Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE *** Legislative salary court hearing
Posted in:
* All respect…
State Senator Jacqueline Y. Collins (D-Chicago 16th) is taking the SNAP Challenge this week to better understand the hardships faced by food stamp recipients. The SNAP Challenge, sponsored by the Greater Chicago Food Depository, invites elected officials, community leaders and others to spend only $35 on food for a week – the average weekly SNAP benefit for a single adult.
“I’m taking on this challenge to educate myself about the struggles poor families face when trying to put food on the table,” said Collins, a member of the Commission on the Elimination of Poverty. “With some members of Congress questioning the necessity of SNAP benefits, it’s important to draw attention to the barely adequate but still critical lifeline food stamps represent for the poor in Illinois.”
SNAP – the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly called food stamps – provides benefits to more than 820,000 Cook County residents and 47 million people nationwide. The average individual SNAP recipient in Illinois receives just $35 each week to spend on food. SNAP Challenge participants are asked to eat only food they have purchased using the $35 available for the week, include food purchased at restaurants and avoid accepting free food.
“Every day, low-income individuals and families must make heart-wrenching decisions between buying food or medicine, or between paying the rent or paying a doctor’s bill,” Collins said. “It’s a privilege to stand with ‘the least of these,’ even in a small and symbolic way, and challenge the apathy that consigns them to the margins of our awareness.”
The Greater Chicago Food Depository, a network of 650 food pantries throughout the Chicago region, distributes food to 678,000 individuals each year while offering training programs that help break the cycle of poverty.
The Food Depository estimates that in order to compensate for the five percent cut in SNAP benefits proposed by some members of Congress, its pantries would have to increase the amount of food they provide by 50 percent.
I simply can’t imagine living on that tiny food allowance.
And, as far as I’m concerned, all those legislators who are constantly complaining about the cost of the food stamp program really ought to take this challenge. Walk a mile in the shoes of someone less fortunate for a change.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 1:47 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE *** Legislative salary court hearing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Until the legislative pay dispute is settled, this might be the best way to eat for some of them.
Seriously, good for her. $35 per week is all they get and this is still too much for the Republicans in DC.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 1:50 pm
As someone who runs a food pantry and sees SNAP clients I really appreciate your comment Rich!
Comment by Nuclear Bozo Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:00 pm
First, SNAP was created to HELP pay for food not be the ONLY source of food money.
Secondly, I don’t know where this $35 figure comes from but I know families receiving several hundred dollars a month.
Comment by Lets Be Real Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:03 pm
You will be happy to know that the State is rolling out a $250 million program called Integrated Eligibility System (IES) to qualify individuals for the SNAP benefits.
IES - taking corporate welfare to new heights!
Comment by Rufus Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:03 pm
===but I know families receiving several hundred dollars a month===
Well, $35 a week per person times four weeks is $140, times, say, six is $840.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:04 pm
*Secondly, I don’t know where this $35 figure comes from but I know families receiving several hundred dollars a month.*
$35 is the average amount of support one person receives for a week. So, yes, there are families that receive hundreds of dollars in a month because it is a full month and they have multiple people in their family to feed.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:06 pm
“I don’t know where this $35 figure comes from but I know families receiving several hundred dollars a month.”
The $35 figure is supposed to be the average per week for a SINGLE adult recipient; multiply that by 4 weeks per month and that would equal about $140 per month. Obviously, families will receive more.
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:09 pm
$35 dollars is not a lot. But we have to assume here that x3 or 4 you can buy eggs, an bread, and milk, cans of soup, etc, for the week. Do you get “whole Foods, fresh organic, bean sprouts” and beer? no.
But my mother had 2 kids and made just above minimum wage and somehow fed us like that.
Its assistance, not pay for everything you want, live on it forever. We seem to forget that. And SNAP does go to those even with low paying jobs. so saying $35 is all they get… (when essentially its free additional money to help out) is not exactly honest.
Comment by RonOglesby Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:13 pm
Applause for Sen. Collins.
Comment by Draznnl Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:14 pm
I agree with your sentiments completely, Rich. I’m all for giving help to those who need it. It would seem appropriate to me, however, if DHS verified residency and income information like they did in the old days. That is no longer the case, and it invites abuse.
Comment by LincolnLounger Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:15 pm
The problem is not the food stamp program but rather the fraud. I am sure there are many people on this program who are not eligible.
Comment by MOON Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:16 pm
MOON: Much of the fraud comes from retail stores that traffic in food stamps–they pay $.50 on the dollar to recipients in cash for the stamps. So, some small business owners, the heroes of the GOP, are partially to blame for the fraud.
Comment by Nonplussed Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:23 pm
As others have said, the program is meant to supplement the purchase of food. Hence the name of the SNAP program. Other resources, such as earned income or TANF cash grant would also be available.
