Homeless people in front of the Martin Luther King Jr. Library in Washington DC, waiting for shuttles that will take them to food shelters. Credit: Ramy Srour/IPS

By Ramy Srour
WASHINGTON, Oct 17 2013 (IPS)

Near the Martin Luther King Jr. Library in downtown Washington, just a few blocks away from the federal district, dozens of homeless men and women wait for the evening shuttles that will take them to their dinners at one of many food shelters around the city.

They can get by during the day with the few dimes and quarters spared by passersby, but the only daily meal they can really count on is the one they will get at the local food shelter, and so for them, hunger is a very real problem.

Two weeks before federal legislation that will cut funding from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, goes into effect on Nov. 1,  thousands of families around the country wonder how they will put food on the  table, while the homeless wonder about meals from shelters, because the one meal they used to count on is no longer a guarantee. "The bill comes at a terrible time, when the needs in this country are tremendous."
-- Josh Protas

Last month, the Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Frank Lukas (R-OK), introduced new legislation that will cut almost 40 billion dollars from the SNAP programme, the main source of food funding for thousands of struggling families across the country.

According to a statement released by Lukas after the bill was narrowly approved in the House, the new bill “encourages and enables work participation, closes programme loopholes, and eliminates waste, fraud and abuse while saving the American taxpayer nearly 40 billion dollars.”

‘This is not right’

But while the SNAP cuts may save the U.S. government budget billions, the effects on millions of struggling Americans will be catastrophic, critics say.

“The bill comes at a terrible time, when the needs in this country are tremendous,” Josh Protas, the director of government affairs at Mazon, a Jewish advocacy group that fights hunger in the United States, told IPS. He said the cuts will have a devastating effect on people struggling economically and on food banks and shelters across the country.

“The new cuts will not be able to compensate for the high demand at food banks and shelters, which are already incredibly stretched,” he said.

Bread for the World, a Christian advocacy group, has been pushing Congress to protect the SNAP programme since the new cuts were introduced last September.

“Any kind of cut is really going to hurt families,” Christine Ashley, an analyst at Bread for the World, told IPS. “We estimate that the new cuts will take as much as 36 dollars a month from each family…Think how [many] groceries you can buy with that amount.”

Feeding America, one of the largest hunger-relief organisations in the country, noted in a recent report that up to 75 percent of SNAP households include a child or an elderly or disabled person, all of whom will be affected by the cuts.

Mr. Valentine, 52, is a U.S. Marine Corps veteran who served for eight years. He is now homeless and unemployed, and he told IPS that he relies on food stamps for all his meals. When asked about the upcoming cuts, he expressed desperation and much frustration.

“These cuts, this is not right,” he told IPS. “I don’t know what I’m going to do if they take this money away from me. I have a wife and an 11-year old daughter. We live off food stamps.” He cannot hide his exasperation as he awaits the daily 6:15 pm van that will bring him and others like him to Adam’s Place Emergency Shelter in northeast Washington for a hot meal.

Valentine also believes that a consequence of the cuts will be an increase in crime. “If people get their stamps cut off, you’re going to see more desperate people committing robberies and things like that. Crime is just going to go up.”

Increased demand on charities

The SNAP cuts come at a critical juncture, as federal employees are still trying to recover from a government shutdown that left them without income for over two weeks. In fact, those federal workers with lower incomes have turned to community shelters to get food on their tables.

“With the government shutdown, we have seen a huge increase in people coming to us for food,” David O. Treadwell, executive director of Central Union Mission, Washington’s oldest social service agency, told IPS. “The SNAP cuts are only going to exacerbate this situation.”

The Central Union Mission is one of several non-profit organisations that provide food for people who do not receive food stamps. Located in the Chinatown district, the Mission runs a Food Place Centre in northeast Washington, where volunteers give away up to 125 food bags per day.

According to Jeff, the food service manager at the Mission, people who come to the Mission simply cannot make it from one paycheck to the next. “It’s already a bad situation,” he said. “It’s only going to get worse.”

As the cuts go into effect, organisations like the Central Union Mission will face considerable increase in demand as people turn to organisations that will feed them without stamps.

Room for hope

The SNAP cuts are part of the larger Farm Bill that was approved by a small majority in the House last month. The new bill is likely to penalise millions of unemployed Americans who cannot find work and who will be immediately removed from the SNAP programme.

“Rather than help unemployed workers who have been hit hardest by the recent economic downturn, this bill would penalise many of those who can’t find jobs by throwing them off SNAP,” Bread for the World and Mazon said in a joint statement with other hunger-relief organisations.

“We will continue to push Congress to protect the SNAP programme in any budget bill,” Bread for the World’s Ashley told IPS. “The bill passed only by a seven-vote margin. This means that there is still enough bipartisan support to keep SNAP alive.”

The U.S. Congress is on the brink of making billions of dollars in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, which provides direct benefits to individuals and families in poverty.

