Photo courtesy of the Vermont Food Bank
Thousands of Vermont households will lose a portion of their food stamp benefits beginning on Oct. 1.
On average, families could see a reduction of $29 a month for groceries. The average benefit is $244 a month, according to Rene Richardson, Food and Nutrition programs director for the department. The reductions will be between $7 and $40 a month. Benefits range from $155 to $375 a month, depending on the income and size of the household.
That $30 to $35 reduction in groceries will be difficult for low-income Vermonters to make up. “When you have only $150 or $200 a month for food, that can be really significant,” said John Sayles, executive director of the Vermont Food Bank.
The program, 3SquaresVT, which is run by the Vermont Department of Children and Families, serves roughly 85,000 individual Vermonters. About 16,000 out of 43,000 households that receive food stamps will see a reduction.
In the aggregate, those households will lose $5.5 million worth of annual support, according to Richardson.
The reduction is part of an annual review of benefits for each state, which takes into account the cost of heating fuel, she said. Each year, FNS reviews fuel and utility rates that are part of an income deduction calculation used to determine benefit levels for individual households.
Heat and utilities are considered part of the housing deduction recipients can claim when they apply for 3SquaresVT support.
Over the last two years, the federal Food and Nutrition Service has allowed Vermonters to claim a higher deduction for heating fuel, as part of the calculation for income eligibility to the program. The larger deduction helped poor Vermonters compensate for the high cost of oil. The standard deduction including fuel use went up from $572 to $744 a month, and the higher deduction led to more money for food for many households.
In 2008, oil cost $4 a gallon on average. Though fuel costs dropped in 2009, Vermont, along with a handful of other Northeastern states, was granted a one-year waiver to maintain its higher fuel deduction rates. Last year, a gallon of fuel oil cost $2.66.
“Any time you take money away from a household relying on money to payfor food, it’s going to be detrimental to the household,” Richardson said. “It’s a federal requirement based on the fact that if the cost of fuel goes up you have less money for food; if they go down, you have more money for food.”
Richardson said the state asked for another waiver and the feds refused.
“We will see a change in food benefits,” Richardson said. “It’s not a pleasant thing to have to do. Unfortunately, it’s a federal requirement.”
Letters went out to 3SquaresVT beneficiaries this week, and in the last several days, about 200 people called the food bank for help, Sayles said.
The state sent out a list of additional resources, including the Commodity Supplemental Food Program. The food bank runs the federal food distribution program, which supplies about $50 in commodity foods a month for women and children and income-eligible residents over 60. The program can take about 500 more applicants before it reaches the maximum number of recipients in Vermont, about 4,000 people, according to Sayles.
Photo courtesy of the Vermont Food Bank
Families and individuals who are part of the 3SquaresVT program typically come to the food bank for groceries.
“We know for a fact that the 3SquaresVt benefit doesn’t last a family an entire month,” Sayles said. “They come to the food shelves.”
Sayles said the food bank has already seen a 35 percent to 45 percent increase in the number of Vermonters seeking assistance from local shelves. In all, about 13 percent of Vermont’s population, or about 86,000 people, rely on the food bank. He expects more 3SquaresVT recipients will turn to local food shelves in the coming months.
“We just do what we always do, and that’s try and keep the food moving,” Sayles said. This year, the nonprofit organization will distribute 8 million pounds of food. “It’s a matter of … finding new sources of food to distribute and being as efficient and effective as we can in getting food out to agencies.”
In 2009, the state dramatically expanded the food stamps program. It changed the eligibility rules so that more people at slightly higher income levels could receive benefits. Any household that is within 185 percent of the national poverty level qualifies for 3SquaresVT now; the cutoff used to be 130 percent.
The number of Vermont households receiving benefits as a result of the new rules and the recession went up 62 percent, from 28,000 participating households to 43,000, Richardson said.
“We really brought more people through our doors, and we did this intentionally,” Richardson said.
