Too bad Carl didn't take the lady up on her challenge to personally observe all the profligate food stamp recipients.

Personally, I see government programs like this as a way to redirect the flow of money in such a way that more people get to use it as it perculates up to the top.

Republicans want to personalize the issue because they are deeply disturbed that somewhere, somebody is getting something that they don't deserve. Very childish thinking.

quote:

Republicans want to personalize the issue because they are deeply disturbed that somewhere, somebody is getting something that they don't deserve. Very childish thinking

Funny, I thought that very thing 10 years ago when they stole my car, and again 6 years ago when they broke into my garage and stole all my tools and wood working equipment.

somebody somewhere was getting something they didn't deserve.

I did not hear the broadcast so I can only comment on what I can gleam from the tread. This is what I know about supplemental programs:

1: There are usually strict eligibility requirements. You just do down and "get them"

2: If this women feels that these people are on fraudulently, she should contact the investigative services unit and report the. As a vendor, she has access to that number.

3: If she is so offended she can opt out and not be an authorized vendor for food stamps.
She is probably in a community where there are a great deal of poor or poverty level people so maybe she could no survive without them.
Maybe she is a bigot, racist who just hates poor people and it that cause I have no sympathy for her.

Somebody committed a bunch of burglaries because they received food stamps? Remarkable.

quote:

Somebody committed a bunch of burglaries because they received food stamps? Remarkable

Seriously? Do you have a link on that?

We (Oregon) have a avg 13% "mis-allotment" of food stamps annually. Avg payment is $91.00 A/Month. There are 255,000 households on Food Stamps. @ $3 million is pissed away annually.

Hell, those are only the ones they find. How many Illegals are on they with fake information.

That is one state. If you want, I can try to figure out national rates. gives me shivers just thinking about it

quote:

We (Oregon) have a avg 13% "mis-allotment" of food stamps annually. Avg payment is $91.00 A/Month.

And you have proof to back this up?
According to the GAO (General Accounting Office)maybe 1% are on the program fraudulently
Illegals would have to have a fake Medicaid card that was active and could be "swiped" though a terminal. Quite an expensive feat for $91.month
Point is there are plenty of Republican small business and large grocery chain that have no problem with Food Stamps (they may hate the people but they love those checks) and good luck convincing them otherwise.

. What measures are taken to prevent food stamp fraud?

USDA is committed to integrity in all of its nutrition assistance programs, and has put special emphasis on the Food Stamp Program because of its size and importance. However, in a program as large as the Food Stamp Program, it may be inevitable that some people will try to cheat the system.

The Department has already taken a number of steps to make it easier to catch and punish people who misuse food stamp benefits. The welfare reform act of 1996 included several provisions, originally proposed by USDA, to more closely scrutinize food retailers who apply for food stamp authorization, and to more closely monitor retailers once they are participating in the program. Retailers who violate program rules can face heavy fines, removal from the program, or jail. Individual food stamp recipients who sell their benefits can also be removed from the program.

One of the most promising developments in the fight against food stamp fraud has been the increasing use of electronic benefit transfer--EBT--to issue food stamp benefits. EBT uses a plastic card similar to a bank debit card to transfer funds from a food stamp benefits account to a retailer's account. With an EBT card, food stamp customers pay for groceries without any paper coupons changing hands. EBT eliminates paper food stamps and creates an electronic record for each transaction that makes fraud easier to detect.

Most States have now adopted EBT for food stamp issuance, and in some cases for other programs such as USDA's Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), and the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, the Federal block-grant program operated by the Department of Health and Human Services to provide cash assistance to needy families. As of October 2003, 48 States, the District of Columbia, Guam and Puerto Rico have on-line food stamp EBT systems. Ohio and Wyoming have off-line EBT systems that use microprocessor chip cards. Forty-nine States, the District, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have completed state-, city-, and island-wide rollout. California is working to extend its EBT system state-wide. Several states have formed consortiums for joint EBT projects. (The welfare reform act of 1996 required all States to convert to EBT issuance for their food stamp programs by October 2002.)

What are some characteristics of food stamp households?