SNAP benefits are already set to decrease in November 2013, when increased benefits that were included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, or federal stimulus package, expire.

A selection of foods available on a food stamp budget. Credit: Miss Karen/cc by 2.0

Benefits – which currently represent a “bare bones diet” prepared by the federal government – will already decrease between eight and 25 dollars per month, depending on household size. The average benefit is already as low as one dollar and 46 cents per person per meal.

But that is not enough for the current Congress, which is seeking to squeeze even more money out of the emergency food programme.

Groups like the Progressive Democrats of America have been circulating an online petition to oppose the cuts.

“There is a push to end entitlements, and if you‘ve got a push to end entitlements, no matter what formula they use, people will be hurting,” Dr. Joyce Dorsey, first vice chair for the National Community Action Partnership, told IPS.

“Food is a major issue for people who really just can’t afford groceries. What we realise is the average low-income person is on minimum wage or a fixed income. Most poor people do work. They may not work full-time jobs,” Dorsey said.

“There are no other income sources to turn to – the jobs are still hard to find, or jobs are not paying wages that allow a person to live at the standard level in their region, then naturally they’re going to need their assistance.”

Today, a record 47.5 million U.S. citizens receive emergency food assistance through the SNAP programme, according to the most recent data from the Department of Agriculture, making up more than 15 percent of all U.S. residents.

The debate is centring around the Agriculture, Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2013 – commonly known as the Farm Bill – which Congress typically reenacts every five years to set national policies for agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry.

On May 15, the Republican-led House Agriculture Committee voted to approve nearly 21 billion dollars in cuts to SNAP. The cuts would represent a loss of benefits to nearly two million people, including children, by changing the eligibility requirements.

These are people who are currently eligible to receive food stamps because they have disposable incomes below the poverty line, even if they have assets or gross incomes that push them above the SNAP eligibility threshold.

Currently, federal law allows these people to be deemed eligible for SNAP if they are deemed eligible for another state-run programme under the Temporary Aid for Needy Families block grant.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), many low-income U.S. households that own a modest car would be impacted. It may also include working families with high childcare costs, or seniors with high medical bills.

The House bill also would eliminate SNAP incentive payments to states that have improved payment accuracy and service delivery; would cut nutrition education funding; and would curtail an option that allows states to approve families for SNAP benefits if they already qualify for low income heating assistance – something the Senate version of the Farm Bill also does.

On May 14, the Democratic-led Senate Agriculture Committee voted during a hearing to approve 4.1 billion dollars in cuts to SNAP.

“It stops overpayments to a small number of individuals in the programme… A small number can claim a heating bill they don’t have, on food assistance, to get additional benefits above and beyond,” Cullin Schwarz, a spokesman for the Senator Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat from Michigan who chairs the Committee, told IPS.

Schwarz claims states are using administrative tactics – qualifying people for separate energy assistance payments of under 10 dollars per year – purportedly for the sole purpose of increasing their food stamp eligibility.

“Fifteen states are providing a very small amount of home heating assistance, as little as one dollar or 10 cents per year. There are some folks who don’t have a heating bill, it’s included in their rent. That [dollar] doesn’t really help someone pay heating – what it does, they can claim both rent and a heating bill they don’t have on their application,” he said.

If enacted, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 500,000 people will receive on average 90 dollars less under the Senate bill.

But Stabenow’s office insists this is not a cut to the benefit structure. “They’re going to get exactly what they’re supposed to get on the programme based on their real expenses,” Schwarz said.

When asked what would likely come out of House and Senate negotiations, Schwarz said, “If Republicans can up with additional ways to reduce spending that does not reduce standard benefits or harm truly needy families… we’re open to discussing those.”

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat from New York, offered an amendment to strike the SNAP cuts from the Farm Bill, and to offset the costs by limiting crop insurance reimbursements to providers.

Congress is encouraging farmers to purchase crop insurance, and Congress is subsidising the crop insurance companies, as it is also ending a longstanding policy of direct payments to farmers. This switch saves 16.5 billion dollars from the federal budget.

Gillibrand contends the reimbursements, however, are corporate welfare, in some cases for overseas companies.

“Families who are living in poverty, our children, our veterans, our seniors, some of our active duty personnel are going to suffer if we cut food stamps. I believe we should not be balancing the debt or the deficit on the backs of these hardworking Americans who are just hungry,” Gillibrand said during the hearing.

“And I think it is a moral statement, and obviously I will fight against any cuts to the food stamp programme and I want people to think about what they’re actually doing when they offer, the nature of these amendments,” Gillibrand said.

Gillibrand brought the amendment to the Senate floor debate on the Farm Bill.

The amendment failed in a vote of 26 to 70, with more than half of the Democratic caucus joining nearly all Republicans in voting no.

However, an amendment by Senator David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana, to end SNAP eligibility for convicted violent rapists, pedophiles, and murderers, passed by unanimous consent.