Fight Over Food Stamps Has Many Complexities

None

Torri Christian is an anti-hunger advocate in Oklahoma. This photo was taken by Jerry Hagstrom in September 2013.  
National Journal
Jerry Hagstrom
Sept. 22, 2013, 5:47 a.m.

OK­LAHOMA CITY — Why did all but 15 Re­pub­lic­ans de­cide last week that they could vote for a $39 bil­lion cut to food stamps over the next 10 years even though par­ti­cip­a­tion in the pro­gram has gone up dur­ing the re­ces­sion?

The ex­per­i­ence of Torri Chris­ti­an, dir­ect­or of ad­vocacy and policy for the Re­gion­al Food Bank of Ok­lahoma and the Com­munity Food Bank for East­ern Ok­lahoma, goes a long way in ex­plain­ing why sup­port for food stamps in low-in­come South­ern states is so low among their Re­pub­lic­an politi­cians.

On Thursday the House passed a bill that would cut $39 bil­lion from the food stamp pro­gram, of­fi­cially known as the Sup­ple­ment­al Nu­tri­tion As­sist­ance Pro­gram, or SNAP. This week that bill is ex­pec­ted to be mar­ried to the farm-pro­gram bill the House passed in June and sent to the Sen­ate to be­gin a con­fer­ence on a com­pre­hens­ive farm bill.

The vote was 217-210. All House Demo­crats voted against it, but only 15 Re­pub­lic­ans joined them in op­pos­i­tion. They in­cluded four from New York, two each from Cali­for­nia, New Jer­sey, and Pennsylvania, and one each from Alaska, Neb­raska, North Car­o­lina, Vir­gin­ia, and West Vir­gin­ia.

The five-mem­ber Ok­lahoma del­eg­a­tion, all Re­pub­lic­ans, voted for the bill, in­clud­ing House Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­man Frank Lu­cas, who last year pro­posed only a $16.5 bil­lion cut and this year a $20.5 bil­lion cut in SNAP.

Ok­lahoma was one of the 40-some states that re­ques­ted waivers from the Ag­ri­cul­ture De­part­ment to make it easi­er for people to qual­i­fy for food stamps, but this year the Le­gis­lature passed and the gov­ernor signed a law for­bid­ding the state gov­ern­ment from ask­ing for an­oth­er waiver to al­low a cat­egory of be­ne­fi­ciar­ies known as “able-bod­ied adults without de­pend­ents” (ABAWDs) to get be­ne­fits for more than the fed­er­ally al­lowed three months out of every three years.

“Ok­lahoma has this un­der­ly­ing cul­ture of self-suf­fi­ciency that is prob­ably the main thing that Ok­laho­mans pride them­selves in,” Chris­ti­an said in an in­ter­view earli­er this month. “Loudly ad­voc­at­ing for the safety net is not the easi­est thing to do in Ok­lahoma.”

Chris­ti­an said that she and her col­leagues spent much of the early part of the year try­ing to tone down the ef­fort in the state Le­gis­lature to stop the ABAWDs from get­ting more be­ne­fits. Ok­lahoma le­gis­lat­ors ini­tially wanted to re­quire that the be­ne­fi­ciar­ies work more hours than the fed­er­al law re­quires and had to be in­formed that they could not go bey­ond fed­er­al law, Chris­ti­an said. The ban on ABAWD waivers passed, but Chris­ti­an said an­ti­hun­ger ad­voc­ates man­aged to stop oth­er pro­pos­als, in­clud­ing one on as­set tests that would have made it par­tic­u­larly hard for seni­or cit­izens to get food stamps.

With these state-level battles a high pri­or­ity, the de­bate in Wash­ing­ton over food stamps seemed far away, but Chris­ti­an said she does travel to Wash­ing­ton about once a quarter and had made it clear to Lu­cas that there are still many needy people in Ok­lahoma. (Per­haps that’s why Lu­cas in an in­ter­view said he heard more about food stamps from ad­voc­ates in Wash­ing­ton than at home.) Lu­cas, she said, vis­ited food banks in 2011 and has been sup­port­ive of SNAP. “He is aware that its be­ne­fits are im­port­ant for fam­il­ies stay­ing to­geth­er,” Chris­ti­an said. “He is not one to buy in­to any rhet­or­ic.”