Based on a study of data gathered in Fiscal Year 2005:

*

50 percent of all participants are children (18 or younger), and 65 percent of them live in single-parent households.
*

54 percent of food stamp households include children.
*

8 percent of all participants are elderly (age 60 or over).
*

77 percent of all benefits go to households with children, 16 percent go to households with disabled persons, and 9 percent go to households with elderly persons.
*

34 percent of households with children were headed by a single parent, the overwhelming majority of whom were women.
*

The average household size is 2.3 persons.
*

The average gross monthly income per food stamp household is $648.
*

46 percent of participants are white; 31 percent are African-American, non-Hispanic; 13 percent are Hispanic; 2 percent are Asian, 1 percent are Native American, and 7 percent are of unknown race or ethnicity.

Revised June 29, 2005

THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM IS EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT
Savings Cannot be Achieved by Targeting "Waste, Fraud, and Abuse"
By Dorothy Rosenbaum
PDF of full report

View Related Reports

If you cannot access the files through the links, right-click on the underlined text, click "Save Link As," download to your directory, and open the document in Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Some in Congress have suggested that the Food Stamp Program can be cut this year by targeting “waste, fraud, and abuse.” In fact,

* The Food Stamp Program is efficient and effective. Program integrity has improved dramatically in recent years and food stamp error rates are now at an all-time low. USDA data show that over 98 percent of food stamp benefits go to eligible households. The low error rate is a major accomp­lishment for a large benefit program that is administered by thousands of eligi­bil­ity workers in state and local offices across the country.

* As the U. S. Government Ac­countability Office (GAO) reported in May 2005, “[t]he pay­ment error rate has fallen each year since 1999 … This decline in the payment error rate has been wide­spread: the rate fell in 42 states and the District of Columbia, and the rates in 18 of these states fell by at least one-third.”

*

GAO further reported that “[a]lmost two-thirds of the payment errors in the Food Stamp Program are caused by case­workers, usually when they fail to act on new infor­ma­tion or make mistakes when applying program rules.” In addition, the program’s success in serving the working poor contributes in part to its error rate: according to GAO, “managing cases with earnings contributes to payment error in part because case­workers may find it difficult to keep up with frequent changes reported to them.”

* Any policies that would significantly reduce food stamp benefit expenditures would have either to eliminate eligibility for various groups of low-income families and individuals or to reduce the already modest benefit amounts. Either approach would cause harm to the low-income households — such as families with children, the elderly, or people with disabilities — who depend upon the Food Stamp Program to help them afford an adequate diet.

*

The Food Stamp Program’s benefits are already lean. Food stamp benefits average only about $1 per person per meal.

Figure 1


Figure 1


The Food Stamp Error Rate has Reached All-time Lows

*

Almost ninety-nine percent of food stamp benefits are issued to eligible persons, the vast bulk of whom are children and parents in low-income families, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.

*

On June 24, the U.S. De­partment of Agricul­ture (USDA) announced that the national combined payment error rate in 2004 reached is sixth consecutive all-time low at just 5.88 percent. Until recently 6 percent was the threshold the Food Stamp Act established for exemplary perfor­mance. An error rate below 6 percent qualified a state for a bonus payment or enhanced funding. Now, because of improved payment accuracy, the national average has exceeded this exemplary level.

*

Some portray the food stamp “com­bined” error rate as a reflection of the dimen­sion of excessive federal expendi­tures due to er­rors. This is incorrect since the combined error rate in­cludes underpayments that save the Pro­gram money. The USDA issues three separate payment error rates: the overpayment error rate, the underpayment error rate, and the combined payment error rate. The overpayment error rate counts benefits issued to ineligible households as well as benefits issued to eli­gible households in excess of what federal rules provide­. The underpayment error rate measures errors in which eligible, par­ti­­cipating households received fewer benefits than the Program’s rules direct. The combined payment error rate is the result of summing (rather than net­ting) the overpayment and underpayment error rates. As GAO notes, “[u]nderpayments represent unintentional financial savings to the federal government.”

In other words, to calculate the combined payment error rate USDA adds together the overpayment error rate, which in 2004 was 4.48 percent nationally, and the underpayment ­error rate, which in 2004 was 1.41 percent, to reach a combined error rate of 5.88 percent. The net loss to the federal government, how­ever, from the errors in that state’s program (i.e., the bene­fits lost through over­payments minus those saved by underpayments) would be only three percent.

*

quote:

And you have proof to back this up?

James, are you trying to hurt my feeling. I would have thought by now I was am unimpeachable source.

