Replies

$200 worth of food stamps still cost the same whether they are used to purchase chips & dip or beans & cans of peas.

It seems to me we should be encouraging more of these people to be independent and think for themselves. The natural consequences of spending your grocery money foolishly is going hungry. The natural consequences of not having a job used to be going hungry and having no place to live. My how things have changed.

Protecting people who are on the public dole from the natural consequences of their bad choices isn’t helping anyone. What benefit or cost saving is there to the taxpayers would there be to control what these people are buying?

You have to pay someone to come up with an increasingly long list of taboo foods. Who decides what is on this list? No soda pop? Okay how about fruit juices which can contain just as much sugar? What about a jar of pickles? Too much sodium? A dozen eggs and a pound of butter. Too much fat? Are they allowed to buy any sugar? If so can they buy flour, eggs and butter too and make their own cookies and cakes? This gets ridiculous.

Unless we want the pleasure of just telling these people they can’t eat certain foods because we want to punish them for being on welfare and we don’t think they should be able to eat those things I see no relief to the taxpayer in this.

Fixing fraud and abuse is one thing. This is something else entirely.

I agree with you on both points. Actions have consequences. The consequence of spending a month's worth of benefits during the first week of the month is no benefits the other 3 weeks. It makes no difference what it is spent on. When it is gone, it is gone.

A better way to save taxpayer money in the food stamp program is fighting fraud and abuse. Tighten up the program in a way which makes fraud more difficult. Purchases should be used in grocery stores only. No fast food restaurants, fast food places, stop & go marts, etc.

I would be a fool to deny there is a segment in our society who have learned how to game the system and as a result live off of our dimes. Punish the individuals, not the entire class.

There should be stiff penalties for anyone applying for and receiving benefits under false pretenses. Bartering food stamps and using someone else’s card should be regarded as a serious crime, prosecuted with no plea deals.

Those on the retail side involved in fraud should be prosecuted as harshly as the recipient.

I reject the notion parents recieving SNAP benefits lose something we all hold precious-making decisions regarding what is best for our families. Or that somehow because they are on food stamps they have a need to be told what is good and what is bad.

For those who believe they have a right to dictate what someone can buy because it is their money, why stop with what items can be purchased? Why not insist store brands must be purchased instead of brand names? Maybe you should insist a certain percentage of items bought must be sale items. How about where they shop? Instead of Publix (most expensive in my area ) make them shop at Aldie’s. A slippery slope if there ever was one.