On Saturday's show, Up host Chris Hayes and his guests discussed the politics of the Farm Bill. A version of the bill that passed the House Agriculture Committee would cut $16.5 billion from the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, over the next 10 years. Over the course of the discussion, Hayes and his guests examined the political influence of large food and beverage companies, and proposals in several states that would place more restrictions on what could be purchased with food stamps.
The debate over whether or not there should be more limits to what can be purchased with food stamps is not new. In fact, it’s a debate that’s been raging for decades. In 1964, during a debate over the Food Stamp Act, Senator Paul Douglas, a Democrat from Illinois, expressed concerns about allowing food stamp recipients to use their benefits to purchase soda:
I do not want to include Coca-Cola or Pepsi-Cola or any of that family. I like them myself, but I do not believe they should be permitted to be substitutes for milk. They are not valuable for the diet. They can be a waste of money especially for young people. Personally, I think it is a great mistake to include them. ...
My suggestion is that the item which is included be not merely soft drinks, but carbonated soft drinks. That would exclude Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Dr. Pepper, and all the varieties of the family of cola drinks. If we include them, this will be used as propaganda against an otherwise splendid and much needed measure. I want to help the poor and hungry and not sacrifice them for Coca-Cola. The Senator knows that these have no nutritional value—none at all.... Actually, they are bad for kids, rather than good for them. I hesitate to use such language, but the only benefit I can see in the present language is that it will increase the sales of the Coca-Cola and other cola and soft drink companies.
(via eatdrinkpolitics.com)
Allison Koch (@allisonlkoch) is a segment producer for Up w/ Chris Hayes.
Leave a Comment:
Soda/soft drinks are not food. Nor are chips, candy bars, etc. Yet you can buy all that with food stamps.
In some states you can buy already made food like sub, fried chicken etc.
Ho-lee-cow,
Do you know WHY some states allow ready made food???
Do you realize that many of the poor live in temporary housing including cheap motel rooms, etc - places WITHOUT kitchen facilities? What are these people supposed to eat??
Are really so "indoctrinated" that you DON'T see what is going on around you anymore?
When we were on food stamps milk/frozen juice was the liquids allowed, nothing finer than a chuck steak, no sugar cereal (my kids were toddlers, remember it well) basic cheese/produce. Go stand in line behind a mother of 2 buying with the wic program and all the covered/not covered 30-45 minutes to buy several days as the daily check of what's covered. Tbags worried about the billions in tax refunds banks/oil/wall street receive after they have paid ZERO in taxes. I don't so, oh yes you believe in killing now-deplorable.
I volunteer at a local food bank in a middle class suburb and have been alarmed to see more and more families needing help with food costs. There are eligibility standards for participating in a food bank so not just anyone can walk in. In 2011 the food allotment per person was 20 lbs of food for the month. In this weight only two packages of meat were included. Today because of increased demand that allotment has fallen to 15 lbs. of food now only including one package of meat per person per month. People who have been the long-term unemployed and who have returned to work are for the most part earning a fraction of the wages that they earned before. Their current wages do not enable them to keep up with the rising cost of food. In my city the cost of meat has risen by nearly $1.00 per lb. since 2010. Either increase the minimum wage to cover the true increase in the cost of living or expand the Food assistance to families. Unemployment figures hide the extreme economic suffering of millions of people in our country for the benefit of corporate profits. This spring a study of worker generated profits for the Fortune 500 corporations in the US demostrated that on average each workers productivity generated $436,000.00 of profit per corporation in 2011. These corporations declared record profits for 2011. What did these workers get? No raise, no bonus and too many had their benefit packages cut. It is virulent corporate greed that is driving millions of working people in our country into perpetual poverty..
I will always support helping those who are disabled or have fallen on hard times, but I take issue with having generations of Americans living "on the dole" gaming the system. Those folks who refuse to seek an education or training to better their lot in life (and, yes, it is STUPID to have it affect their benefits if they seek and receive such training) are shortchanging those who genuinely deserve assistance.