Oregon DHS Food Stamp Program
GAO Food Stamp Programs
These are always fun-
Fraud Investigations

quote:

Why GAO Did This Study

In fiscal year 2003, the federal Food
Stamp Program made payment
errors totaling about $1.4 billion in
benefits, or about 7 percent of the
total $21.4 billion in benefits
provided to a monthly average of
21 million low-income participants.

That is no where 13% more like 3%. Whats that about 30 minutes in Baghad. Ken Lay took that in maybe 5 minutes. The citations you quote were not participants but Vendors who committed fraud and they were caught and to pay back the money absconded. What about the billions ENRON and Black Hawk defrauded?

quote]n other words, to calculate the combined payment error rate USDA adds together the overpayment error rate, which in 2004 was 4.48 percent nationally, and the underpayment ­error rate, which in 2004 was 1.41 percent, to reach a combined error rate of 5.88 percent. The net loss to the federal government, how­ever, from the errors in that state’s program (i.e., the bene­fits lost through over­payments minus those saved by underpayments) would be only three percent.[/quote]

quote:

That is no where 13% more like 3%

What crack are you smokin? 13% was the 2003 rate.

quote:

State 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004a
North Dakota 8.03 7.04 5.96 6.14 4.85 4.09
Ohio 8.44 7.96 8.48 6.50 6.61 7.74
Oklahoma 11.88 7.05 8.23 7.94 8.98 5.83
Oregon 10.50 10.15 9.76 11.07 13.00 7.81

page 45 of the GAO report. Disregard the 2004 rate.

You are out of your mind or so full of hate and cynicism That number is an outlining number. The national average for 2003 was 6.8%. Oregon got its fraud number down significantly in the next year.
Ideally, there should be no fraud. ideally, there should be no need for food stamps
Ideally, politicians should not exploit the tragedy of 9/11 to get us messed up in Iraq.
I can live with food stamp fraud. As I said, the amount of money waisted is maybe 30 minutes in Iraq.

quote:

You are out of your mind or so full of hate and cynicism

seriously those are my only chioces?

quote:

The national average for 2003 was 6.8%

In fiscal year 2003, the federal Food Stamp Program made payment errors totaling about $1.4 billion in benefits
Oregon was nearly twice the national avg for fraud.

quote:

Ideally, there should be no fraud. ideally, there should be no need for food stamps

Two entirely different concepts. stealing vs. need. I would never knock the needy.

quote:

Ideally, politicians should not exploit the tragedy of 9/11 to get us messed up in Iraq.

I'm sure there is a Latin term for that...

quote:

I can live with food stamp fraud. As I said, the amount of money waisted is maybe 30 minutes in Iraq.

That is interesting, so then your ok with Insurance fraud, ID theft, welfare fraud, unemployment fraud, shoplifting, car jacking, robbery, literally all crimes in which someone takes something that is not theirs versus war, a main function of federal government.

Very good, the U.S. federal government doled out $1.4 billion in overpayment in a year's time in food credit to poor people.

Would that the eventual $1.5 trillion for Iraq had been used in the same manner.

Loganthor posted: "war, a main function of federal government."

No, dude, that's called "defense".

quote:

No, dude, that's called "defense".

THANKS... Still true though.

quote:

Very good, the U.S. federal government doled out $1.4 billion in overpayment in a year's time in food credit to poor people.

Your making assumptions on their economic standing. It is called fraud for a reason

quote:

In other words, to calculate the combined payment error rate USDA adds together the overpayment error rate, which in 2004 was 4.48 percent nationally, and the underpayment ­error rate, which in 2004 was 1.41 percent, to reach a combined error rate of 5.88 percent. The net loss to the federal government, how­ever, from the errors in that state’s program (i.e., the bene­fits lost through over­payments minus those saved by underpayments) would be only three percent.

I wonder if this bothers anyone else? Can you imagine any business that has a 6 percent error rate and stay in business?

What would you DO to your bank if it shortchanged you only 1.41 percent? "Oh it was ok because this just made up for some of the over-payments we made to others."

Loganthor posted: "THANKS... Still true though."

Yes, as in the imminent attacks about to be launched against the U.S. by Iran. Or those Saddam had in the works. Or the ones Ho Chi Minh was hatching. Not to mention the invasion planned over the Rio Grande by the FSLN. Or the massive Cuban armada formed up in Havana harbor. Or the Arbenz government getting ready to mobilze the campesinos for the northward push.