She said seniors who have more than $35 a month in medical expenses can include out-of-pocket costs in their income deductions, such as insurance premiums, prescription co-pays, transportation to the doctor, over-the-counter medications and hearing aids and dentures.
Permalink |
I’m listening to Dubie and Shumlin spar on the Mark Johnson Show, and the issue of Dubie’s “misstatement” about cutting benefits for the most needy is being volleyed about.
A Freudian slip perhaps? Saying what’s on your mind, but inadvertently slips out vs. an unintended twising of words.
Dubie repeatedly tells us he’s going to lower taxes. Fine if that’s you philosphy, say it, and be prepared to defend the consequences. The wealthy aren’t struggling; I’ve heard Shumlin say that he can afford a higher income tax. However, Dubie’s plan is to cut their taxes. Undoubtedly some of this extra money will end up in his campaign coffers, and not in the mouths of those who need assistance via job creation.
I don’t think people on food stamps are padding Dubie’s coffers, and I don’t think cutting their benefits is going to help get their children properly nourished for the school day ahead of them.
And if you do the research, hisory shows that “trickle down economics” is a right wing fallacy-it does not create more jobs. It does encourage greed, and hording increased profits in offshore accounts.
For those who believe in trickle down theory, I’ve got a bridge over Lake Champlain to sell you.
Did I mention that it’s over the bottom of the lake? Fish on!
Permalink |
Correct: trickle down economics sort of sounds ok as a theory, but the days since January 20, 1980 have shown it has severe limits. If trickle-down economics worked as advertised, Latin America would not be overthrowing the tiny elite that has dominated the Central and South America since the conquistadors destroyed the Aztec and Inca civilizations. What really happens in trickle-down economics is that power and wealth transfer to a handful of predators.
Trickle down? Yea right. We all know what trickles down hill, and it ain’t money.
Permalink |
What you both say is true. Unfortunately for America a lot of people including Brian Dubie still believe in Reaganomics anyway. You’d think after 30 years of evidence that it doesn’t work they’d figure that out, but I believe deep down they know that these policies will continue to make the rich, richer and squeeze the middle class out of existence. And sadly that seems to be the point. Try talking to one about the economy and what you will hear is that spending is too high, specifically spending on social and economic programs for the poorest among us.
Darn those poor people, wanting to feed their children and everything!
If not for them we’d all be rich, and the Republicans would cut our taxes..
Permalink |
I’m gonna quit my job and go on state assistance. Why bother to work hard to create a decent paycheck to support my own family, a nice retirement for myself and maybe even some left over to leave my kids and grandkids when the Dems are just going to take money out of my pocket and food from my kids’ mouths to support everyone else because I managed to crawl above the poverty line. And “free” or “low-cost” healthcare? LMAO – somebody’s got to pay, but there aren’t enough “rich” Vermonters to suport us all, so I’m calling dibs on Shumlin’s income taxes. Dems rule!! American dream, here I come!!!!
Permalink |
What part of the progressive tax bracket do you guys not understand. Nearly half the country does not pay taxes anymore. Here is the reality, as sad as the picture is with the man holding food next to his son, the fact remains that food stamps, heating assistance, and other social programs are not legitimate uses of taxpayers money. The expansion of goverement and the digging into our wallet needs to stop. Maybe I will help my neighbor if he is in need, DON”T FORCE IT ON ME. Don’t take money from my family and give away. Gee, that sounds alot like slavery.
Permalink |
“Nearly half the country does not pay taxes anymore.”
That is a myth, a lie invented by the far-right wing extremists, currently called the “Republican Party” through their propaganda entertainment TV source called Fox “News”.
Besides, if anyone isn’t paying their taxes, it’s the obscenely wealthy individuals and corporations that can afford to hide their assets in offshore banks.
For example, Exxon cleared trillions of dollars in profits last year and yet paid $0 in taxes to the USA. I made less than $30,000 and even with three kids, I STILL paid taxes!
So please, if Fox”News” says it, or Rush Limbaugh, or any other of those professional liars, don’t believe one single word of it!
