Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Food Stamp Use Soars Across U.S., and Stigma Fades (Feds want to enroll 16 million more people)
New York Times ^ | November 29, 2009 | Jason DeParle and Robert Gebeloff

Posted on 11/28/2009 5:27:37 PM PST by reaganaut1

With food stamp use at record highs and climbing every month, a program once scorned as a failed welfare scheme now helps feed one in eight Americans and one in four children.

It has grown so rapidly in places so diverse that it is becoming nearly as ordinary as the groceries it buys. More than 36 million people use inconspicuous plastic cards for staples [...].

Virtually all have incomes near or below the federal poverty line, but their eclectic ranks testify to the range of people struggling with basic needs. [...]

While the numbers have soared during the recession, the path was cleared in better times when the Bush administration led a campaign to erase the program’s stigma, calling food stamps “nutritional aid” instead of welfare, and made it easier to apply. That bipartisan effort capped an extraordinary reversal from the 1990s, when some conservatives tried to abolish the program, Congress enacted large cuts and bureaucratic hurdles chased many needy people away.

...

[T]he program is now expanding at a pace of about 20,000 people a day.

There are 239 counties in the United States where at least a quarter of the population receives food stamps

...

In more than 750 counties, the program helps feed one in three blacks. In more than 800 counties, it helps feed one in three children.

...

Although the program is growing at a record rate, the federal official who oversees it would like it to grow even faster.

“I think the response of the program has been tremendous,” said Kevin Concannon, an under secretary of agriculture, “but we’re mindful that there are another 15, 16 million who could benefit.”

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: foodstamps; welfare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-178 next last
To: Semperfiwife

Your comment is not hyperbole.


101 posted on 11/28/2009 8:16:48 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: I_Like_Spam

I hadn’t heard that!


102 posted on 11/28/2009 8:20:52 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

I remember lectures on water empires, how the empire of such systems was far more stable because he could turn off the water at a word and cities starved in weeks. Now we have a food dole democracy, and at a word, people would riot for lack of fatty fried stuff within two days.


103 posted on 11/28/2009 8:22:06 PM PST by tbw2 (Freeper sci-fi - "Humanity's Edge" - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Starve the beast!

Claim additional dependents for the year, and put the saved tax money in your own bank account. At the end of the year, pay your taxes with a check. That way, YOU get to collect the interests on that money. The government collects a lot of interest each year by holding on to peoples weekly deductions. They count on that extra tax freebie.
Also, for Christmas, by food. Everyone eats! Food is non taxable. A collection of nuts and cheap nut crackers go over well. Sweet cakes, cookies, jellies, cheeses, etc. That way, there's no sales tax. The dollar stores have baskets that can be Saran wrapped and tied with inexpensive ribbon to dress things up a bit.
Pay attention to what is taxed and what is not taxed. Limit those things that are taxed like a plague. You'll be surprised how much money you save, and how much money the politicians DON'T get.

104 posted on 11/28/2009 8:22:27 PM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Achilles Heel

The 2008 Farm Act removed the asset test completely, nationwide. A state couldn’t use federal money if they didn’t comply.


105 posted on 11/28/2009 8:25:18 PM PST by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

thank you so much


106 posted on 11/28/2009 8:25:28 PM PST by manc (Marriage is between a man and a woman, end of. -end racism end affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: tbw2
If you’re too poor to feed the kids you have, you cannot be allowed to have more children.

Seriously, you want the government to decide when a woman can give birth to a baby and when she can't? Did you just fly in from Stalingrad?

107 posted on 11/28/2009 8:28:17 PM PST by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: FReepaholic

“Indeed. The phones are FREE courtesy of your tax dollars.”

Oh you’ve got to be kidding me!


108 posted on 11/28/2009 8:33:49 PM PST by VanDeKoik (Iran doesnt have a 2nd admendment. Ya see how that turned out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Kimberly GG
New rule: You cannot vote if you are enrolled on welfare or other government assistance programs."

You know, at first glance you look at this from the perspective of saying it's not right, or good for the country, for folks to be able to vote themselves public money.

But there's another point: can you imagine how this rule would affect the behavior of politicians? 99% of the political motivation for entitlement programs is to BUY VOTES. If the programs themselves disqualified those voters--- IOW, no votes could be bought with the programs --- you'd see a lot less (ahem) "compassion" oozing out of congresscritters.

Even if the rule just applied to presidential elections, it would certainly be a step in the right direction!

And think what the Rats would save in "walking around money"? Not only do they have to buy their voters from the git-go. Then they have to pay them cash on the spot to get them on the bus to go down to the polls on Election Day.