Most of the concerns I have heard raised have not been that the amount is too much, but that there should be limits on what can be purchased. Certainly, if the SNAP benefit is so little, it wouldn’t make since to buy high cost or low nutrition items.
Comment by More Courage Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:28 pm
I would suggest that every legislator take this challenge. Every single one from Quinn to the newest freshman rep.
Good for Collins.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:29 pm
===Other resources, such as earned income or TANF cash grant would also be available===
Yeah, bigtime bucks. After rent, utilities and other necessities, I’m sure there’s a whole lot left over from that veritable bonanza to buy food.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:30 pm
=== It would seem appropriate to me, however, if DHS verified residency and income information like they did in the old days. That is no longer the case, and it invites abuse. ===
Is this a joke?
We don’t verify the information?
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:31 pm
Make that sense. Or for that matter Cents.
Comment by More Courage. Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:31 pm
“Much of the fraud comes from retail stores that traffic in food stamps–they pay $.50 on the dollar to recipients in cash for the stamps.”
Where and how often does this happen? People exchanging food stamps for half of their purchasing power must mean they don’t need the stamps.
Comment by capncrunch Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:32 pm
Jan Schakowsky usually takes this challenge once a year too.
Comment by Just Observing Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:33 pm
Thanks, Rich, for your realistic and compassionate view of food stamps. Government benefits are meant to help the poorest people and are often issued in very small amounts. If people are comfortable living on public assistance, then we have a bigger problem than just the programs themselves.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:34 pm
Capncrunch, there are certain things you can’t buy with stamps. It is/was a well known practice to sell them for $.60 on the dollar. There is really no way to win this arguement, as you will be made out to be an insensitive jerk, regardles sof your intentions or what you do to help others.
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:36 pm
If that’s the average, and it is supplemental, should we assume that it is based on SOME level of income? Should we assume that in extreme, no-income cases the amount per person is much higher? My family refused to even chase after any of these benefits, despite qualifying at times for it. I’m long past those days, and I know that there are plenty of people who desperately need help. I hope they get the help they need.
I also know that there are those driving better cars than me (to this day!), own better TV’s, and getting hundreds in various government benefits all while getting paid under the table, or nursing additions, or hiding other income. No idea what the percentages are, but they can’t be low considering how many cases I’ve seen personally.
The stories that really twist at me are the mentally unstable cases that end up homeless and struggling to get help. I can’t imagine the frustration felt by those who work with the disabled as they watch funding disappear and services end. It has to be heart-breaking and maddening at the same time when you see first-hand the damage being done.
Comment by Liandro Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:38 pm
Never said that there would be a bonanza. If their income was that high they wouldn’t be eligible for benefits. But the fact of the matter is the program is what it is and there is a reason it is named the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Supplemental and Assistance. When people publicize that they are going to “live off this meager benefit” it should at least be known that the program is not meant to be the sole resource for a person or family.
Comment by More Courage. Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:38 pm
—
Yeah, bigtime bucks. After rent, utilities and other necessities, I’m sure there’s a whole lot left over from that veritable bonanza to buy food.
—
Its all assistance. and supposed to be temporary not a way of life. Assistance assumes people receiving it also help themselves and want to get it out of it.
Is it a lot? no. should it be? probably not.
Comment by RonOglesby Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:39 pm
“I am sure there are many people on this program who are not eligible.”
That’s really easy to say, MOON. Got any real evidence? That said, the Obama administration has greatly increased enforcement in the program. In 2012 alone, more than 1,400 stores were disqualified for trafficking in Food Stamps and another 700 sanctioned for other violations. That’s where most of the fraud takes place. I can’t for the life of me figure out why Republicans are so convinced suddenly that we should cut people’s Food Stamp allowances and step up investigations of recipients while Wall Street bankers cost the country billions and have no fear of the law. Priorities a bit off, maybe?
Comment by OldSmoky2 Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:42 pm
It seems to me that a family of six (@35 x 4 weeks x 6 people) could live on that amount ($840) easier than a family of 1 could live on $140 (35 x 4), or a family of two (Mom, child) could live on $280 (35 x 4 x 2) for the month. If you look at smaller food packaging, the cost is still sometime almost as high as the larger package. So 6 eggs probably costs almost as much as 12, a half gallon of milk costs almost as much as a gallon, etc.
So, maybe, the program needs at least tweaked to recognize a larger base number and a smaller increase as the family size increases.
Comment by mythoughtis Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:45 pm
I nominate Chapin Rose. He seems worried about people getting fat on SNAP. As opposed to the traditional means he’s familiar with.
Maybe they can check his urine while they’re at it, since he gets a state paycheck. Wash the windshield, too.
