As a nation, we should be talking about to learn from and strengthen effective programs such as SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, not how to cut them.
People in the United States used to face the extreme hunger and severe malnutrition that we associate with the developing world. Since the late 1960s, these problems have largely disappeared. Why?
Federal nutrition assistance programs are part of the answer, especially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps). Today, SNAP offers a lifeline to struggling families, helping 45 million people stave off hunger each year. The Census Bureau estimates that SNAP kept 4.6 million people out of poverty in 2015.
Tara Marks knows first-hand how this kind of help makes a difference.
Tara used to skip meals so that her young son would have enough to eat. Then she began getting help from federal programs, including SNAP. This assistance helped her gain some stability in her life.
As she told the Senate Budget Committee, “I was able to lift [my son] Nathan and myself out of poverty by finishing school. SNAP was a critical factor in my success. Having SNAP benefits allowed me to focus energy on school so that I could support us. I am no longer stressed over purchasing food.” Today, Tara is studying to be a lawyer.
Despite what the program’s critics would have us believe, SNAP benefits are modest, averaging $4.25 per person per day. Most recipients are either working or unable to work due to age or disability. On average, families stay on the program for nine months, just enough time to get back on their feet.
The program helps people eat today, but it also has a lasting impact, especially for children. Hunger can prevent children from concentrating and can lead to misbehavior and poor health. Children who receive SNAP do better in school, have higher graduation and college attendance rates, earn more, and have better health as adults, when compared with low-income children who don’t receive that benefit.
SNAP’s structure make it effective. As a federal entitlement program, SNAP expands or contracts depending on who needs the benefit. In an economic downturn, the program is there to support people who are newly struggling—with no congressional action needed. SNAP benefits help the economy, since people spend the money quickly and in their local communities. The program is also efficient: approximately 93 percent of its funding goes toward food.
Private charities and state programs also help address hunger. But they can’t take the place of a federal safety net. The private assistance from every church and private charity adds up to just five percent of the federal government’s food assistance.
Effective programs like SNAP are successfully addressing a persistent social challenge. They are helping millions of people like Tara Marks and her son every day. As a nation, we should be talking about to learn from and strengthen these programs, not how to cut them.
Tara Marks’ story first appeared on the Circle of Protection website.