Reforming the food stamps program
Monday, September 23, 2013
According to some
commentators on the left, the Republicans in the House are greedy
sociopathic evil monsters who want to starve children and old ladies. Of
course they are talking about the bill that the House GOP passed that
will result in an approximate 5% savings from the food stamp (SNAP)
program.
Of course it's no more than the usual liberal lies. In the first place, the underaged, parents with children, the elderly and the disabled who are unable to work would see absolutely no reduction in benefits. However in keeping with welfare reform passed by a bipartisan majority in Congress in 1996, able bodied food stamp recipients who do not have children at home would be required to enroll in a supervised employment search program in order to remain eligible for benefits. Anyone who makes a good faith effort to find a job and can't would continue to receive uninterrupted benefits. Only those who refused to cooperate with the program would eventually face a discontinuation of benefits.
This proposal is intended to help people help themselves. It encourages people who are in a position to look for work to do so. It's a gentle nudge toward self sufficiency. And after all, the Food Stamp program was initially intended as a temporary stopgap measure to help people until their circumstances got better. But for many it has become a long term way of life. But nevertheless, only able bodied recipients without children would be affected by this change in the law.
And where does the 5% figure come from? That is the amount that the non partisan CBO estimates would be saved by the food stamp program if that work search requirement for able bodied recipients is implemented.
Nobody is going to be starving. Everyone who needs help will get it. It's just that if you are able bodied without children you will be required to make at least some small effort to help yourself. The supervised job search requirement would take up about two hours weekly.
This proposed change in the food stamp regulations is reasonable and compassionate. What could be more compassionate than helping someone get a job so that they can enjoy the dignity of gainful employment and self sufficiency?
Of course it's no more than the usual liberal lies. In the first place, the underaged, parents with children, the elderly and the disabled who are unable to work would see absolutely no reduction in benefits. However in keeping with welfare reform passed by a bipartisan majority in Congress in 1996, able bodied food stamp recipients who do not have children at home would be required to enroll in a supervised employment search program in order to remain eligible for benefits. Anyone who makes a good faith effort to find a job and can't would continue to receive uninterrupted benefits. Only those who refused to cooperate with the program would eventually face a discontinuation of benefits.
This proposal is intended to help people help themselves. It encourages people who are in a position to look for work to do so. It's a gentle nudge toward self sufficiency. And after all, the Food Stamp program was initially intended as a temporary stopgap measure to help people until their circumstances got better. But for many it has become a long term way of life. But nevertheless, only able bodied recipients without children would be affected by this change in the law.
And where does the 5% figure come from? That is the amount that the non partisan CBO estimates would be saved by the food stamp program if that work search requirement for able bodied recipients is implemented.
Nobody is going to be starving. Everyone who needs help will get it. It's just that if you are able bodied without children you will be required to make at least some small effort to help yourself. The supervised job search requirement would take up about two hours weekly.
This proposed change in the food stamp regulations is reasonable and compassionate. What could be more compassionate than helping someone get a job so that they can enjoy the dignity of gainful employment and self sufficiency?
posted by John, 6:43 PM
