Posted on 05/20/2015 4:17:11 PM PDT by upchuck
Wisconsin’s State Assembly approved legislation last week that puts in place new rules about what recipients of food stamps may purchase with the benefits.
Assembly Bill 177 would limit the types of food that could be purchased with Wisconsin’s food stamp program, FoodShare.
In addition to banning the purchase of foods such as lobster with the publicly-funded program, the legislation would also require that just over two-thirds of the benefits be used to purchase healthy foods:
“Under this bill, DHS [Department of Health Services] must require that not less than 67 percent of the SNAP benefits used by a recipient in a month be used to purchase any of the following foods: foods that are on the list of foods authorized for the federal special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children (WIC foods); beef; pork; chicken; fish; fresh produce; and fresh, frozen, and canned white potatoes. In addition, DHS must prohibit using SNAP benefits for the purchase of crab, lobster, shrimp, or any other shellfish.”
The bill was passed in a 60-35 vote.
Supporters say the measure is fiscally responsible and encourages healthy eating, while opponents say that limiting the types of food that can be purchased places additional hardship on those receiving aid.
“A lot of people, an awful lot of people who are on FoodShare are also on BadgerCare, so there is a direct financial benefit not just to the individual, which of course is obvious to have better health, but also to state taxpayers and society as a whole,” Rep. Robin Vos, R-Rochester, told the Associated Press.
“It’s a restriction that’s designed just to make the lives of those that are already struggling that much harder,” Rep. Lisa Subeck, D-Madison, told The Capital Times. “And instead, we should be focusing not on the foods people buy but on putting people to work by creating jobs that get people off of FoodShare.”
Rachel Sheffield, a policy analyst for The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society, said that the “food stamps program is in serious need of reform.”
“Most importantly food stamps should include a work requirement that requires able-bodied adults to work, prepare for work or look for work in exchange for receiving assistance,” said Sheffield.
The bill will go on to the state Senate for approval. The AP reports that the Wisconsin Senate declined to take up a similar bill last year.
No, I mean Medicare, and now that you mention it, Medicaid too. And Obamster care. These are govt programs. No chocolate cake for you! :-)
Come on virgil. The notion is that there can be hundreds of food and non-food items that can be allowed for purchase under these programs; but there are also a smaller set of other items that absolutely should not be allowed, and which prohibition can be cured by software systems. And those businesses that enable these people to break the law under these programs should be severely punished.
““And instead, we should be focusing not on the foods people buy but on putting people to work by creating jobs that get people off of FoodShare.””
Hopefully the ones who miss buying hot pockets and pizza rolls will get a job so they can buy them.
Starting last year at the Lilac Fest here in Rochester, NY EBT cards are o.k. to purchase from concession stands. Something about not wanting to stigmatize those using them.
On second thought, this will cause a rash of kitchen fires as people will have to learn to cook on a stove instead of using a microwave.
Yes, they may find a way, but let’s not make LEGAL for them to currently do what they are now allowed to do, which is infuriating. And let’s not give up.
Get real. I watch Holder’s people buy lobster for themselves and shrimp for the pets. The going rate around here is to go shopping with a card holder. Buy $100 worth of groceries and hand them $50 cash once outside.
I agree that there are lots of items that shouldn’t be paid for by these benefits, and it can be easily controlled electronically. Just leave my canned vegetables alone. If I want steak today, I’ll have a bowl of cereal on another day. I can make that card stretch farther than the state can.
Doesn’t the EBT card access both a Food Stamps and general welfare accounts?
IIRC general welfare can be spent on anything?
Make food stamp recipients eat exactly the same meals the First Lady wants your kids to eat at their school lunch. Nothing more and nothing less.
It’s only fair.
L
For those that are as reasonable as you, yes; but for those that are irresponsible, clamp down. I tend to think there are a whole lot more that are behaving irresponsibly under these programs than otherwise. But that’s a whole different matter. Thanks.
Sorry, I do not know, and hopefully, will never need to experience it to know.
I see your point.
But for the record, I did not see anything in the article that said canned vegetables would be banned. My problem is with people being allowed to use food stamps/welfare to purchase filet mignon and lobster, when ground beef and flounder filets are just as nutritious and can feed their families for a much greater number of meals.
Yes, it pisses me off when welfare recipients use money to eat ‘higher on the hog’ than I can afford to eat.
Apples and oranges, doofus.
Medicaire (sic) is funded through (non-government) worker's paycheck deductions for their entire working lifetime
Welfare is redistribution of money stolen, earned by other people with real, productive jobs.
I have mentioned before that I am a triage interviewer at a local food/clothing/etc. bank.
Most of the time when a client wants food and I ask why the response is, "My food stamps ran out."
Well, if you're gonna spend your food stamps on chips, soda and junk the stamps are gonna run out. Food stamps are supposed to be used to buy healthy food.
SNAP stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Supplemental... that's important. Stamps are not meant to supply primary nutrition.
The program is crawling with fraud and needs to be reformed.
I think there’s lots of people receiving these benefits (I actually don’t, btw)who are reasonable, but there has been a lot of fraud by others. They get used more like S&H Green Stamps (if you remember those). Like a kind of barter.
I think he was asking me that question rhetorically.
If I believe the government has no place in how I raise my family, it is with the understanding that belief applies to all families.
I was forced on to the healthcare market this year. Unable to afford a policy on the open market, I had to purchase one on the federal exchange. Yes, I get a subsidy.
I would not be happy if there was a requirement to monitor my grocery purchases, my alcohol intake, my level of physical activity, etc simply because my subsidy is taxpayer money. Sounds far fetched, once they figure out a way to do it, they will.
LMAO!! Imagine the flame wars here if that, God forbid, ever happened. I'd be banned before the first 10 posts. :)
The best way to keep the government out of our lives is not to let them in.
Put ‘em on the Moochelle diet. Welfare/foodstamps will disappear overnight.
The receipt will split the items into two separate itemized totals...
*********************
It’s not exempt v. non-exempt ,, it’s the MASSIVE relational database needed to track EVERY item purchased so that later in the month a computation can be made to see if they are at 66% non-junk or 68.7% to approve or deny the purchase of a burrito at 7-11 ,, while the on-demand report is being compiled and analyzed the other people in line are just waiting and waiting...
and then you have the issue of comparing the good food to bad food purchases ... do you go by weight? suggested servings? or some other metric? Will buying one GIANT sized Doritos instead of two small bags be approved?
This will be unworkable... simply ban the junk food from the system...
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.