The contempt and hostility for the working poor — without whom, the economy would grind to a halt — by the majority of the U.S. House GOP on SNAP sends my blood pressure through the roof.
They are in violation of the social contract.
The worst are those like Fincher on the Ag Committee who votes to takes millions in direct federal cash subsidies for his farm and then perverts The Gospels to justify taking food off the table for the working poor.
See you in church, holy man.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/22/gop-congressman-stephen-fincher-on-a-mission-from-god-starve-the-poor-while-personally-pocketing-millions-in-farm-subsidies/
http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fight-hunger/programs-and-services/public-assistance-programs/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program/snap-myths-realities.aspx#
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:45 pm
“I also know that there are those driving better cars than me (to this day!), own better TV’s, and getting hundreds in various government benefits all while getting paid under the table, or nursing additions, or hiding other income. No idea what the percentages are, but they can’t be low considering how many cases I’ve seen personally.”
A) stop trying to take anecdotal information and make assumptions about the program as a whole.
B) are there people with nice cars on food stamps? Sure. I could tell you the story of the man that list his job and he is living in his nice car because that is all he has left or any many other scenarios that remind us we should not make assumptions.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:46 pm
OldSmoky2, there’s been a pervasive belief forever that the poor are somehow living large off of the taxpayers. Having known plenty of poor people (but having myself only been “college poor”), I have yet to see solid evidence of that “truth.”
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:47 pm
**First, SNAP was created to HELP pay for food not be the ONLY source of food money.**
What do you say to those who lost their jobs and temporarily have no money?
“I know families receiving several hundred dollars a month.”
Yes, but do you know their circumstances? If they’re committing fraud, then yeah, I support the appropriate punishment, but if they’re earning, say, $1,500 a month for a family of three, and they pay $900 per month rent along with utilities, then the SNAP amount should be around the maximum for that household size.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:48 pm
=== Got any real evidence? ===
Ummm…. how about all the people we’re finding on our Medicaid rolls who shouldn’t be there?
Actually, how would we even know when it comes to our SNAP rolls in Illinois? Has an audit been performed recently? If we don’t verify address or income, there’s a pretty good bet some people are exploiting the lax oversight.
It’s human nature.
If you leave the lid to the cookie jar wide open and leave the room, someone is going to reach their hand in.
And that leaves fewer for the people who really deserve them.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:49 pm
Lincolnlover
I’m not sure exactly what you are talking about. Today we have more verification capability than we ever had in “the good old days”, including electronic verification of wages for currently about 40% of employers. We also can track claimed absent fathers using birth records, many of these fathers are actually in the home & we catch them. We have direct access to Social Security benefit info & can verify social security numbers electronically. We have electronic access to verify legal residence from INS. With the new Affordable Care Act changes in Medicaid we will soon have access to IRS data.
“I agree with your sentiments completely, Rich. I’m all for giving help to those who need it. It would seem appropriate to me, however, if DHS verified residency and income information like they did in the old days. That is no longer the case, and it invites abuse.”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:49 pm
Rep. Robin Kelly recently participated in the SNAP Challenge, and her updates were really eye-opening. The small amount of food an adult can purchase, but also the quality of food was a reality-check - challenging to have a healthy diet when your dollar goes farther purchasing processed food.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:56 pm
@AFSCME Steward
Is it currently mandatory practice that we verify address and income information for every recipient?
It is one thing to have the capability to do something. It is quite another to actually do it.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:57 pm
It is becoming more & more difficult to traffic because all benefits are issued electronically. The feds regularly visit stores that accept SNAP to inspect what they sell & compare with the amount of SNAP redemption activity coming from the store. A person caught trafficing their SNAP benefits is ineligible to receive SNAP for 10 years.
“Capncrunch, there are certain things you can’t buy with stamps. It is/was a well known practice to sell them for $.60 on the dollar. There is really no way to win this arguement, as you will be made out to be an insensitive jerk, regardles sof your intentions or what you do to help others.”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 2:58 pm
Sorry,
Rich, but I just stood behind a very over-weight lady buying boxes of Alaska crab legs, potato chips, and soda with her LINK card. I don’t even buy that stuff! Anyway, I just bought 4 dozen eggs, 2 pounds of sliced ham, a pound of cheese, and a whole lot of canned vegies and some bread at Aldis for under $30, and I guarantee I couldn’t eat it all in a week, even with my wife’s help. It is all about choices, and poor people have no inheresnt right to live as if they are not!
Comment by Skirmisher Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:00 pm
A much better solution would be to set up food banks, where people could purchase good quality food. Buying food at a grocery store means these people are paying more for food. Anytime something is subsidized the industry being subsidized raises the price and it cost more.
No argument some time of program is needed, but higher prices, fraud, and poor purchasing make the program less effective and efficient.
