higher.

“Categorical eligibility is critical for Californians because it allows for low-income families to get SNAP benefits even if their income doesn’t reflect the federal poverty level once you factor in cost of living,” Jared Call, managing policy advocate at California Food Policy Advocates told ThinkProgress.

The policy also helps promote work by slowly phasing out SNAP benefits as a household gains more earnings.

The CPBB, however, estimates that by striking categorical eligibility from the farm bill, households close to the income threshold that begin to make earnings slightly above the federal threshold would lose all of their SNAP benefits at once.  That could leave the family worse off than before their wage increase.

“If you think about someone working a minimum wage job in the service industry, they don’t have control over their hours or schedule,” Call said. “Without categorical eligibility, they would have to report the extra earnings and be cut off from SNAP completely.”

In rural areas, categorical eligibility is essential for low-income families on SNAP that need multiple vehicles to travel long distances into town. Without it, families would have to claim a second car as an asset, and sell it off to meet SNAP’s federal requirements of one car per family.

Eliminating categorical eligibility would also jeopardize free school lunch for low-income children. The traditional way for a child to recieve free school lunch is through a paper application filled out by the child’s parent. In states that implemented categorical eligibility, however, a child whose family receives SNAP benefits is automatically enrolled by the district into the free school lunch program, ensuring that every child whose family is struggling to make ends meet is guaranteed one meal a day. Roughly 275,000 students would be in jeopardy of losing their free lunches if categorical eligibilty was eliminated.

Above all, curtailing categorical eligibility and imposing tougher work requirements just creates more red tape for low-income families. The policies proposed in the House version of the farm bill don’t encourge work, but rather punish families already working.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+3 # uuzul 2018-05-13 11:05
The amount of hoops and paperwork a person has to go through to prove they are poor is staggering. That is a single person. The moment you begin work, you must supply all sorts of proof of your hours and income monthly. If your housing situation changes, you must submit more paperwork. Add kids and a spouse into the picture and it generates more paperwork. Now, try to keep up with all this when the state and/or county cuts their staff drastically. In this county (Douglas County, OR) not only were the actual social workers fired to be replaced with social service 'technicians' (folks literally taken off the street and given a couple weeks training to do paperwork), even these workers were trimmed back during the last year! If you are in a Section 8 (HUD) house, have kids, are working (often 2 or 3 jobs), have SNAP and so on, you could spend an entire day once every 6 months driving 70 miles to Roseburg with all your paperwork -- and pray you've got everything they need --- to keep getting help. This means taking time off from work, paying for gas, hoping the old car makes it there and .... hoping your 'technician' hasn't called in sick. Being poor is a job in itself. Get a job to get SNAP? You have got to be joking! The poor are already working full time just to get the help they need so they're not having to live under a bridge. And a lot of the poor aren't able to meet those challenges. A lot of the poor DO live under the bridge, or in the woods, or on the street.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN