SNAP important protection against hunger

The highly effective federal assistance program called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, makes it possible for Americans in low income households to protect themselves from hunger and malnutrition. As currently administered, SNAP has one of the lowest error rates in providing benefits to eligible households of any federal program. It reaches the low income populations for which it is intended.

Sadly, some in Congress want deep cuts to SNAP along with structural changes that will undermine this vital program. Approximately 1 million unemployed, childless Americans will be cut from SNAP in 2016. They will be cut from the program after three months regardless of how hard they are seeking employment. With reduced options, they will put additional demands on food banks, pantries, food kitchens and even homeless shelters as some will forgo rent payments to buy food.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan proposes to convert SNAP into a block grant program, i.e. a fixed lump sum amount given to states. This change would allow states to adjust eligibility and benefits as they see fit. In doing so, it would undermine the current system that has been so effective in reaching those in need while cutting fraud, waste, and abuse. It would eliminate the flexibility that allows for increased benefits in times of disasters like hurricanes, floods, and forest fires, and steep downturns in the economy.

Representative Ryan proposes to cut SNAP funding by $125 billion between 2021 and 2025. This would force millions of people out of the program, or cause a significant reduction in already low (about $1.40 per meal per person) benefits. Cuts to SNAP would make it harder for families to pull themselves out of poverty. SNAP kept nearly 5 million people out of poverty last year. If cuts were to come solely from eliminating eligibility for categories of now eligible households or individuals, about 10 million people would be cut from the program each year.

In the event of across-the-board cuts, SNAP benefits would have to be reduced by an average of more than $40 per person per month beginning in 2019. With this budget plan, the risk of crushing hunger and real malnutrition would be substantially increased. What effect would this have on our society?

According to a recent USDA data analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, in 2015 SNAP benefited 1 in 9, or 12 percent of Montana residents. Of those 119,000 eligible Montanans, 68 percent were in families with children, 29 percent in families with members who are elderly or have disabilities, and almost 44 percent in working families. In the bigger picture, SNAP reached 45.4 billion total United States participants. Seventy-five percent of American SNAP households included a child, elderly person, or an individual with disabilities.

While private charities play important roles, the food pantries and food banks combined equal just 6 percent of food that federal nutrition programs provide mainly via SNAP, but also through school lunch programs, WIC, and a few other federal nutrition programs.

As a further benefit, Moody’s Analytics estimates that in an economy still recovering from the Great Recession, $1 in SNAP benefits generates $1.70 in economic activity. With SNAP, people are able to buy nutritious food. Without SNAP, low wage single people and working families will suffer. In plain terms more Montana children will go to bed hungry.

It is essential to the health and general well being of our citizenry that all have enough to eat. Children need good nutrition to learn and grow. Adults need to be in good health to be productive. Montana is a beautiful place to visit. For all who live here, it should be a place where none go hungry.

Please contact our members of Congress and urge them to protect SNAP by resisting radical, destructive changes to this fine program. They are Sen. Jon Tester, Sen. Steve Daines, and Rep. Ryan Zinke.

Karen Cunningham, Results Volunteer, Coram