Comment by Downstater Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:01 pm
the key phrase is single adult. single adults are the most vulnerable. much of the aid given is keyed to families with children. multiple people equals multiple portions of aid, and you know the phrase, you can feed two for the price of one, and it really is easier if you have more money keyed to more people. $35 is not much at all. good for her.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:01 pm
=== and poor people have no inheresnt right to live as if they are not===
Wow.
So, you want to make them wear some sort of a patch on their clothes or something?
And good luck eating ham and cheese all week, every day of every week. Don’t forget to visit your heart surgeon.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:02 pm
Address does not have to be verified. Income verification from the 30 days prior to application is required.
Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:03 pm
=== I nominate Chapin Rose. ===
I will second that nomination.
While we’re at it, I will also nominate those who oppose common sense measures to ensure that this aid reaches those it is designed to help.
Put a photo on SNAP cards, just like we have on driver’s licenses, state ID’s, school ID’s, work ID’s, health club ID’s, building ID’s, etc.
Those opposing basic steps like this are also defending fraud and perpetrating theft.
They are equally in violation of the social contract.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:05 pm
Seriously, I really don’t get the intense hostility toward poor people, as if they’re all getting something over on the rest of us. God forbid something could happen to you and you wind up in their shoes.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:06 pm
Thanks for taking the time to reply and clarify, @AFSCME Steward.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:09 pm
“Those opposing basic steps like this are also defending fraud and perpetrating theft.”
Nope. How about the home bound senior that has an aid that shops for him or her? How about the mom that needs their kid to run to the store? How about the money it would take to set up that infrastructure?
Sound bites are easy. The actual implication of policy change always rudely messes up those sound bites.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:10 pm
Montrose, you can probably forget it. The “hate the poors” have never listened to your quite valid arguments.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:12 pm
It’s a shame that class envy in this country consists mainly of resentment by the middle and upper classes for the poor and their purported welfare Cadillac.
Wouldn’t it be refreshing if a conservative Republican took the SNAP challenge? It would be a plus if he or she were also a born-again Christian whose Lord said what they do to the least of these they do to Him.
Comment by reformer Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:14 pm
@Montrose - any other suggestions to reduce the fraud that takes place? It doesn’t have to be a photo ID.
How about an audit of the rolls instead? That seems to be a middle-ground compromise.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:21 pm
===I simply can’t imagine living on that tiny food allowance.
===
I was going to say something snarky about the size of Sen Collins compared to Rich, but the tone of the anti-poor on this thread is amazing. God forbid the chosen ones fall on hard times. Jeesh
Comment by Been There Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:23 pm
=== I would suggest that every legislator take this challenge. Every single one from Quinn to the newest freshman rep. Good for Collins. ===
I didn’t realize that made me “hate the poor”. Sheesh.
I won’t speak for others posting some comments I find distasteful, but my own perspective is simple:
We only have X dollars to fund programs such as SNAP.
Every $1 diverted from SNAP via theft or fraud is $1 less to help a person or child that truly needs it.
Why would anyone defend fraud or theft from hungry people? It drives me crazy. Reasonable people can have honest motives for having a different view of things.
We need SNAP. And we need to make sure those in dire straits receive as much help as possible.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:27 pm
Wow… I’m just amazed at some of the comments here. Set up food banks to do this? OK, let’s get a rollcall of House GOPers ready to set up new government-run food banks around the country and hire new employees to staff and run the program. Never mind the economic loss to thousands of grocery stores. And force people to make healthier food choices with SNAP? OK, square that, please, with all the Red-state school boards screaming their heads off because the Obama administration is trying to get school cafeterias to actually serve healthy vegetables instead of french fries and ketchup.
Comment by OldSmoky2 Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:27 pm
@Montrose:
“A) stop trying to take anecdotal information
and make assumptions about the program as a
whole.
B) are there people with nice cars on food
stamps? Sure. I could tell you the story of
the man that list his job and he is living in
his nice car because that is all he has left
or any many other scenarios that remind us we
should not make assumptions.
A.) No. You are basically telling me to ignore what I’ve seen with my own eyes. I won’t ignore my life experiences, especially when I’m fairly sure I’ve ran into these issues far more during my life than most who comment on this board. I passionately care about making sure people are able to rise up the social ladder. I’m not naive, however, and I won’t pretend to be. Not for you, not for anyone. Ignoring problems doesn’t solve them.
B. And I can tell you stories of people trading LINK purchases for cash, or working under the table so they can keep benefits, or refuses promotions so they can keep benefits, or living with relatives and lying about it so they can keep benefits, or not marrying because their baby’s father makes too much money, or not reporting thousands in free rent/groceries/purchases so they can keep their benefits. It’s just SO easy to hide gift income or under-the-table income. I understand why they do it, and that is why I blame the system more than the individuals.