"Still true enough"

quote:

Yes, as in the imminent attacks about to be launched against the U.S. by Iran. Or those Saddam had in the works. Or the ones Ho Chi Minh was hatching. Not to mention the invasion planned over the Rio Grande by the FSLN. Or the massive Cuban armada formed up in Havana harbor. Or the Arbenz government getting ready to mobilze the campesinos for the northward push

Those certainly sound like defense issues. Thank god we have George Bush at the helm to keep us all safe.

quote:

We (Oregon) have a avg 13% "mis-allotment" of food stamps annually.

Why, that's just aweful! But, you know, I don't really care thgat much, because I know that that's just that much more money that will filter through the grocery store payroll, and some of it will end up in my pension check. FOr me, it's all good.

Log, in marxist land everything is ass/backwards, fraud and theft are good things. Trying to end them is wrong.

quote:

Brent: Yes, as in the imminent attacks about to be launched against the U.S. by Iran. Or those Saddam had in the works. Or the ones Ho Chi Minh was hatching. Not to mention the invasion planned over the Rio Grande by the FSLN. Or the massive Cuban armada formed up in Havana harbor. Or the Arbenz government getting ready to mobilize the campesinos for the northward push.

Sorry but you forgot some more dictators to add to your list:
Mugabe
Pol Pot
Nur
Najibullah
Franco
Abdul Rashid Dostum
Mao
Stalin
Lenin
Rabbani
...

Wow! Now I'm completely confused! Did any of these people receive Oregon Food Stamps? What about Ghandi, Mother Theresa and that Jesus guy? Who do we throw into this list?

quote:

Why, that's just aweful! But, you know, I don't really care thgat much, because I know that that's just that much more money that will filter through the grocery store payroll, and some of it will end up in my pension check. FOr me, it's all good.

Does the little bit offset the taxes the government pisses away. Dont get me wrong, I understand the benefit side for you, what is the cost side?

I don't see a cost. The money doesn't disappear. It just moves on to somebody else . . . and then some of it comes back to the original taxpayer. But, of course, we have had this discussion several times before.

As a self-described "conservative" democrat, here is my take for whatever it's worth.

I have no problem with the idea of entitlement programs...food stamps, welfare, CHIP, etc. As was said long ago, the measure of a great nation is how they take care of their citizens that cannot care for themselves. We should all understand that there is going to be a certain amount of fraud associated with any of these programs. And it will come from both the recipients and the providers of social services.

The question is how do you try and keep the amount of fraud to some acceptable level (whatever that is deemed to be). The problem I have is the knee jerk reactions, from both sides, that usually follow. Like some previous posts, one side may not care as long as some are benefitting. The other side will point to the fraud as evidence the program is broken and needs fixed. Both sides are right, to a point.
What I object to is the fact that most on the left, but not all, will usually immediately call for more funding of these programs. The mantra seems to be that if I only had more bucks, we could fix all the problems. The right, but not all, will almost immediately say that they have enough money and some of their funding should be cut. To me, the amount of money is not the issue with entitlements, for the most part. It's the administration of the programs that needs looked at. Wouldn't it be refreshing to hear the administrators and managers of these programs say that they are going to look for more efficient ways to cut the levels of bureaucracy that almost always accompany these programs, thereby improving the level of service and at a lower cost to the taxpayers? But usually what we get is "show me some more money".

I have no doubt that some programs may need more funding, but I also have no doubt that the management is just as much of a problem.

About.com U.S. Gov Info / Resources
GAO Finds Food Stamp Program Efficiency Improving
From Robert Longley,
Your Guide to U.S. Gov Info / Resources.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Also showed reduced rate of program fraud
Dateline: May 2005

A report released by the General Accounting Office (GAO) shows that efficiency in management of the federal Food Stamp program has reached its best level in history, and that continued improvements are expected when new data is released by USDA. In addition, the GAO report showed a significant reduction in the number of ineligible families receiving food stamps.

The report would seem to contradict recent criticism claiming high rates of “fraud, waste, and abuse” in the Food Stamp Program.

Among the findings of the GAO report were the following:

# The rate of non-qualified food stamp recipients being granted benefits due to either administrative error or applicant fraud has declined by almost one-third over the past five years from 9.86 percent in 1999 to a record low of 6.63 percent in 2003. 98 percent of households receiving food stamps were eligible for the program.

