Posted on 05/18/2025 5:12:42 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Down in the swamps of Washington, D.C., our Congress is said to be hard at work hammering out a budget for the coming fiscal year. With a crisis of massive deficits looming, supposedly they are going to come up with some major areas where government spending can be cut.
One of the areas under consideration for significant cuts is the program formally known as the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” or SNAP, and informally known as “food stamps.” According to the latest data from the Department of Agriculture, as of February 2025 the SNAP program had some 42+ million “participation persons,” with the cost of the program running at just under $8 billion per month, which is close to $100 billion per year.
Is it possible to achieve meaningful savings in this program? That depends on whether you think that the government’s goal should be to maximize the number of people living on handouts and in a state of dependency, or whether instead you think that the government’s goal should be to maximize the number of people living by their own resources and without dependency. The history of the program over the past several decades would suggest that plenty of current program participants are fully capable of making it on their own.
However, needless to say, the left-wing press has risen to the occasion to defend every last penny of current spending on the ground that any cut would constitute a cruel blow to the vulnerable. For one example among many that are available, let me pick on my usual whipping boy, the New York Times. The Times has a piece from Monday (May 12) with the headline and subheadline “Republicans Target Federal Anti-Hunger Program as They Prepare Trump Tax Package; Limiting funding for SNAP could help defray the costs of President Trump’s tax plans, but could result in millions of low-income families losing access to aid.” Excerpt:
House Republicans on Monday proposed a series of sharp restrictions on the federal anti-hunger program known as food stamps, seeking to limit its funding and benefits as part of a sprawling package to advance President Trump’s tax cuts. . . . The moves could result in potentially millions of low-income families losing access to the safety net program.
On cue, the Times rolls out a program advocate to throw around some inflammatory rhetoric:
Proponents of the food stamp program say that it has long served as a critical lifeline for low-income families by ensuring that they do not experience hunger. . . . “Slashing billions from SNAP would deepen hunger, increase poverty, and weaken communities,” said Crystal FitzSimons, interim president of the Food Research & Action Center, an advocacy group.
However, looking at the history of the program, what emerges is that it became bloated during the Covid pandemic, and the Bidenauts were only to happy to keep it that way. The best resource I find for a counter-view on food stamps is something called the Economic Policy Innovation Center, or EPIC. They have a web page called the EPIC Food Stamps Resource, updated to May 1, 2025. Some key data:
- In 2001, when Bill Clinton left office, the number of participants in the food stamp program was 17.3 million.
- During the George W. Bush years, food stamp enrollment went up substantially, reaching 28 million in 2008.
- But then, once Barack Obama took office, enrollment really started to soar. As recounted in this Manhattan Contrarian post from 2013, the Obama administration undertook an aggressive advertising and outreach effort to maximize food stamp enrollment. By 2013, enrollment had reached 47.24 million. Essentially all of that increase took place during times of economic expansion, when the normal expectation would be that enrollment would decline.
- During his first term, Trump and his people made substantial progress in decreasing the food stamp rolls. By Trump’s last year in office, enrollment was down to just over 34 million, almost a 30% decrease.
Covid was the excuse for letting the food stamp rolls begin to explode again. But at this point the pandemic has been over for at least three years. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the rolls are at a high level because the Biden people wanted them to be at a high level.
EPIC gives some insights into how the numbers come to be so high. For example, the food stamp program supposedly has work requirements for any able-bodied adults. But the work requirements “are currently waived completely or in part in 34 states.” As a result, many able-bodied adults enrolled in the program simply do not work. EPIC gives figures for 2017-19: “Before the pandemic and Biden expansions, 13 million able-bodied adults received food stamp benefits on average between 2017 and 2019, yet 62 percent of these work-capable recipients did not work at all.” Since then, the evasion of the supposed work requirements has only gotten worse.
With food stamp program expenditures currently running at an annual rate of around $100 billion or more, there is lots of room for that to be reduced without anyone actually going hungry. If Bill Clinton could have food stamp rolls of well under 20 million people, that should be achievable again.
We do not disagree that the system requires changes.
Where we disagree is the extent with which conservatives will wholly support eradication of the support programs with no exceptions or replacement planned, and you painted the entire Republican Party with that brush.
That is where I disagree with you.
The parents are flush with cigarettes, tattoos and weaves and wigs.
................................
Don’t forget booze, weed and iPhones.