Like I said above, there are so many people who need help. They should get it. But there are plenty of people who have been in the system long enough to know how to abuse it. Free money is something most people won’t turn down, no matter how rich or poor they are. To pretend that isn’t the case is to be brutally naive of human nature.
Comment by Liandro Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:28 pm
I think posts like this reflect a very basic difference in people and how they interact with and view the world.
Some people are convinced that they are not poor because of the good life choices and hard work they have done. They feel they are the victims of a system that does not force other people to be as smart/hard working as them, and actually rewards people who do not work hard or make good choices.
Others feel that they are lucky to have the advantages they have in this society, and that very easily they would be in a much different situation if not for that luck. SNAP benefits (and TANF, etc.) to them are a necessary government service that helps people who are down on their luck, and people who never really had a chance to succeed to begin with.
I think the divide between the two groups is insurmountable.
Comment by MCT Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:31 pm
===Others feel that they are lucky to have the advantages they have in this society, and that very easily they would be in a much different situation if not for that luck===
Maybe, but some of us know that not everybody can do what we are capable of doing. It’s about getting yourself out of your own head. Not everyone has the same advantages, the same luck (if you will), the same mentors, the same skills, the same level of intelligence, the same ethics, etc., etc., etc.
I find this hate the poors stuff to be a bit like long-distance runners viciously heckling those who finish behind them and the spectators along the route. It makes no sense, and it’s just not the decent thing to do.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:39 pm
@Liandro, if you see fraud, why don’t you turn it in?
Comment by 100 Miles West Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:40 pm
To be fair, that doesn’t include the money I was making myself, heh. Not sure my dishwashing job really cranked up the family income too much higher, though.
Comment by Liandro Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:40 pm
Liandro
For the record, I am not saying the program is perfect and there is no fraud. What I am saying is that our policy decisions need to be made based on data, not anecdotal stories. The fraud rate for SNAP is 1 cent on the dollar. The payment accuracy rate is over 97%. We should always work to improve, but the policy changed be suggested in Washington are draconian at best.
Formerly - if you can find a way to pay for an audit, by all means. Just figure out how to do it in a way where you are not making families that need SNAP jump through yet another hoop.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:41 pm
Rich - I am trying to stop. I really am.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:42 pm
–Put a photo on SNAP cards, just like we have on driver’s licenses, state ID’s, school ID’s, work ID’s, health club ID’s, building ID’s, etc.–
Sure. Just like on credit and debit cards. Make the store clerk be a copper.
“Don’t you wear glasses? Did you get a haircut? Citizen’s arrest!”
Milton Friedman would think you’re all nuts.
We’re a long way, folks, when WWII heroes like Bob Dole and George McGovern — who were broke growing up, just like the alleged heroes here — could put their heads together and come up with common sense, decent solutions for the general welfare.
Whoops. Welfare. Bad word.
SNAP is welfare for McDonalds, and WalMart, and the corner gas station and every other big business that relies on cheap labor to make their margins.
JHC, people here weep for poor little Bill Daley because he’s too scared to go for the Big Chair, but they’ll stick it to people on SNAP.
Once again, I’ll see you in church.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:42 pm
I’m a single adult, and my weekly grocery bill usually runs between $35-$40 - and I eat pretty healthy stuff, albeit small portions. However, I have a Walmart Express and several other grocery stores to choose from in my neighborhood, so I have the benefit of being able to comparison shop for the best deal (the best deal is usually Walmart, but not always for some items). I’m guessing a lot of the people on food stamps live in the “food deserts” and don’t have a lot of places to choose from.
Comment by ??? Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:44 pm
Also, I think I was raised better than that.
You don’t purposely step on the downtrodden. You don’t emulate them, either, of course, but hating life’s losers, temporary or permanent, is a truly disgusting and inhuman trait.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:44 pm
It seems to me that $35 a week for an adult is about right. Let’s do the math.
Bread, at least where I live, can be purchased for $2 a loaf. A half-pound of cheese can usually be had for $1.50 or so on sale, A pound of bologna costs $1. That’s lunch for the better part of a week and we haven’t cracked the $5 mark. Not appetizing enough? OK, let’s make it up on other meals. A dozen eggs costs about $2. According to the most recent Schunck’s ad, whole chickens are on sale this week for 79 cents a pound, chicken hindquarters are 59 cents a pound (but you have to buy 10 pounds), sirloin steak is on sale for $4 a pound and ham is on sale for $2 per half pound. If I buy a four-pound chicken (which should provide two meals for one person) a one-pound steak, ham, eggs and the hindquarters, I’ve spent a little over $22, and that’s plenty of protein for one person for a week, plus there is also the bread. That leaves $13 for potatoes, rice and vegetables–we can also go through that math, but it is absolutely doable if one shops carefully.