# The rate of benefits granted in error declined in 41 states and the District of Columbia.

# As a result of the declining error rate between 1999 and 2003, the Food Stamp Program avoiding paying out some $700 million in erroneous payments in 2003 alone that it would otherwise have paid had the error rates from 1999 remained constant.

# Of the errors reported in the Food Stamp Program, two-thirds were the result of caseworker error (such as failure to act on reported changes in income or making mistakes in applying program rules), while one-third were the result of participant error, such as failing to report income changes.

# Declining error rates in the Food Stamp Program occurred during a time of rapidly rising participation in the program, showing increased efficiency and targeting of resources.

The Food Stamp Program error rate represents the combined total of the food stamp overpayment rate as well as the underpayment rate – that is, benefits due to eligible recipients that they did not receive. If the underpayments were subtracted from the overpayments, arguably a more accurate way of measuring total food stamp benefits paid in error, the aggregate food stamp payments overpaid would equal $760 million for fiscal year 2003, just 3.5 percent of total food stamp benefits.

The full GAO Report, Food Stamp Program: States Have Made Progress Reducing Payment Errors, and Further Challenges Remain (GAO-05-245), may be viewed (pdf) at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05245.pdf

About the General Accounting Office
The General Accounting Office is the investigative arm of Congress. Charged with examining matters relating to the receipt and disbursement of public funds, GAO performs audits and evaluations of Government programs and activities.

Created under the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, the GAO conducts independent audits of government agencies. GAO is under the control and direction of the Comptroller General of the United States, who is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for a term of 15 years.

This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/healthcare/a/foodstampgao.htm

©2007 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.

Look I am not going to defend fraud. I have worked with the Investigative Services Unit for New York State and recommended investigations for similar programs. Waste, Fraud and Abuse have no place and only undermine the integrity and undermine the real need for these programs.
Having said that, I am amazed that these same critics are silent with the 10 Billion totally unaccounted for in Iraq. The response is because its a war its justified. I recognize there are those who philosophically oppose these programs. Fine, contact your congressman and senators and demand they put forth motions to cease funding.Good luck

James, as reported, the majority of food stamp overpayments are administrative error. And the recipient has to re-imburse the program.

This happened to me. I notified them 3 times that I was receiving an over-payment. It took them nearly a year to demand re-payment and stop the excess payments.

Fortunately, I knew better than to spend them and the over-payment was deducted from the food stamp card. Had I suddenly been demanded to re-pay an amount equal to nearly a months income, it would a been a real mess. And that does happen to people. People assume that their increase is justified by an increase in the program itself....and get placed in a terrible financial situation when that assumption is incorrect.

I'm currently underpaid about $10 per month according to their own rules and determinations. I receive $10, and qualify for $20. It isn't worth the effort to obtain them. Any slight disruption in the paper work tends to create more messes than it resolves. The paperwork is enormous, as it is with any governmental assistance.

Probably pay more for paperwork and bureaucracy than is spent on actual assistance.

Attempts to prevent fraud, cost a fortune. Example: I was requested to send in documentation showing utility bills with my name and address on them. A week later, I was requested to send in documentation from my landlord to prove utilities were actually in my name and not theirs. This was followed by a request for documentation for additional verification of utility bills...additional copies of what they received before. This was followed by documentation requests for any changes in medical expenses. I sent this in and it was followed by requests for proof of a paid medical premium for the previous month...which was already included on the submitted documentation as having been paid. And on, and on, and on. All this within a 30 day period. Most months are like this. My neighbors tell me that before Bush, the stupidity of duplicate verifications wasn't done. Verifications, yes. Over and over, no. It was more of an annual or bi-annual thing.

With all of this paper work, there are bound to be an enormous amount of errors involved.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

quote:

James, as reported, the majority of food stamp overpayments are administrative error. And the recipient has to re-imburse the program.

This happened to me. I notified them 3 times that I was receiving an over-payment. It took them nearly a year to demand re-payment and stop the excess payments.

Well, thats not fraud thats mismanagement and possibly a systematic error which a decent computer and technical staff should be able to correct.

Well, the entire system is botched. I received a computer print-out showing monthly changes to my income over a 12 month period. Each month, different. Of course, there never was any change in income at all! I was asked to verify all of the changes to prove I didn't have a fraudulent intent and to provide verification for changes in income! A Social Security annual income statment helped on that one combined with direct deposit bank statements.

I can just imagine the computer input required for each piece of paper mailed into their office from all the requests. It must be mind-boggling.