I was never allowed to have soda as a kid because my dad called it "bellywash." I still do not drink it because it is a major waste of calories. It is not something that should be purchased with food stamps as it is a waste of money.
It just makes sense to align SNAP with the WIC program which mandates healthier foods. Great show again today, this guy [Chris Hayes] needs a show right before Rachel and after ED every week night. Although, it would be a shame if the in-depth nature of this program were sacrificed if spread over the week.
When I was fired from my job, due to having applied for worker's comp for an accident at work, and subsequently had to appeal for denied unemployment, there was a period where I needed to apply for food stamps right away.
I needed to feed my family, simple. My unemployment came months later, but I had food stamps right away.
This can happen to anyone, people are loosing their jobs everyday.
The Republican plan for themselves, cutting taxes while cutting Education and everything that everyday people benefit from to improve their lives, and on top of it all, the "Corporations are People" outsource these USA jobs, for their profit...
is called Corporate Welfare, and a Fraud on the American People.
Only a person can walk into a polling place to vote, not a Corporation.
Romney lies and insults, and thinks he can get away with it, because of SuperPac millions flooding his campaign.
They think people can't see through that?
Sorry, Mitt, you will not be President.
There is no need to regulate what type of food items can be bought with the program; the people are asking for help with buying food, they are not asking for dietary advice. One thing people have got to remember is that using a system that was set up as a safety network for our nation’s people does not mean that these people forfeit all rights to be treated as regular humans who still deserve respect. Isn’t it bad enough that needy people must be stripped of all privacy and dignity in order to just apply for the programs? We don’t have to micromanage every single aspect of their lives in order to provide help. I can assure you that most of the people on this program have a very high level of planning and budgeting skills which they use daily in order to ensure that they will have enough food to last the entire month; not to mention the fact that more and more educated individuals are also temporarily on the system. What they buy is what they can afford to buy in order to provide enough sustenance for their families. In fact it would be wonderful for someone to step up to the plate and do the research necessary to see what these individuals are buying with the program to prove that they are not thinking like children and only buying junk food. Hell; give me a grant and I will research the information to prove it. But what I really want to express is that these people are still very much capable of managing their own lives; they are asking for help with food, they are not begging for the general public to assume they are completely incompetent and unable manage their own lives.
One out of two people in the US are now living in poverty. This is why there are so many people receiving food stamps, not because these people are too lazy to work. This is a link to a USA Today article from Dec of 2011.
http://tinyurl.com/7xg2sl6
Perhaps the GOP would like to address this problem by things like lifting minimum wage, passing a small business tax cut that provides incentative to hire workers here in the US, or to replace equipment and being allowed to deduct the entire cost from next year's taxes? Or how about rebuilding crumbling bridges, dams, levees, roads, power grid, etc?
Guess not... Apparently it's much more important to block access to contraception, stop abortion, kill public education, restrict voting and to give even more tax cuts to the top 2%. At the same time they complain about the economy being so awful.
Instead of focusing on stupid stuff like what “types of food” people on SNAP should be allowed to buy, why not focus on important things such as what is truly causing the system to not work as efficiently as it should. The people entering the program need help developing a life plan on how they are going to get off the system, they need compassionate, understanding, knowledgeable people working in social services that can treat them with dignity, and most importantly the system needs to be streamlined and linked. There is absolutely no reason why in this day and age no person in the federal government has realized the efficiency that would come from linking the programs together. One database and one application for all benefits to include: FASFA, WIC, SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, Energy Assistance, Section 8 housing, etc). You enter the person’s social security number and it pulls up all their information including job history duties, disabilities, education level, criminal history, IRS information, etc. Not that complicated people. Basic project management skills should have told us this a long time ago.
I totally agree Tanya, government assistance should be a "hand up" not a "hand out".
The phrase was repeated on this show saying "people that oppose food stamps think that those that receive government assistance are lazy". I don't believe that statement is entirely true and the feelings of people that oppose extended government programs weren't fully represented on this program.