Extravagant? No. But it’s nutritious and can actually taste pretty good, depending on one’s cooking skills. Let’s also not forget food banks and pantries that can supplement the above.
The main point is, food, all things considered, is pretty darn cheap in America if one shops carefully. Most of us don’t, and so we spend way more than we need to while throwing away way more than we should. It would require planning and it might be a bit inconvenient, but I’m pretty darn confident that I could survive on $35 a week for food, perhaps even less, given the availability of staples through food pantries and food banks.
Comment by ebenezer Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:47 pm
ebenezer, I will eagerly await the results of your own real life experiment next week, since you think it’s so easy.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:49 pm
=== Not everyone has the same advantages, the same luck (if you will), the same mentors, the same skills, the same level of intelligence, the same ethics, etc., etc., etc. ===
Amen to that!
I would humbly add: not everyone is born with the same skin color, same gender, same neighborhood or same school system.
Brighter minds than mine could surely come up with even more.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 3:51 pm
—Rich Miller–
Also, I think I was raised better than that.
You don’t purposely step on the downtrodden. You don’t emulate them, either, of course, but hating life’s losers, temporary or permanent, is a truly disgusting and inhuman trait.
Agreed, which is why I *try* to focus on the system more than individuals. My grandparents and parents, while never wealthy, were amazing role models. I’ll take that over wealthy parents any time, easily.
But while I am aware how blessed that made me, the victim argument only goes so far. At some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions. We have to craft a system with the understanding that some people will make every attempt to abuse it. Emotions have their place, but going overboard leads to enabling.
Comment by Liandro Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:03 pm
Rich,
I didn’t say that it was easy. In fact, I said it would require planning and would likely be inconvenient. But (at the risk of sounding too much a curmudgeon) that’s the way I was raised–we saw so many “price reduced” stickers on the outdated groceries in our house that my sister and I thought it was a brand. We weren’t poor, but my mom bought in bulk on sale and also baked bread before breadmakers existed. She was just being frugal. I don’t eat that way anymore and I would not care to again. But it can be done, and I don’t know that society has an obligation to provide the poor with sufficient funds to eat the way that I do now–maybe that’s just the capitalist in me.
I don’t think I’m insensitive to the poor. Other posters have also said they’re able to live on $35 a week for food. This week’s Schnuck’s ad shows that it is entirely possible. Not as easy as you and I have it, no question, but doable.
What do you think is a reasonable weekly amount for an adult?
Comment by ebenezer Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:12 pm
=== We have to craft a system with the understanding that some people will make every attempt to abuse it. ===
That’s just not practical. You put in too many hoops, you’re gonna start denying lots of benefits to truly needy people.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:16 pm
=== Make the store clerk be a copper. ===
Just like we make them “a copper” when selling tobacco and liquor?
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:16 pm
– I find this hate the poors stuff to be a bit like long-distance runners viciously heckling those who finish behind them and the spectators along the route. It makes no sense, and it’s just not the decent thing to do.–
This is a great analogy. I’ve run a half-dozen marathons, never faster than 4 to 5 hours. I promise you that I trained every bit as hard, and maybe harder, than some of the folks finishing in only 3 or 3 1/2 hours. But I was glad the speedy guys and gals didn’t rag on me for whatever factors accounted for my slower finish time.
And - I sure didn’t feel like ragging on those behind me. In fact, I was even more impressed with those who never gave up, even though it took them maybe 6 hours to finish. I thought it was probably even tougher for them to keep it up for that long - making their feats all the more impressive.
Comment by Linus Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:17 pm
FKA, one more time.
People who are disabled or home-bound or whatever often have others pick up their food for them. Do you want store clerks conducting full-scale investigations of eligibility? It’s not as simple as checking an ID. And IRMA is dead-set against this requirement for obvious reasons.
Either read the other side’s arguments or stop posting. Final warning.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:19 pm
Apparently I’m taking the SNAP challenge on a daily basis and didn’t even know it. I have a family of 5 and our food budget is $700 per month (about what we would receive through SNAP) and we eat quite well. My income does not limit us to that amount, it’s just that is about what we end up spending on a monthly basis for food.
Comment by 332bill Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:20 pm
Re food banks: there used to be a program in the Peoria area called SHARE Food, through which you could buy monthly packages (meat only, fruit/veggies only, or a combination of both) for about 1/2 the usual price. At Thanksgiving and Christmas you could also get holiday packages that contained turkey or ham and other holiday dinner items. I took advantage of it for several years.
The organizers always emphasized that it was NOT just for poor or needy people — their motto was “If you eat, you qualify.” They wanted as many people to sign up as possible so they could get the best purchasing deals on their food. Unfortunately, the program closed down in 2010 due to high transportation costs and other factors. There are currently SHARE Food programs in other states but I haven’t been able to find one currently operating in Illinois.
