Claim: Congress is “slashing benefits.”
Food Stamp spending has skyrocketed in recent years, outpacing actual poverty levels. Today, the government spends so much money on welfare annually that it could instead write a check for double the poverty threshold to every impoverished person. Yet, despite the massive cash flow, our programs often fail to uplift Americans. The federal government continues to trap people in cycles of long-term dependency and allows resources to flow to those that welfare programs were never intended for. Policies enacted under former President Biden raised the trajectory of Food Stamp spending over the next decade by a massive $394 billion. This is a 54% increase. The Biden Administration took several steps to intentionally and permanently increase the level of Food Stamp spending, including unilaterally increasing Food Stamp benefits in 2021 by 21% above inflation through a “reevaluation” of the Thrifty Food Plan, which is used to calculate benefit levels. The House proposal would scale back some of this excessive growth under the “current CBO baseline,” yet spending would still remain well above the projections prior to President Biden taking office, according to EPIC’s Budget Director, Matthew Dickerson.Claim: Food Stamp recipients already work.
Food Stamp work requirements are not enforced in many states. Work requirements are waived completely or in parts of 31 states despite modest unemployment rates. 13 million able-bodied adults received benefits in 2022 (the latest data available), and 66% of them did not work at all. Only 27 percent of these work-capable adults worked at least 20 hours per week. Some have claimed that Congress would have to enforce “harsh” work requirements in order to achieve the proposed savings. In reality, simply enforcing the reasonable requirements that already exist would help preserve benefits for the truly needy. Strong work requirements are not demeaning – they affirm the inherent value and potential of every individual. Anything else would imply that society does not need the special contributions each American has to give. Work provides purpose, structure, and fulfillment. Able-bodied, working-age adults without dependents should be held to a respectable standard and required to work while receiving benefits. Likewise, parents should be encouraged and supported in pursuing work. The benefits of a child witnessing their parent work hard for them are undeniable, and the effects carry on through generations. Every parent able to work deserves to feel the invaluable reward of providing for their family.Claim: Congress would be harming children, seniors, and the disabled.
This group of people is exactly who the Food Stamp program was originally designed to target –and who Congress now seeks to re-prioritize. Federal eligibility requirements prioritize protecting the vulnerable and it’s time for the states to start abiding by them. Through legal loopholes and workarounds, states have expanded the Food Stamp population to include those who would not qualify under federal requirements, allowing for resources to be spent on those who do not truly need them. Congress aims to cut back spending on able-bodied adults who do not work - not children, seniors, and the disabled who the program is supposed to target. Ending these loopholes would not harm the vulnerable but instead reel in wasteful spending to preserve their resources.Claim: A state cost-share requirement would cause widespread harm.
A state cost share requirement would simply require states to bear part of the cost and take an active role in a program they administer. This would not technically change who pays for food stamps. It would still be the American taxpayers. But what it would do is incentivize states to find cost-saving measures and reduce waste. Because states currently do not have stake in the program benefit costs, they have little incentive to eliminate the tens of billions of improper payments that go out each year. They also have little incentive to remove the able-bodied adults off the benefit payroll that do not qualify under federal guidelines. After all, why wouldn’t they want to expand the program to anyone – even millionaires – if the federal government is paying for the benefits? A proposal that allows states to slowly take on program costs over the next decade would give states time to adjust.Claim: Policies like these are not what the American people asked for.
The savings proposals are aimed at curbing the billions of dollars lost annually to waste, fraud, and abuse in the Food Stamp program each year. Proposals like a state-cost share and strengthened work requirements are common sense. These reforms would rein in a program that has expanded far beyond its original intent, ensuring benefits are directed away from those exploiting the system and back to the truly needy.