When I have busted my butt completing another 60 hour week to receive monies that barely cover the expenses, including high taxes that support social programs, it's hard to think of the person sitting on the sofa in their rent subsidized apartment, watching subsidized cable television, talking on their subsidized cell phone, eating chips and soda bought with food stamps.
Owning a very small business I have gone through extremely hard times, as probably most Americans, and found it difficult to keep a roof over my family's head and food on the table. At these times I have been known to take side jobs like delivering or moving items for people with my truck to make a few bucks to buy dinner for the day or take on a second job. Thank God for my parents who have been supportive at these times also, but made me pay back every penny given. I understand I may have more opportunities than most and some people in this world have absolutely no support system through family or friends.
My point is, we all need a little help sometime but human beings 99% of the time will take the path of least resistance (a nice way to say we are all a little lazy). If I was receiving food stamps from the government would I get off the sofa to take on that side job for extra money for dinner? Probably not. Would I consider that lower paid job and possibly jeopardize my future government subsidies? Probably not.
I would like to see the data on the percentage of people that are on food stamps for more than a year, two years, so on to lifetime. The problem with these programs is without incentives (like supplying only the bare necessities for nutrition and living expenses and putting time limits on the subsidies) and support (like programs that help people find work and affordable childcare) to advance our lives past welfare, chances are we as a people will not move forward and the programs will continue to grow out of control.
That farmer from Iowa was brilliant. He is to farm and food issues the equal of Prof. Michael Hudson to economics — I could have watched him answering your (better than I thought of) questions (and always with an answer you didn't expect) for the whole two hours. My point: there's a secret here that is not known generally, and constitutes the secret hideaway of the giant crime syndicate — the Mt. Doom of food.
A crash course in his school of thought is going to be my next project.
I've said it before — best show on TV, (most) every time.
P.S. — what is it with these podcasts? Every segment crashes and starts over after about 10 seconds. Rachel was doing the same this morning.
I hope they fix that soon. New apps?
Great panel discussion, and great comments, folks! I can tell most everyone has either personal experience or the integrity to research the subject.
The one point rarely mentioned, and which I want to throw out there is this: SNAP is intended as a SUPPLEMENT. I know plenty of families for whom it is the ONLY grocery money.
The utilities supplements/grants are rarely adequate to meet the full demand. People are sharing the cost of gas to get to work, as well as sharing vehicles. Parents are living hungry to make that SNAP stretch farther for the kids. And just about every family I know who receives SNAP is also trying to feed their kids' friends (like normal people), neighbors' children, elders, and the homeless in their towns. Some families have taken in people who do not have benefits due to state cuts in services and eligibility.
People share in hard times. I think the social programs (what's left of them) are the last flimsy barrier between 45 million (?) Americans, and starvation. The Great Recession's "optics" have benefited greatly from the New Deal programs. Those who don't share in the current experience of poverty have no clue about the realities.
The Farm bill is essentially welfare for large corporate farmers and the large corporate Agribusiness. Companies like ADM, Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Dupont and others always seem to come to my mind when someone mentions the farm bill. We also need to mention large corporate agribusiness lending institutions that are aided by the corporate welfare in the Farm Bill. We raise sugar beets here in the Red River Valley. These are heavily subsidized by the Sugar program that just refuses to die. We could import sugar from Cuba or the Caribbean far cheaper than we could raise it here. The Sugar bill helps my community but I would just as soon see it die because the American Crystal Company, Moorhead beet plant has locked out its union workers for over a year over health insurance. I am pretty fed up with the whole sugar program and think it is nothing but unnecessary welfare for sugar beet growers here in the Red River Valley.
The farmer from Iowa talked about "mono-cultures" that refers to hybrid corn and soybean crops. Traditionally farmers used to rotate crops such as small grains like wheat or barley, legumes like alfalfa for hay, and then row crops like corn or soybeans. Modern agribusiness stresses making growing these mono-culture crops for more profit vice rotating crops more often. The need to put ever increasing amounts of chemical pesticides, herbicides, and expensive fertilizers gives us large yields but we are vulnerable to diseases that could wipe out large sections of our crops. We do not have enough biodiversity with different strains and types of crops because of big corporate agribusiness growing ever more of these mono-cultures because they are more readily sold on the world commodities market. We are ripe for new types of disease and severe crop losses due to a lack of variety of seeds. So the farmer from Iowa is spot on. Many college professors in classes I took at Moorhead State said many of the same things he did in political science classes.