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:21 pm
Many of the working poor do great things for us. They cut our hair, ring us up at cash registers, stock store shelves, feed us and pour our drinks, etc. I can’t just throw these people under the bus when they need help with basic sustenance. They’re human beings, not chaff. They’re not my servants.
Wordslinger briefly mentioned national politics, and I’ll add that it also sickens me that politicians are preparing to hold our creditworthiness and economy hostage in order to stop healthcare that will benefit millions of poor Americans. We spent trillions killing people in other countries, but now we’re too broke to spend money at home and help heal ourselves and help prevent financial catastrophe for those of us who get sick and have no health insurance? That’s sick, to me.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:21 pm
Rich I’ve always respected you, but this post is pretty amazing. I wish some people would get out of their own way and understand how fortunate they are. Thanks for the post.
Comment by UISer Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:39 pm
Hmm, maybe if you don’t like the snap benefits you could get the education you need, develop the skills or show the initiative to get a job that will allow you to purchase what you want.
Comment by Fed up Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:41 pm
I read none of the commentary; I suspect some will aggravate me.
Ty Warner just got fined 50 MILLION for tax evasion.
We have kids and parents going to be hungry (some homeless) in THE United States of America.
IT
Comment by sal-says Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:46 pm
I read and agree with @Montrose’s point that photos may not be the way to go. I readily conceded that at 3:21.
I also agree with @Montrose that any sort of audit would have to be done in a manner that does not add to the already hefty burden of the poor.
And it would be great to see some of these loud-mouths who think SNAP is a bad thing take the SNAP challenge themselves, or at least practice what they preach when it comes to compassion.
I simply posted that since @wordlinsger’s logic didn’t seem to make sense in light of our policies concerning liquor and tobacco sales. I agree with him/her 90% of the time, but I expect us all to challenge each other’s viewpoints from time to time.
I will refrain from posting on this again.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:46 pm
A little honesty is in order here.
The United States economy doesn’t work without cheap labor. To keep that cheap labor upright, programs like SNAP are essential.
How the heck do you think you go about your day getting stuff done? The grocery store. Walmart. The gas station. The fast-food joint.
Without the labor of those folks and many more like them, you’d be bogged down so you couldn’t even move.
It’s the same deal with immigration. There’s a phony law that says “only so many immigrants.”
Do you know how cynical that is? The folks who voted for it do. Shame on them, but shame on you for being a willfully ignorant chump and believing them.
The American economy would collapse without illegal immigration and cheap labor. No one in their right mind could think otherwise.
I celebrate those on SNAP and illegal labor. I could not live the life I do without you.
Thank you. And I’m with you til the last dog dies, whatever it may be.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:47 pm
Fed Up - I am going to follow Rich’s advice and not even try.
Comment by Montrose Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:48 pm
A lot of people don’t get that opportunity, Fed up.
Long ago, I used to be a public aid caseworker for the state. We required receipts for applicants’ eligible bills. We also did a “home visit” to verify that the residence existed, utilities, and there was some semblance of a household resembling what was on the application.
I know for a fact that is not the case anymore. Caseloads are too large, worries about worker safety, relaxation of Feds rules, etc.
Someone I know just got alloted emergency SNAP benefits based on the information he entered into a computer. No verifications of any kind, and none since then either.
I’m glad for him — he needed and deserved the assistance. It was just startling to me the lack of verification (and responsibility).
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:52 pm
I suggest that every lawmaker stand in line at the grocery store with me and watch the government cards being used to buy those “essentials”and as soon as the cash register drawer closes, out comes the cash for cigarettes, beer, steak, etc.
Suddenly, no shortage of cash there. Pathetic…
National Park Service has signs posted warning visitors not to feed the wild animals. It makes them dependent of free food and they forget how to survive on their own.
Our grocery stores need the same signs to be posted.
Comment by OLD BRASS Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 4:54 pm
@Fed Up - Sure, because education is free/cheap? Higher ed certainly isn’t and despite a lot of schools’ best efforts to help, some kids end up forced to drop out of high school to help make ends meet for their families. Don’t judge. Also, I was hoping you could share where this magic job tree is located that everyone seems to assume exists.
As for all of the questions about eligibility, there’s this thing called Google…check it out: http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm
Comment by Really?!? Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:08 pm
My husband and I became homeless within a year of being married in 1983. I will never forget it.
One of the first things we did when we realized we had lost our apartment and our jobs (all we had left was a car and some clothing) was to visit one of those all-you-can-eat buffet restaurants and stuff ourselves silly with some of our remaining funds. Feeding ourselves became a major preoccupation really fast.