Permalink |
Where does such anger, bias and generalizations come from? It is comments such as “selfish republicans” that cause people like me to reconsider how much we give to those in need. Having lost a job due to back surgery, continuing medical issues, knowing we would be living on one income amd savings for a while, we still made good our captial campaign pledge to a major non profit in Burlington. We have not missed a year of giving to the United Way in 28 years, achieving this by reducing our lifestyle in order to live within our means. Gee, what a concept! What would it be like if Vermont did that or the US Government. Most people do live within their paychecks and get whatever support or help they need from their church, community or the government.
The majority of taxes are paid by the smallest percentage of wealthy people. I scoff at the comments of one writer who said the wealthy were stealing from the poor, what exactly are they stealing? The wealthy are giving in taxes everyday and usually more by donations to non-profits. With that said, I agree, the immoral amount of dollars made by the countries CEO’s should be taxed much higher. The truth of the matter is, it is just a way to keep score. It is like the pro baseball players or other jocks, they just want to be the highest paid, one dollar more than the other guy. Yet we all pay for it in price of tickets, bonds for stadiums, etc. I am a Vermonter first, a Republican second.
The governments first responsibility is to keep us safe. Thus we do need a military. You would need to ask President Obama why he is increasing military presence in Afganistan, it is useless. Even with having lost a dear cousin and many friends in the war attack of 9/11 I shudder at what those military dollars could do if otherwise spent. I also know that the military is providing a great training ground for thousands of the enlisted. People that otherwise would not be going to college will be able to or it is an opportunity to get out of horrendous living conditions.
It was the military and tax dollars via DARPA that created the Internet, not Al Gore. Good things do come from investing and research while we protect our Country.
Our social programs have become generational, we are no longer teaching people how to fish, in order that they may become self reliant, we are continually giving them fish creating an addiction to government programs and stealing not their money but their selfesteem.
Permalink |
“Maybe I will help my neighbor if he is in need, DON”T FORCE IT ON ME. Don’t take money from my family and give away. ”
“Maybe”? That is exactly why it must be mandatory. If we went back to the way it used to be, your neighbor would starve to death before you even knew they were hungry!
The attitude evinced here is inhumane! How can anyone be so selfish as to desire their neighbor’s family to die of hunger just to have a few more dollars to blow on gas for the ATV (or whatever you would waste that money on).
You must not be aware of how little of your taxes actually go to help the needy, and how the vast majority of your taxes go to the bank accounts of the CEOs of America’s military contractors. The US military is the biggest welfare cheat in America.
I don’t begrudge my neighbor a little bit of my money through taxes when the Pentagon is taking up much, much more of it. That’s because I’m not a selfish Republican.
Permalink |
Thank you Greg you are absolutely right. With more in our pockets to give, we would. And we could decide how that money was distributed.
“If we went back to the way it used to be, your neighbor would starve to death before you even knew they were hungry!”
a true Yankee would get off their lazy butt and go get their food, work for it, grow it. They were too proud to take a hand out. If someone did help them, they paid them back through the sweat from their brow. Try finding that today.
“That is exactly why it must be mandatory.” sounds like you have control issues. No thanks I really rather not have a stranger such as yourself tell me what is best for me. I have been an adult for many years now and can make my own sound decisions.
Permalink |
Hi, the work that we can accomplish with a VUE estanblished is phenomenal. The Vermont Unit of Exchange is a value on work, and a value added for community service. With it we give actual value that may be used for food at formers markets and for education at state schools. We can pay taxes with it, and other state demands. This vue will allow movement and growth of the economy where it is floundering while the money supply is shrunken by the banks, once they have already but all their debt from recklesss gambling onto out backs, and as well kept all the profit for themselves. It is quite important that you get my voice into the debates. I want to pin point the two candidates on how we can reclaim the monetary industry, and when will they begin addressing that point of leaking dollars ?
Here is my video response to the vpr debate.
Thank you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6QZWLjk5JI
Emily
Permalink |
Right on, Arthur, and the people that want us to believe this, despite the contrary evidence, are filling Dubie’s coffers in a huge way to help him spread this message that has deceived us for so long. The rich just want to keep stealing from those pestiferous poor.