As far as the SNAP/ food stamp program is concerned the GOP and some of the Democrats that support this new Farm Bill are making absurd cuts in SNAP. 46 million Americans are living in poverty. Food Stamps allow people to continue work but helps them with decent food if they run short of money. Food stamps are just as much welfare for grocery chains and food processing companies than they are about welfare for people.
We subsidize large corporate food entities when we give people food stamps. It is imperative to keep our people fed with nutritious food. Cutting back on food stamps/SNAP is absurd and ridiculous. In a country like ours poor people have a right to eat decent food especially if someone in the family goes to work everyday. We also need to consider offering a living wage as well. Minimum wages, even in Fargo-Moorhead ought to be $10 per hour. This is darn little money in this day and age even out here on the Prairie.
I am a teacher in Florida. I work with disabled preschoolers. All my students receive free breakfast and free lunch, and although school lunches have gotten better, most of my students want fresh fruits and vegetables. I buy bunches of grapes and take them in for snack time. Most of my students don't know how to eat real cherries. I have one little boy who will literally eat whatever the other children leave. I pick up extra food and give it to him. Two breakfasts and two lunches.
[Expletive] righteous show today.
Chris great show today very interesting ideas and articulate people. i think your shows should be repeated over night during the week.
How lame is the excuse that they need three years to understand how to break up. What does the key man insurance policy provide?
As a head Start teacher I have really been following the farm bill because SNAP is a source of our meal program. This is not just another school lunch program where food goes in the garbage. These children are served breakfast and lunch, or lunch and a snack. There are strict nutritional guidelines.The children not only learn to eat new foods, but how to use utensils, serve themselves, clean up-it's a part of socialization. And, as the chef on your program pointed out, it gives children the tools to make good choices. Some of my most gratifying moments as a teacher were when parents tell me how their children tell them in the store that they need to buy healthy foods, or their children now drink milk. This program is way too important to cut back on. It is the exact same thing Michelle Obama advocates-it's not about what government telling you what to eat-it's about getting the tools to make good choices.That is what I saw and took from your show, and it is at the core of what needs to be done.
I really think your discussion of food stamps really cut to the core of the issue. As a Head Start teacher I have been following the farm bill because SNAP is the major source of funding for Head Start's meal program. Our children all qualify for federal food programs. It is a core of Head Start-children get either breakfast and lunch,or lunch and a snack. There are strict nutritional guidelines. Children learn to eat balanced meals, are introduced to many new foods, often have to learn to use utensils, how to set the table, clean up, share a meal socially, serve themselves-these are important life lessons.As the chef said, you are giving them tools to succeed. We also actually cook with the children-once a week we actually make things like smoothies, salads, salsa, etc. I cannot tell you how I feel when a parent says,"How did you get her to drink milk", or tells me how their children tell them at the store that they need to buy fruit and vegetables.To cut this funding would be unconscionable. There is so much more than giving people food stamps-as Michelle Obama has pointed out-it's not about the government telling you what to eat, it's giving the people the tools to make good choices. If you have not worked with low income families, you have no idea how life changing these programs can be.
I would have asked two questions:
1. Are the cafeterias for US members of Congress subsidized? If so, they are getting welfare. Considering mose members of the Senate are millionaires, they certainly don't need to be subsized by the middle class.
2. Since dinners, lunches, breakfasts, etc. can be claimed as entertainment on a person's tax claims if they itemize, then can't we also claim that any and all members of congress who itemize and claim these expenses on their income tax returns are also being subsidized and basically receiving welfare from middle class Americans?
Republicans like to criticize Americans who desperately need assistance as welfare abusers - let them go hungry, yet they receive all types of welfarepaid for by middle class taxpayers!