But she said it has been harder to get Lu­cas’s staff to agree to meet­ings since he has been un­der so much pres­sure to cut make a big cut to food stamps. Chris­ti­an said she does not blame Lu­cas for agree­ing to the cuts, par­tic­u­larly since it is part of a path to­ward a new farm bill.

Last year, when Lu­cas pro­posed a $16.5 bil­lion cut to food stamps over 10 years, the Ok­lahoma food banks re­mained si­lent while na­tion­al an­ti­hun­ger groups such as the Food Re­search and Ac­tion Cen­ter called for no cuts to food stamps. “We did not say a thing,” Chris­ti­an said. “We knew that no cuts was un­real­ist­ic.” Na­tion­al hun­ger groups “are try­ing to keep their mes­sage con­sist­ent,” she ad­ded, “but it is not pro­duct­ive when they are not work­ing with the real­ity.”

Chris­ti­an and her col­leagues have also tried ap­proach­ing more re­cently elec­ted Ok­lahoma Re­pub­lic­ans. Rep. Jim Briden­stine, who rep­res­ents Tulsa, has vis­ited food banks, she said, but when it comes to dis­cuss­ing hun­ger he “gets in­to very the­or­et­ic­al con­ver­sa­tions. He is very liber­tari­an.”

The ad­voc­ates have also talked to Rep. Mark­wayne Mul­lin, who rep­res­ents the poorest part of the state, but with him the con­ver­sa­tion must start with “why need ex­ists in the com­munity,” not with the need to main­tain SNAP be­ne­fit and eli­gib­il­ity levels, she said.

Lob­by­ing to main­tain SNAP presents spe­cial chal­lenges for food-bank lead­ers, she said. They real­ize that low-in­come people get most of their food through SNAP and use the food banks as a backup, and that if SNAP be­ne­fits are cut people will have to come to food banks earli­er in the month.

“We do pub­licly sup­port SNAP not just be­cause we can’t do more, but if we want to end hun­ger we have to ad­voc­ate for safety nets,” she said.

But the first pri­or­ity for the Ok­lahoma food banks, which are part of the Feed­ing Amer­ica net­work, has to be ac­quir­ing and dis­trib­ut­ing food. “This is food in, food out,” she said.

The Ok­lahoma food banks get between 10 and 20 per­cent of their dona­tions from the Emer­gency Food As­sist­ance Pro­gram, or TE­FAP, which is run by the Ag­ri­cul­ture De­part­ment. Com­mod­ity-dis­tri­bu­tion pro­grams are more pop­u­lar with Re­pub­lic­ans than SNAP, and the House bill that cut food stamps con­tains a big­ger in­crease for TE­FAP than the Sen­ate-passed farm bill.

But Chris­ti­an noted that her food banks have to get the oth­er 80 to 90 per­cent from dona­tions of food or money. That means spend­ing a lot of time on food drives and fun­drais­ing, but also deal­ing with the fact that some donors are very con­ser­vat­ive and might not like a com­bat­ive cam­paign against SNAP cuts.

One of the oddest things about the cur­rent battle over food stamps is that, while farm groups op­posed split­ting the farm bill in two, food com­pan­ies and re­tail­ers that take in the SNAP money through elec­tron­ic be­ne­fit-trans­fer cards have been si­lent ex­cept for their sup­port of the Food Re­search and Ac­tion Cen­ter and oth­er an­ti­hun­ger groups. Chris­ti­an said the Ok­lahoma an­ti­hun­ger lead­ers have ex­plored the idea of loc­al re­tail­ers writ­ing an op-ed art­icle point­ing out that SNAP is im­port­ant to their bot­tom line, but “the eco­nom­ic stim­u­lus ar­gu­ment back­fires in a way” and there are fears people may ask, “Are you try­ing to help the needy, or what are you try­ing to pull here?”

The Ok­lahoma ex­per­i­ence seems to sig­nal that cam­paign­ing to main­tain SNAP be­ne­fits is more com­plic­ated and dif­fi­cult than it might ap­pear.