109 posted on 11/28/2009 8:35:23 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15153812/Asset-Limit-Reform


110 posted on 11/28/2009 8:37:21 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
The Founding Fathers cared about the QUALITY of the vote, not the quantity. They wanted those with a poker in the fire to vote, which is why they developed a republic instead of a flat out majority rules democracy. The reason is they knew it wouldn't take long for the lazy to vote themsleves a bunch of "free" things.

This is why, long ago, I got out of my youthful exuberance for getting out the vote.

If people don't care enough to vote, I'm fine with that.

111 posted on 11/28/2009 8:38:18 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: manc

Several years ago I was very involved in a particular program to give donated toys to poor kids at Christmas.

When the gifts were handed out, I’d never heard so much griping in my life.

The basketball was “stupid” and “I wanted a different doll” and “look at this ugly sweater!”

No doubt some of this is just being a kid. But, really, there was no gratitude or even politeness at all.


112 posted on 11/28/2009 8:41:22 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast

1996 ‘Welfare Reform’ signed by Bill Clinton

Establishing a Five Year Lifetime Limit on Assistance: To address long-term welfare dependency, TANF placed a five year lifetime limit on assistance, but allowed states to exempt up to 20 percent of such cases for hardship reasons. States are allowed to reduce this lifetime limit below 5 years, and almost half of the states have done so.

Eligibility for TANF assistance is limited to pregnant women and families with children. Within these constraints, however, TANF allows states broad discretion in how they spend their federal block grant money.

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:NctByD-l4QwJ:www.policyalmanac.org/social_welfare/welfare.shtml+lifetime+food+stamp+limit&cd=17&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


113 posted on 11/28/2009 8:42:07 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast

I believe you are talking about the Obamaphone -— it’s available nationwide. And, yep. It’s “free.”

Oh, and don’t forget vouchers to use public transportation and even taxis in some cities. And utility vouchers.


114 posted on 11/28/2009 8:43:13 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast

House Passes Welfare Reform Reauthorization (5/16/02)

House Passes Welfare Reform Reauthorization


The House passed legislation reauthorizing the 1996 welfare reform law (PL 104-193) that eliminated the federal welfare entitlement. The bill (HR 4737) passed on May 16, 2002, on a largely party line vote of 229-197, with most Republicans supporting the bill and most Democrats opposing it. It is awaiting action in the Senate.

The House-passed bill would require states to ensure that 70 percent of welfare recipients have jobs by 2007. An estimate 58 percent of welfare recipients do not have jobs now. It would also require welfare recipients to work 40 hours per week, with at least 24 hours spent at a work site and up to 16 hours spent in training.

The bill would continue current federal spending levels on the welfare program at $16.5 billion per year and increase child care funding by $2 billion over five years. It would provide states new flexibility in implementing housing and food stamp programs. It also authorizes $300 million per year for marriage-promotion programs.

- 5/16/02


115 posted on 11/28/2009 8:43:27 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Growth is not surprising since the Dept of Ag has had an aggressive tax-payer funded ad campaign encouraging people to sign up. The ads are clearly designed to get people thinking of government food as an entitlement not welfare.
116 posted on 11/28/2009 8:44:33 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

Wow!

I wish you’d been able to vid that.


117 posted on 11/28/2009 8:45:36 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

If benefit levels were not tied to the number of children, and so long as abortion is not paid for the federal government, I’m quite sure you’d see fewer pregnancies.


118 posted on 11/28/2009 8:47:50 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
I don’t think food stamp recipients actually vote.

Oh yes they do!

Their 'church' buses them to vote.

119 posted on 11/28/2009 8:47:56 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Starve the beast!

Claim additional dependents for the year, and put the saved tax money in your own bank account. At the end of the year, pay your taxes with a check. That way, YOU get to collect the interests on that money. The government collects a lot of interest each year by holding on to peoples weekly deductions. They count on that extra tax freebie.

Also, for Christmas, by food. Everyone eats! Food is non taxable. A collection of nuts and cheap nut crackers go over well. Sweet cakes, cookies, jellies, cheeses, etc. That way, there's no sales tax. The dollar stores have baskets that can be Saran wrapped and tied with inexpensive ribbon to dress things up a bit.

Pay attention to what is taxed and what is not taxed. Limit those things that are taxed like a plague. You'll be surprised how much money you save, and how much money the politicians DON'T get.

Your post bears repeating! It is SOOO important that each of us do whatever we can to starve the beast. We can make a difference.

And, again, after you tally up your tax bill for this year, see about making a charitable donation to reduce what you give the government as much as possible.

120 posted on 11/28/2009 8:51:02 PM PST by fightinJAG (Mr. President: Why did you appoint a bunch of Communists to your Administration?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson