Senate Cuts Food Stamp Funding to Pay for School Lunch

UPDATE 12/02/10: The House voted in favor of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, ushering in school lunch reform. The move came after more than 15,000 Change.org members signed a petition supporting the Child Nutrition Act and more than 1,000 members urged Congress to reform school lunch without cutting future funds to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), aka food stamps.  While the bill still includes SNAP cuts, President Obama and Congressional leaders have promised to fix these reductions. Read the full story here.

In a very anti-Robin Hood move, the Senate is robbing the poor to give to the poor. Last week, the Senate voted to slash funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a.k.a food stamps, in order to pay for Medicaid and teachers' salaries. Then later in the week, the Senate took an axe to food stamps again, cutting more funding in order to pay for its recently passed Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, a bill designed to improve school lunches. Two cuts in a week — that's harsh even by cash-strapped government standards.

Increasing the dollars dedicated to Medicaid, teachers' salaries, and school lunches is certainly a noble goal. However, dipping into the wallets of America's poor is kind of an ass-backwards way of funding these programs. As Change.org blogger Jean Stevens recently wrote, the stimulus bill provided more funding for SNAP. In terms of pulling the country out of its recession, that was a great move by our government — every dollar of food stamp money spent generates about $1.70 of economic activity, resulting in a big bump to America's struggling economy. Reducing the money allocated to food stamps just doesn't make fiscal sense.

Not only do these cuts hinder the economy, they hit America's poor at a time when they need food stamps the most. The recession drove an additional six million families to SNAP. "In short, when November 2013 hits, a family of four will see their monthly food stamp benefit drop by $59," Jill Richardson recently wrote on the La Vida Locavore blog. For many folks, $59 buys about a weeks' worth of groceries. It's all well and good that Medicaid, teachers, and students will see much-needed funding increases, but should poor families really have to go hungry in order to pay for these benefits?

To be fair, the final version of the Child Nutrition Act may not actually slash food stamp funding (the Senate's version of the bill includes these cuts, but the legislation still needs House approval before a final version is created and signed into law). But the cuts to fund Medicaid and teachers' salaries are definitely happening. In fact, the Senate voted to keep oil and gas subsidies in place, but approved cuts to SNAP instead. Talk about adding insult to injury.

Medicaid, school lunches, and teachers certainly need more resources, but not at the expense of hungry families. This shouldn't be a rob-from-the-poor-to-give-to-the-poor situation — rather, Congress should pull funding from those who can afford to lose a little (I'm looking at you, oil and gas companies).

Photo credit: Auswandern Malaysia via Flickr