In 1 1/2 years, I've filled 2 3-ring binders to capacity. (I keep copies of everything they send me and everything I send in return). It's the only way you can prove no intent to de-fraud. That is how many hundreds of sheets of paper?

Exampe: I received a notification of 3 pages that my benefits were increased to Zero.

3 days later I received three more pages stating that there was an error. Instead of a benefit increase to Zero, there was a benefit increase to Zero. Several days after that I received a notification that due to an error, my benefits were increased to $10 rather than being increased to Zero.

When people are elected who think government can't function well, it doesn't. Perhaps the program works better in other counties, but certainly not in mine.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

o Hunger and Environmental Nutrition
o Nutrition Education for the Public (NEP)
o Public Health/Community Nutrition
* Logout
In spite of the mismanagement of the Food Stamp Program, Hunger and Food Insecurity are real issues. Here is the American Dietetic Association Position Paper:

Food Insecurity and Hunger in the United States

March 2006 (Vol. 106, Issue 3, Pages 446-458)

ABSTRACT

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that systematic and sustained action is needed to bring an end to domestic food insecurity and hunger and to achieve food and nutrition security for all in the United States. The Association believes that immediate and long-range interventions are needed, including adequate funding for and increased utilization of food and nutrition assistance programs, the inclusion of food and nutrition education in all programs providing food and nutrition assistance, and innovative programs to promote and support the economic self-sufficiency of individuals and families, to end food insecurity and hunger in the United States. Food insecurity continues to exist in the United States, with over 38 million people experiencing it sometime in 2004. Negative nutritional and nonnutritional outcomes have been associated with food insecurity in adults, adolescents, and children, including poor dietary intake and nutritional status, poor health, increased risk for the development of chronic diseases, poor psychological and cognitive functioning and substandard academic achievement. Dietetics professionals can play a key role in ending food insecurity and hunger and are uniquely positioned to make valuable contributions through provision of comprehensive food and nutrition education, competent and collaborative practice, innovative research related to accessing a safe and secure food supply, and advocacy efforts at the local, state, regional and national levels.

* PDF Version (Member only)
* PDF Version (non-printable)

Privacy Policy © 2007 American Dietetic Association (ADA) - ADA does not endorse the content, products or services on other Web sites.

While adequate nutrition is recognized as a basic human need, unfortunately, in the United States, it isn't recognized as a basic human right.

The "right" to adequate nutrition has been deleted as being applicable to the United States in every treaty this nation has ever signed that has had it.

Carter signed a full treaty (International Covenent on Political, Social and Cultural Rights) and the Senate wouldn't ratify it as written.

In the U,.S., malnutrition is a human right. Basic nutrition is not. Begging bowls are still allowed in some cities.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

quote:

I can live with food stamp fraud. As I said, the amount of money waisted is maybe 30 minutes in Iraq

For me, it's a matter of language. Food stamp fraud does not represent a waste of money. The money does not disappear. Food stamp fraud is a waste of opportunity. That is, the opportunity to put the money to uses that are more pleasing to us. The money lives on to facilitate more transactions of all different kinds.

The other point I'ld like to make is that, as I understand it, the original purpose of food stamp programs was largely to provide an artificial "market" for food produced in excess of the needs of the normal commodities markets. That is, it was a part of the price-support efforts for farmers.

Yep. Ditto the give-a-way food programs for cheese, butter, etc. It was costing the government a fortune to store the stuff bought as a subsidy.

Smaller farmers do benefit from this....and the bulk of the money goes to huge producers such as Safeway Foods.

Long term intended effects though, were to keep more farms in business. Had they been allowed to go under, the prices of food would have increased dramatically.

Subsidies initially secured the national food supply at a modest individual cost. Corporate interests stepped in to take advantage of national policy. The intent has been somewhat usurped.

Retired Monk
"Ideology is a disease"

quote:

Long term intended effects though, were to keep more farms in business

Exactly!

This is where the overall big picture gets subverted by the small-minded focus on attempts to personalize the issues. Ronald Reagan was a master at this.

No doubt, there will be political divisions over farm price supports, but this is the proper and important arena for debate. Who really gives a crap about the odd "welfare queen" here and there?

The biggest congressional advocate for WIC and Child and Adult Care Feeding (school lunch) was Bob Dole. The last I checked Bob Dole was considered a Conservative Republican