Washington, D.C. – June 3, 2011 – More than 2,500 national, state, and local organizations joined in a letter sent to Congress today to urge Members to oppose proposals that cut or dismantle the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps). The letter, circulated by the National Anti-Hunger Organizations (NAHO), is being delivered to every member of Congress and the White House.
In New York, Hunger Action Network helped generate sign ons from more than 170 organizations.
"The demand at area food pantries and kitchens are at record levels, with increases of more than 50% over the last three years. Many programs are reporting their cupboards are bare. The idea that Congress would seek to slash the country's main anti-hunger program in the midst of the Great Recession shows how out of touch many elected officials are with the real problems confronting average Americans," noted Mark Dunlea, Executive Director of the Hunger Action Network of New York State.
Some recent deficit reduction proposals in Congress, particularly the House-passed (but Senate-rejected) “Ryan budget” plan, would make fundamental changes to SNAP by converting it into a “block grant” program and making drastic cuts to funding. The letter pointed out that such changes would harm millions of Americans – resulting in millions of people either being thrown out of the program or tens of millions seeing their already inadequate benefit levels reduced to the point that they would run out of food as soon as halfway through the month.
The letter and list of signatures can be found online here (pdf).
The letter describes the great strengths of the program that such proposals would undermine:
- · As millions of people became newly unemployed or underemployed in the 2008-2011 period, the program responded quickly to provide desperately needed help in the downturn.
- · Targeted to go to the neediest people in our country, 93 percent of benefits go to households with incomes below the poverty line – including millions of working poor families. One‐third of SNAP participants are in households that include senior citizens or people with disabilities, and three‐quarters of participants are in families with children.
- · The program keeps hunger at bay and lifts many households out of deep poverty. The most recent Census Bureau poverty report noted that SNAP benefits – if counted as income – would have lifted 3.6 million people above the poverty line in 2009.
- · SNAP efficiently uses existing commercial food distribution channels to avert hunger.
- · Recent months have seen natural disasters in a dozen states. In those situations as well, SNAP responds quickly and effectively to meet the increased need and help households that lose nearly everything in disasters.
Structural changes – a block grant or “global” spending cap cuts – or budget cuts would end these strengths, harm vulnerable Americans, and harm American agriculture, retailers, and the food industry.
The bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (“the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission”) ended with a bipartisan vote for a plan that explicitly recommended not making fundamental policy changes to programs, like SNAP, that provide vital support to low-income people.
“If SNAP is weakened, it would harm tens of millions of children, seniors, and working-age adults, increase poverty and hunger, damage our education and health systems, create havoc with state and federal budgets, and weaken the economy,” said Jim Weill, FRAC President. “More than 2,500 organizations are telling Congress that this is the wrong path to take.”
“Such changes would roll back a generation of progress in this nation against very deep hunger and would destroy a bipartisan compact that for two generations has developed and sustained a strong and effective nutrition safety net,” said Weill. “SNAP kept families across the country from going hungry in the middle of one of the worst recessions this country has ever seen, and has been a lifeline for those impacted by recent natural disasters. It’s a program that works, and one that Congress and the President must protect.”