Let’s make this clear... You were the one to bring up conservatives in #33. And even in my reply #35 I did not bring up Conservatives. And I even went further later to say “Government”. It was you who persisted to paint with a brush in a defensive posture that was unwarranted because I DID NOT mention Conservatives at all prior. You read something that I did not say...
But since you were so intent on nailing me down I obliged you with the truth. I wasn’t going to lie to you since you asked. Read back... You pegged me wrong from the start and put words in both PIF and my mouths. Right?
You unfairly painted with a broad brush, both conservatives on this website, and Republicans in the government.
I disagreed with both characterizations.
It’s clear to me you have your hands full on this thread. If it helps, I will retract any comments I made so you can concentrate on what is important to you. That’s all.
I have never been on food stamps or any welfare program. However, when I was raising my kids alone, my income was low enough that I could have qualified for food stamps and other types of government assistance. But I never applied for those things. The thought of food stamps never occurred to me. Instead, I just counted my pennies and found ways to make ends meet.
So, when you hear that people have never been on food stamps, it doesn't mean we live on Easy Street.
I wouldn't want anyone to go hungry. Seniors, the disabled, and truly needy people might need help. But something is seriously wrong if we have to buy food for 42 million people. We should be brainstorming to solve this problem. Our politicians won't solve it. They sound clueless.
With that said, most conservatives/Republicans today have no business complaining about food stamps. On average, it costs $17,000 to educate one child in public school for a year. (In some states, as high as $30,000.) On average, it costs only $2,000 in SNAP to feed a child for a year. But most freepers today feel entitled to your tax dollars to pay for their children's K-12 education. Given a choice, I would rather pay for a child to be fed.
You have touched on the true problem and cause, we need to fix the economy first and then the parasites committing fraud will have no justification.
I for one homeschooled my kids, and many others here did as well, so you should retract your snarky comment. I detest public schools and would eliminate them with the stroke of a pen if I had the authority.
My comment was directed at ‘most’ conservatives/Republicans/freepers today. It was not directed at anyone who favors spending cuts or shutdowns, whether they homeschooled, as you and I did, or sent their kids to school.
We who favor spending cuts or shutdowns are not the majority. The majority of conservatives/Republicans - at least the most vocal majority - firmly believe the taxpayers should fully fund K-12 education, even though it costs a fortune. Then, they complain about things like food stamps.
Understood, thank you for the clarification.
Folks,
welfare is payment not to riot. So be ready for what happens.
Bill Clinton set of reform for food stamps as well :
https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=321580
In Maryland, you can go into seafood restaurants and pay by snap.
The restaurant list
https://dhs.maryland.gov/restaurant-meals-program/
As Freeper openurmind points out, these things are to a degree controlled by the state.
I don’t like that it can be used in any restaurant.
“I don’t like that it can be used in any restaurant.”
I might be mistaken, but I think that started when they combined EBT with SNAP on the same card. They are different and should be separated again. EBT is considered nearly cash to be used for prepared foods and Welfare items. While SNAP is more regulated and cannot be used to buy prepared foods. Problem is they put both on one card as the combined total balance available for either...
I agree. Thanks for your educational input on this...:)
Yes. Plenty of room for reduction.. SNAP increases pretty well each time a dependent mouth is added. IT’s enough to become the primary means of financial support for baby mama and her little charges. Collectively, it’s more money(food) that mama could fill her refrigerator/panty each month.
Billy Dee Williams says it works every time.
Far be it from me to argue with so august an authority ...
And thank you friend for your patience with me and letting me know you are not sore at me... :)
Been worried about that. I have a tendency to speak my mind no matter the collective consequences and unfortunately I lose friends that way... I’m just trying my best to be a truly moral person. I somehow got the impression this is what we are supposed to try and be... :)
LOL… I was concerned that you might be sore me!
Of course, as Jordan Peterson is fond of saying, this type of give-and-take involves sharp elbows sometimes… I try to mind my elbows, and I’m trying to be forgiving and understanding of elbows that come at me… :-)
I work at it and I’m not always successful, but I do try. That reminds me… I have to go apologize to another Freeper whose head I took off a few weeks ago.
I have found in at least five cases in my time here, that some people simply don’t want to accept an apology… And I have to accept that it is my responsibility, not theirs in many cases. I forgive those people in my heart if they were the ones that I felt wronged me, and if they don’t want to accept my apology, I have to learn to accept that and let that dog lie where it may.
So, as you can, guess, I am gratified that we are not at odds with each other. Life is too short, and most of the time, we should be on the same side of these kinds of things.
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.