The food stamp program, serving 43 million people is the largest U.S. public nutrition program. But there is mounting evidence its benefits, averaging $1.40 per meal, are inadequate for a healthy diet, two anti-hunger groups told a House Agriculture subcommittee. A third group recommended that Congress “provide a more appropriate level of assistance.”
Food stamps are the largest element in the so-called farm bills written every few years. The program cost $71 billion in fiscal 2016. A staunch conservative, House Agriculture chairman Michael Conaway, has said he intends to include “meaningful reforms” of the program, formally the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), in the 2018 farm bill, such as stricter work requirements for able-bodied adults without children.
At present, food stamp benefits are tied to the Thrifty Food Plan, the lowest-cost of four USDA food plans that estimate the types and quantities of food needed for a nutritious diet. Josh Protas of Mazon said Congress should switch to the Low-Cost Food Plan, one step up from the Thrifty Food Plan “in order to provide a more appropriate level of assistance and empower food-insecure families to better meet their nutritional needs.”
The Low-Cost plan expends 30 percent more on food than the Thrifty Food Plan. For example, a family of four with two school-age children would spend $638 a month under the Thrifty Food Plan and $839 under the Low-Cost Food Plan, according to the latest USDA estimate.
“It would provide additional benefits,” said Stacy Dean of the think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, who said there was “increasing concern and growing evidence that SNAP’s basic benefit level is out of date and not sufficient to ensure that participating households can afford a healthy diet.”
Dean said the Thrifty Food Plan “is just out of sync with what we’re all buying” and what is considered healthy. It assumes recipients will devote up to two hours a day in food preparation and will eat “far more of certain types of food – such as dry beans and fluid milk – and far less of other foods, including items commonly consumed like cheese and chicken,” said Dean. Other studies say food stamp recipients report running out of food before the end of month.
Russell Sykes of the American Public Human Services Association suggested a pilot project to test the impact of the Low-Cost plan and the Thrifty plan. Like Dean, he said there was increasing evidence that benefits may be insufficient at current levels.
“Such a significant increase (in benefits nationwide) may not be feasible for the 2018 farm bill,” said Dean. “Yet evidence is mounting that SNAP’s benefit is insufficient for all families to meet their basic food needs with a healthy diet.”
Protas and Dean also spoke against draconian restrictions on benefits to able-bodied adults, the group eyed by Conaway. Adults from 18-50 years of age with no dependents are limited to 90 days of food stamp benefits in a three-year period if they are not working or in a job-training program for least 20 hours a week.
Massachusetts Rep. Jim McGovern, a Democrat, said, “We need to increase the SNAP benefit” and warned, “Don’t screw around with the program, period.” Arguably the leading congressional proponent of public nutrition programs, McGovern said he opposed block grants, funding cuts or new restrictions on eligibility for food stamps.
To watch a video of the hearing or to read the statements of witnesses and the opening statement by subcommittee Glenn Thompson, click here.