How the Proposed 2018 Budget Would Affect SNAP Benefits

The proposed 2018 Federal Budget includes drastic cuts to funding for several anti-poverty programs. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is to be cut by $190 billion over the next 10 years . The budget cut will affect millions of Americans, as SNAP is the largest program in the domestic hunger safety net. SNAP helps low-income individuals and families with nutrition assistance. Recipients receive a monthly stipend to purchase food. Recipients are required to work if able and can only use SNAP funds for food purchases. In 2016, around 44 million people received SNAP benefits. In 2008, 28 million people received these same benefits. SNAP is not only a stabilizing program that helps Americans survive, it helps improve lives. In 2015 alone, SNAP lifted 4.6 million people out of poverty. SNAP is essential to fighting hunger in America.

Most recipients of SNAP have fallen on hard times, like Christine.  Christine is college educated and has faced poverty for most of her adult life. Her work has mostly been in food service.  Jobs have included fast food restaurants, high-end restaurants, and even being a kitchen supervisor in a prison. Christine looks for jobs with the best benefits to support her family. She has faced unpredictable hours, hard labor, and danger in her jobs just to make a living.  The salary for these jobs is not enough for the survival of her family. Christine first applied for SNAP when her older child was 2 years old. This was not a proud moment for Christine, but she knew she needed the help. Christine has never used SNAP for more than 18 months at a time, only signing up when the assistance was necessary. Christine describes how people that are food secure cannot understand what food insecurity is really like. People that have food security do not have to make the difficult decisions that Christine and millions of others do.  Politicians making decisions on SNAP do not have to face the decision of cutting back on the quantity to buy more nutritious food or buying unhealthy food that can give families the necessary calories. Christine has worries that politicians could not imagine that her problems stretch farther than finding food. Her poverty status is an all-encompassing problem, that is aided slightly by SNAP.

Mick Mulvaney, the White House Budget Director, has presented plans to shift the responsibility of funding from the federal government to the states. This shift of funding may yield similar results to state control of the welfare system. State control of welfare has resulted in some positive and some very negative changes. The state of Arizona has put grand restrictions on their welfare system that is more extreme than any other state. Shorter time limits have been enforced and the monthly stipends are not a livable wage at a maximum of $278 per month. Other states have made similar cuts, while other states work to make the welfare system give more appropriate assistance to recipients. This means your location will dictate the benefits you receive, not your need of assistance. People fear the same thing will happen with SNAP being transferred to state control.

This budget cut will hit areas greatly affected by unemployment, like Southern and Central California. Some towns in these areas have unemployment rates as high as 19%. In addition to the financial cut, the Trump administration wants to change the work requirement waiver. People often believe that SNAP beneficiaries are people who cannot or choose not to work. A recent United States Department of Agriculture report revealed that 31.8% of SNAP households had at least one wage earner. This is necessary because of the federal work requirement. This requires all able-bodied adults without small children to work at least 20 hours per week. There is little abuse of this program because SNAP alone does not offer a living wage. SNAP needs to be supplemented with work or other government funding to survive. SNAP does not punish recipients for working, which is a common belief. For every one-dollar wage increase, the SNAP benefit decreases around 30 cents. This allows for recipients to have food security while working to provide for other necessities.

The Trump administration wants stronger requirements to be eligible to receive the benefits, perhaps modeled after what Governor Paul LePage has instituted in Maine. In Maine, the food stamp program shrank by more than 20%. Maine has work, volunteering, and job-training requirements to receive any safety-net program benefits. This puts a strain on people who have no physical disabilities but may have mental disabilities. There are many residents in Maine who have no physical restrictions, but have limitations from illnesses like depression or anxiety. The government decides who is eligible for SNAP and is able to deny anyone they deem as able-bodied.

This budget has not passed yet, so the time for action is now. Communicating with your elected officials is the most effective action you can take as a Move For Hunger advocate.

Use this directory to find contact information for your elected officials on both the local and national level. Let them know that you are a constituent who is concerned about budget cuts to federal nutrition programs and wish to speak to someone regarding these issues.

Social media is another powerful tool for communicating directly with elected officials; use this verified list of members of Congress on Twitter to instantly voice your opinion about the issues that matter to you.