Get Opinion in your inbox -- sign up for our weekly newsletter
Opinion L.A.
Opinion Opinion L.A.

Food stamps: Congress glimpses into the meaning of $4.50 a day

Beginning today, nearly 30 members of Congress will get a small taste of what it’s like to rely on food stamps. Those calling for deeper cuts can rest assured though; this will come at no cost to the federal government.

The group of House Democrats will voluntarily live off a budget of $4.50 per day, the average Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefit (somewhere between the price of a Starbucks latte and a Cronut). Their pledge is part of the SNAP Challenge, which is protesting a farm bill poised to make significant cuts to the program.

The Senate’s version of the bill, which cleared the chamber on Monday, calls for $4.1 billion in cuts over a 10-year period, but that’s nothing compared with the $20 billion in cuts awaiting in the House bill.

Some will be taking the challenge for a week and some will be taking it for just a few days. Regardless, the actions of this group are laudable.

The Wall Street Journal reported in March that 47 million people are on food stamps (15%) with even higher shares in many states (Mississippi, Oregon, Louisiana and Tennessee all have rates above 20%, as does the District of Columbia).

The House cuts to food stamps would be significant. Some effects include slashing no less than 2 million low-income people from the food stamp program and placing in jeopardy 210,000 school meals for children in low-income families, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

One might argue that the SNAP Challenge is the type of meaningless protest that renders no direct results except to serve as a public relations boost for those participating. In this case, though, legislators ought to seek media attention in any form they can. And hopefully their colleagues (especially those not participating) will take note.

Perhaps there are ways to trim SNAP and make it more efficient. But cutting $20 billion seems awfully counterproductive for a program that simply provides a fundamental necessity to millions of Americans. After all, the House only proposed cutting a still absurd $16.5 billion last year.

It’s important for legislators to understand where their money goes and, accordingly, what it means when a program is cut. And, in this instance, they need not look farther than their local grocery store.


Is Pope Francis a homophobe?

McManus: Head-in-the-sand Congress

NSA leaker Edward Snowden: He's no Daniel Ellsberg



Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • Opinion newsletter: Time to start taking Trump seriously?

    Opinion newsletter: Time to start taking Trump seriously?

    Good morning. I'm Paul Thornton, The Times' letters editor, and it is Saturday, Aug. 29. Times journalist Ruben Salazar) was killed in East Los Angeles 45 years ago today. Here's a look back at the week in Opinion. Subscribe to the newsletter If you ask Donald Trump, part of the U.S. Constitution...

  • Will L.A.'s Olympic ambitions hurt or help the river restoration?

    Will L.A.'s Olympic ambitions hurt or help the river restoration?

    City analysts raised concerns this week that Los Angeles' bid to host the 2024 Summer Olympics underestimated the cost of building an Olympic village along the Los Angeles River to lodge 17,000 athletes.

  • What Americans need: An 'idiot-proof' retirement system

    What Americans need: An 'idiot-proof' retirement system

    Volatility in the stock market over the last couple of weeks has caused enormous unease among investors big and small. Tens of millions of people with much of their retirement money in the market are worried about seeing a sudden plunge in prices. Many of these people will sell their stock to protect...

  • It's the 10th anniversary of Katrina, and I don't know how to feel

    It's the 10th anniversary of Katrina, and I don't know how to feel

    Last month, my mother mentioned that she would be out of town on the 10th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. When my sister admonished her to stay home, my mother replied, "Why? I wasn't here when it hit."

  • A smaller, better L.A. County jail?

    A smaller, better L.A. County jail?

    A majority of the Board of Supervisors wants a smaller jail. Numerous reform advocates and thinkers want a smaller jail. The Times wants a smaller jail — because for too many years the county has squandered one opportunity after another to provide more humane and effective treatment to accused...

  • Respecting the rights of the homeless

    Respecting the rights of the homeless

    A Los Angeles City Council committee took the smart step this week of removing criminal penalties and fines from a controversial new law involving the treatment of homeless people's possessions. While it's true that city officials have a responsibility to keep the streets safe and clean, they must...