When Lu­cas held town-hall meet­ings in Ponca City and Black­well on Sept. 5, there were no SNAP be­ne­fi­ciar­ies or an­ti­hun­ger ad­voc­ates to urge him not to cut food for the needy.

“People work­ing three jobs are not go­ing to make it to a town-hall meet­ing on a Thursday,” Chris­ti­an said. “People strug­gling just day to day to get by don’t have the time and the agen­cies serving them don’t have the time. They are tapped out emo­tion­ally. That is why there is such a frac­tured net­work for safety nets.”

The Ok­lahoma food banks pub­licly op­posed the $39 bil­lion cut and said af­ter­ward that they “look for­ward to col­lab­or­at­ing fur­ther with our law­makers in the con­fer­ence com­mit­tee pro­cess to min­im­ize neg­at­ive im­pacts for the fam­il­ies we serve.”

The Sen­ate bill con­tains only a $4 bil­lion cut, and an­ti­hun­ger ad­voc­ates ex­pect the Sen­ate and Pres­id­ent Obama to op­pose a deep cut. But the $39 bil­lion House cut is now on the table, and the pres­sure is on to fi­nal­ize a farm bill that can be passed in the House.

Na­tion­al an­ti­hun­ger groups and Demo­crats ar­gue that there has long been bi­par­tis­an sup­port for SNAP and the feed­ing pro­grams. But when Demo­crats ar­gued on the House floor against the cuts they used the ex­amples of an op-ed writ­ten by former Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­ers Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and Bob Dole, R-Kan., and Sen­ate Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee rank­ing mem­ber Thad Co­chran, R-Miss. But Daschle and Dole have been re­tired for a long time and there are ques­tions about wheth­er Co­chran will run again.

An­ti­hun­ger groups in the more lib­er­al states have no prob­lem put­ting pres­sure on Demo­crats to de­fend food stamps. But that’s preach­ing to the choir. Per­haps what has happened in Ok­lahoma will be a wake-up call to the na­tion­al an­ti­hun­ger groups to provide some kind of as­sist­ance to an­ti­hun­ger groups in states that have elec­ted a new gen­er­a­tion of Re­pub­lic­an politi­cians. If something doesn’t hap­pen to con­vince them they need to sup­port SNAP, con­ser­vat­ives may suc­ceed in their cam­paign to gut both it and the farm pro­gram.

In a fol­low-up email, Chris­ti­an noted that she had met with Lu­cas in 2012 and with Lu­cas’s staff in 2013 and said the food banks “have con­tin­ued a strong, part­ner­ship-minded re­la­tion­ship with his loc­al and na­tion­al staffers.” She also said that even though Ok­lahoma food banks re­mained si­lent on the pro­posed $16.5 bil­lion cut to food stamps that Lu­cas pro­posed in 2012, “Ok­lahoma’s food banks agree with Feed­ing Amer­ica that any cuts to SNAP in the U.S. farm bill will be harm­ful for mil­lions of hungry Amer­ic­ans.” Chris­ti­an also said that Ok­lahoma’s food banks “ap­pre­ci­ate the time Con­gress­man Briden­stine has spent thus far tour­ing our fa­cil­it­ies and learn­ing about our work. We look for­ward to build­ing our re­la­tion­ship with his of­fice in the fu­ture for the bet­ter­ment of fam­il­ies we serve.”

Con­trib­ut­ing Ed­it­or Jerry Hag­strom is the founder and ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of The Hag­strom Re­port, which may be found at www.Hag­strom­Re­port.com.
What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
7 REPUBLICANS ON STAGE
Carly Fiorina Will Not Be Allowed to Debate on Saturday
2 days ago
THE LATEST

ABC News has announced the criteria for Saturday’s Republican debate, and that means Carly Fiorina won’t be a part of it. The network is demanding candidates have “a top-three finish in Iowa, a top-six standing in an average of recent New Hampshire polls or a top-six placement in national polls in order for candidates to qualify.” And there will be no “happy hour” undercard debate this time. “So that means no Fiorina vs. Jim Gilmore showdown earlier in the evening for the most ardent of campaign 2016 junkies.

Source:
×