Americans are easily persuaded into helping those in other countries; however, they fail to notice the poverty and hunger surrounding them daily. As an American citizen who lives a privileged life and has witnessed the painful effects of hunger first hand within my family members, I believe that all people should have the opportunity to be provided with the necessities of a comfortable lifestyle. This being said, it has been brought to my attention that Congress has been debating whether or not to cut funding from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This would be detrimental not only to the health of our citizens but also to the country’s economy. SNAP is a fundamental aspect of our country, and Congress can not afford to cut its funding.
There are 16 million children in America who live in households without consistent access to adequate food. 21 million American children rely on free or reduced-price lunches for their nutritional needs on an average school day as well as 3 million children who receive free meals in the summer when school is out of session. Poverty is everywhere, yet we continue to focus on the poverty of others rather than helping those around us. One in every five American children suffers from hunger.
Due to the high amount of debt in America, Congress continues making budget cuts in an attempt to save funds. However, lately Congress has been looking into cutting funding from SNAP, commonly known as food stamps, which would only increase the amount of hungry children we have in America. SNAP is a vital part of our country. It feeds 14% of all US households. On average, the monthly SNAP benefit is about $133.85 per person. This amounts to just $1.48 per meal. How is that Americans are willing to send “just a dollar a day” to help children in other countries battle hunger, but struggle giving taxes to support $1.48 a day to help hungry children in America? SNAP helps feed not only the adults and senior citizens of our country, but it helps feed many of our children.
SNAP isn’t a long-term program that families are just allowed to stay in forever. There are countless stories of how helpful SNAP has been in the lives of Americans. One example of the amazing benefits of SNAP comes from Steven Johnson, a medically discharged soldier who was airlifted out of Afghanistan due to a shoulder injury. When Johnson got home he expected to receive the Veterans Affairs medical disability benefits as soon as his military pay stopped. However, this wasn’t the case. The military failed to notify Johnson that it takes about 394 days for disability cases to process, so Johnson, his wife, and 3 teenage children were forced to fend for themselves until their case was heard. Johnson tried going back to work, but his shoulder still hadn’t completely recovered causing him severe pain during the workday. He pawned jewelry, his television, and other personal belongings to try to get money for food and bills. His children even applied for after school jobs, but it still wasn’t enough.
The Johnson family was forced to apply for SNAP. “I wasn’t embarrassed,” Johnson said. “I’m not going to sit here and let my kids go hungry because of my pride.” Each week after that, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson carefully planned how to use the $125 weekly allowance. They lived off peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for a while because it was all they could afford. The Johnson family is not the only story of how beneficial food stamps can be in the face of adversity. There are countless others who have experienced hard times in their lives, and, had it not been for the help of SNAP, they wouldn’t have been able to feed themselves or their family.
Many Americans are against SNAP because they say it is detrimental to our country’s economy. They think it is just a long-term program that families use when they are too lazy to get jobs and supply their own needs. However, these statements are false. The average time a family uses SNAP is about 9 months. SNAP is a temporary fix to hardships due to disabilities, injuries, and low-income.
According to studies done by Economists, every dollar of SNAP spending generates $1.70 back into local economy activity. The USDA has calculated that food stamps generate money back into the economy; so, cutting SNAP will also effect the U.S. economy. It would also dent revenues for the 250,000 groceries and supermarkets around the country that accept SNAP. This would in turn affect millions of jobs from store workers to truck drivers delivering food to those stores.
SNAP is actually beneficial to the economy, and, although it is already extremely efficient and effective, it could still be improved. One possible way to make this program more effective would be to have the participants help pay off their debt to the country after finding a job to support themselves. For example, if a person had relied on SNAP for 5 months and used $500 for food, then once they obtained a job they would have to pay the government back the $500 they took. That way, food stamps would be more of a loan process rather than a free money program. This would also guarantee money would constantly be in the SNAP fund because there would always be people giving money back to the program.
