Posted on 12/20/2018 6:40:03 PM PST by 11th_VA
The Trump administration wants to push more food stamp recipients to find jobs, after this year's farm bill failed to include work requirements for the federal food assistance program.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Thursday proposed a rule that would limit the ability of states to exempt work-eligible adults from having to obtain steady employment to receive food stamps. Critics called the proposal "draconian" and said it would hurt workers and families who are already struggling.
The move comes just weeks after lawmakers passed a $400 billion farm bill that reauthorized agriculture and conservation programs while leaving the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which serves roughly 40 million Americans, virtually untouched. Supporters of work requirements argue that it would help food stamp recipients find work through job training, easing them off public assistance, but critics say the proposal could backfire.
"The President reportedly plans to make draconian changes in a key SNAP (food stamp) rule, cutting off basic food assistance for hundreds of thousands of the nation's poorest and most destitute people," said the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities founder Bob Greenstein, who directed the agency that oversaw the federal food assistance programs under President Carter, in an emailed statement.
The proposal would "cut impoverished people off assistance and increase hardship substantially, rather than raising employment or helping people find jobs," he added.
Currently, states can receive waivers for work requirements if their unemployment rates are 20 percent above the national average, which currently stands at 3.7 percent.
Trump's proposal would strip states' ability to issue waivers unless a city or county has an unemployment rate of 7 percent or higher. Currently, no state has an unemployment rate above 7 percent, with Alaska representing the country's highest jobless rate, at 6.4 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
While we’re fixing the food stamps, how about raising the maximum income for a family of three from $1809 a month to at least $2,000? Earn $1808, take out rent and utilities, and most families max out their food stamps. Earn a buck more and you get nothing.
Gosh, I never realized how punished I was for working hard to feed myself.
I better think this over.
Am I being abused? I just may be. /s
Ah the mind of a Leftist...
“”The President reportedly plans to make draconian changes in a key SNAP (food stamp) rule, cutting off basic food assistance for hundreds of thousands of the nation’s poorest and most destitute people,”
GOOD. Dont make me pay for your laziness and your sorry ass sob stories on why you’re poor.
I could count more than 100 times in my life I see these assholes driving BMW’s and using their EBT cards at 7-11.
He is pissed. I want to see full Trump blitz. Making so many changes the media can’t keep up !!!
This week I ran into a Jewish man I know who’s parents got him out of the USSR when he was in his late teens. (Late 50’s) They sent him to Israel and he eventually ended up here.
I was telling him how my Grandfather went through the Russian Revolution, they were dirt poor, but the Bolsheviks still took everything they had.
He said to me “These kind of people will punish anybody who they think have the potential of being independent or productive.”
He nailed the current Democrat party and most of the Repubs.
also limit what businesses can take food stamps. currently you can shop at seven eleven and Mini mart . I would force businesses to bid with there pricing in the store on goods to be able to except food stamps with only the most cost effective stores being allowed to except food stamps. I would also push for picture id on the food stamp card so it is difficult to sell the cards nd then use them
You can tell the EBT sorts because they separate out the wine and dog food from the ribeye steaks. Anyway quite some time ago I was immediately behind a BF who paid for some steaks and some other stuff on the EBT and the wine and cigarettes with cash. Nails about 2 inches long and a paint job on them like a custom hot rod. I only had one item and was also not far behind her in the parking lot. She got into a new Mercedes 2 seater with the groceries she paid for with my money and drive away.
I got into my 17 year old Camaro and likewise drove away, the difference being I paid for my own groceries (and hers)
I was on welfare in 1970. Two kids and wife. We had little and I worked a few cash deals, but no jobs. Never ate so much steak as we did on food stamps. We had two back payments when the welfare folks said we were underpaid. Bought a color TV and new fridge.
” the difference being I paid for my own groceries”
That’s what i said to another idiot in line 2 years ago. The clown was holding the line because the clerk said he didnt have enough money, and he wanted the clerk to call the state office to CONFIRM IT.
I was having a really bad day back then and I just blew it “Hey a**hole, next time dont hold the line for people who actually worked for their money and step aside”
The entire line nodded..
I would go with the picture ID, but living in a rural area, I think that smaller stores within walking distance are OK for EBT. Unless you want even more uninsured hoopties on the roads. A disabled friend gets EBT and SSI. He is conscious of where every dollar goes, but lives in a trailer with a very small fridge. Can't do big shopping at a Walmart once a week.
Whaddasupprise.
Give each family two or three pounds of government cheese, a big sack of potatoes and some chicken necks and noodles to make soup with. Don’t like it? Then GET A JOB!
I agree about the rural areas but the big cities re difrent...food stamps are administered on the county level so it should be on the county level that it is decided which stores do food stamp with oversight by the State and FED to make sure it does not turn into political reward to downers to get the food stamp concession in the county
The problem with these efforts to reform welfare is that they usually exempt those with dependent children from the work requirements and those are responsible for 98% of the welfare abuse. Going after the few who don’t have kids and making them work is good but in reality it won’t save much money because the big money is going to unwed mothers with several kids and they’re usually put off limits because nobody wants to risk the wrath of the news media’s blitz on starving kids.
If we’re going to make a dent in the enormous state we’re going to have to stop making it profitable for single women to have children. I live in Mississippi and see it daily, teenagers who have no desire for any career other than to start having children and collecting benefits. It’s a way of life for a good portion of the population. We have to stop making that more attractive than working for a living.
And all democrats are mad - they want more people to not work and to be dependent on your and my money.
IF the members of Congress would have the GUTS to actually go to these ‘food banks’ & see the people that are coming there, they might get a clue.
New cars-—jewelry—manicures—styled hair-—really nice clothes.
MANY people are not destitute & in NEED of the food. All that is happening is that the FEDS are freeing up their other money so they can buy more drugs.
I live in rural Nevada. I know there are people spending the gas & time to go to 3 or more different food banks to get FREE STUFF. One of those food banks is even in another county.
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.