Permalink |
This coming on top of the recent suspension of housing vouchers is really a sad commentary on our economy. More people out of work, more people needing help and shirinking money available. As much as I would like these people to be helped, I can not help but wonder where is this money going to come from? You can only tax people, even rich one’s just so much. It is up to our local communities (the people in them) to take up the challenge and quit looking to government for solutions.
Permalink |
Back in the early 1960s, the top tax rate on the obscenely wealthy was 90% and America was not only at it’s peak on power then, we even had enough money to send men to the moon while simultaneously fighting a pointless war against brown people in Asia.
It is clear and obvious that the obscenely wealthy are not taxed nearly enough. The last 30 years have proven beyond doubt that Bush I was right, ‘supply-side’ economics really is voo-doo.
Let’s go back to the way economics were when America was at it’s strongest, as that is PROVEN to work: high taxes on the wealthiest individuals and businesses, and strong unions to protect workers from rapacious business owners.
Instead of eliminating the Middle Class, as is the Republican Party agenda, let’s go back to when America was still a great nation, as it is shown in recorded history when a Democrat is in charge. (A real Democrat, not these fake right-wing Dems we have today).
Permalink |
The reason for the foodstamp cut is because the sellout ‘Democrats’ in Congress eagerly caved in to extremists demands while negotiating the education funding bill. The far-right extremists in Congress (Republicans) ordered the sellout Dems to give up something in exchange for saving hundreds of thousands of jobs (and therefore the US economy), and the sellout Dems were happy in cutting public assistance to the starving American citizens.
Why am I supposed to support the Democrats when they sellout the Value Voters of the Democratic Party? Oh, yeah, because far-right extremists want to eliminate Food Stamps, Medicare and Social Security altogether!
Permalink |
I am a 57 year old disabled Vermonter, who lives on less than $800.00 per month. I depend on a Food Stamp benefit to make ends meet, and have been told that my benefit will be cut. As it is, because of rising food costs, I have seen the quality of my meals go down. I am below poverty scale, as is thousands of others like me. Yet, all I ever hear from politicians, is how help is needed for the Middle Class. It is immoral to rob from the poor. Squeezing from the bottom is fine for toothpaste, but not when it comes to the poorest in society. We are like sitting ducks, who, they figure, can’t do anything about the decisions that are made for us. It is time for the poor of this nation, and those who support them, to take a stand. Get up, stand up, speak up!
Permalink |
Paul, I was intrigued by your comment. I’m a volunteer with the Vermont Workers’ Center and have been working on a report that looks at the budget cuts (aka “efficiency measures”) that the state is making and revealing what has been the impact on Vermonters because of them. You’re definitely not the only one that has been affected in this way! I’m interested in talking to you (or anyone else reading this) a bit more about what you’ve experienced and what you think the state could be doing better.
Take a look at this survey we’re conducting; it’s one small step in getting your voice heard: http://workerscenter.org/node/622
Or, you can get in touch with me via email at hannigan.diane@gmail.com
Permalink |
Warren Buffett’s $1.6 Billion Stock Donation to Gates Foundation Lifts 5-Year Total to $8 Billion
Buffett and Gates want their fellow billionaires to follow their lead, recently telling Fortune magazine they’re actively urging everyone on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans to pledge at least 50 percent of the net worth to charities.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/ -
Arthur the more you take away from those sinful rich the less they will give, then where will we be? There will be no more Gates Foundation type organizations.
And where would we be without Jimmy and Roselyn Carter. Please don’t tell me they are not considered wealthy.
Permalink |
“It is time for the poor of this nation, and those who support them, to take a stand. Get up, stand up, speak up!”
Paul, you can speak out. Speak out at the ballot box. That is where it really counts.
“And “free” or “low-cost” healthcare? LMAO – somebody’s got to pay,”
We will all be paying, middle class, poor, rich. No one’s gonna be paying entirely for anyone else.