Family took us in, but this created an over-crowded situation. We stayed in three different family members’ households over a period of five months. The stress was such that it was very difficult to find a new job. I know I blew at least two job interviews because depression dulled my usual sharpness and the desperation was discernible.
Once again employed, we regained most of our possessions and put our life back together in a 12′X60′ trailer. At first I had a weekly budget of $20 per week for the two of us, and this felt a little tight even in 1984. Bread, peanut butter, rice, potatoes and eggs featured prominently.
One thing about the trailer park, though, was that there was always somebody else in worse shape. Sometimes they had children, sometimes very old, sometimes disabled.
Many of them were receiving some sort of aid as well, but once you heard their stories you knew there was nothing to begrudge.
Comment by yinn Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:09 pm
==Hmm, maybe if you don’t like the snap benefits you could get the education you need, develop the skills or show the initiative to get a job that will allow you to purchase what you want. ==
You are the poster child for the hate the poor crowd. Good job. You compassion is overwhelming.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:12 pm
“as soon as the cash register drawer closes, out comes the cash for cigarettes, beer, steak, etc.”
Every single time, huh? I have someone in the family who got sick and now gets public aid. The benefits are meager, and this person runs out of money every month. If it wasn’t for my wife and I shelling out a few $20s and buying meals a few times a month, this person would suffer even more.
“wild animals”
You compare poor, sick people to wild animals? You’re the one who’s pathetic.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:18 pm
Complex topic and you can choose almost any example to prove your point- and still be correct.
However, I would like to see the old commodity surplus program brought back or something that provides basic food. No SNAP card that allows one to buy cookies, ice cream or steak. Basic food that Supplements is what is really needed.
Comment by Federalist Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:49 pm
- yinn - Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:09 pm
Thank you for sharing your story.
Comment by Cheswick Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 5:50 pm
“but they should be just that, safety nets, not a way of life.”
I agree that SNAP and other government benefits should be just a safety net, and they are. If people are committing welfare fraud, I fully support fighting this fraud, as long as it’s cost-effective (see welfare drug tests). Fraudsters are taking benefits that belong to the truly poor. But if people are comfortable being truly poor and collecting benefits, as a way of life, then the problem is with the people and not the benefits and the government. Benefits are there for those who qualify. The government doesn’t discriminate between those who for whatever reason want to remain poor and those who don’t.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 6:24 pm
I think I’m going to be sick after reading some of these comments, especially Boog’s above.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 6:31 pm
The negativity here is astounding.
The information on SNAP benefits by family size and income is on line at the DHS web site, but keep in mind that the maximum benefit for family size is reduced based on family income.
The US Dept of Agriculture web site says that the average SNAP benefit per person in Illinois in 2012 was $139.45 per person. So although the maximum SNAP benefit for a family of 3 is $526 the average benefit would be $419.35.
The maximum that a 3-person family can earn (gross earnings) and qualify for SNAP is $2,069 a month.
Nobody’s getting rich off SNAP.
Also- some of the people recycling the food stamp stories that go back to Reagan need to remember that stamps were discontinued several years ago.
Comment by DuPage Dave Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 6:41 pm
I think some of the “hating” on the poor we see comes from an excessive amount of attention to “prosperity gospels”, that is, the Old Testament thinking that the Rich and Healthy are that way because they must be favored by God, and the poor and sick must be sinners God is punishing. There is also new science that suggests conservative right-wingers may actually have differently-wired minds than we do. Link:
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/15/inside_the_conservative_brain_what_explains_their_wiring/
But be careful in quoting the article to some people, as they may suddenly react quite violently, without recognition that they’re reading about just such behaviors.
Comment by Gregor Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 6:44 pm
Not sure why, but I am a bit surprised by the reaction this generated. Of course there’s some level of fraud involved with the program, but there’s also a stigma involved and many people who could benefit from the program go hungry because they’re afraid to sign up. Do you think that people enjoy having their name added to the list of people receiving government benefits or walk into a store knowing that you’ll be judged when you pull out that Link card?
The total amount of money lost because of welfare fraud is NOTHING compared to the amount of taxpayer dollars lost due to corporations fleecing the people (i.e. mortgage crisis, shotty products, etc.).
Comment by yo yo Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 7:47 pm
Anonymous
You are partially correct. Expedited benefits are issued postponing verifications if the person meets the criteria, which is very limited. These are issued for only 1 month plus a partial month if the person applied after the 16th of the month. No other benefits are issued unless the recipient provides all necessary verifications.
“Someone I know just got alloted emergency SNAP benefits based on the information he entered into a computer. No verifications of any kind, and none since then either.”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 7:59 pm
Boog - anything else you’d like to see “them” do besides jumping through hoops? Maybe a song and dance routine for your entertainment????
Comment by Heather Wednesday, Sep 18, 13 @ 8:05 pm