During the debate in the U.S. House of Representatives in
June 2013 on a proposed $20.5 billion in cuts over 10 years to the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps, proponents of the cuts denied that they would make it more difficult
for the poor to feed themselves. Rep. Rick Crawford claimed that the cuts would
be “eliminating abuse.”[1]
For example, some drug addicts sell their “food stamps” for something like half
value and use the cash to buy drugs. The addicts manage to get their food at pantries
and soup kitchens. While such fraud exists, the proposed cuts would have hit
bone. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, nearly 2 million
people would lose SNAP eligibility were the cuts to become law.[2]
After the debate, “Tea Party” Republicans wanting even more cut combined with
Democrats against any cuts defeated the proposal.
The full essay is at "Congressional Cuts to Food Stamps."
1. Ned Resnikoff, “House Debates $20.5 Billion Cuts to Food Stamps,” MSNBC, June 18, 2013.
The full essay is at "Congressional Cuts to Food Stamps."
1. Ned Resnikoff, “House Debates $20.5 Billion Cuts to Food Stamps,” MSNBC, June 18, 2013.
2. Dottie Rosenbaum and Stacy Dean, “House Agricultural Committee Farm Bill Would Cut Nearly 2 Million People Off SNAP,” The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, May 16, 2013. “By eliminating the categorical eligibility state option, which over 40 states have adopted, the bill would cut nearly 2 million low-income people off SNAP.”
