Editor’s note: This commentary is by Paul D. Manganiello, MD, MPH, of Norwich, an emeritus professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College.
As a retired obstetrician/gynecologist, and presently the medical director of a free medical clinic, I know the importance of state and federal food nutritional programs. No one gets the chance to choose whether or not to be born, and we all need to live with the hand that we were dealt. It is however advantageous for all of us, one could say for our own enlightened self-interest, to assure that every child has the opportunity to be able to attain their full potential in order that they become happy, productive adults. If individuals are food insecure, this will not happen.
The national food assistance program, SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), has been linked with improved health outcomes and lower health care costs by reducing food insecurity. To qualify, gross monthly income for a family of four must be below 130% of the poverty line (i.e., $33,000), and assets must be below $2,250 for households without an elderly or disabled member of the family.
Food insecurity affects a person’s health not only from a nutritional standpoint, but causes overall stress not only for the individual, but also for the entire family unit. This is especially disconcerting as it relates to children, since poor and inadequate diets can contribute to the development of asthma, anemia, cognitive and behavioral problems, anxiety and depression, and overall poorer general health outcomes. Those who are food insecure, in order to pay for food, may need to postpone needed medical care, forgo taking their prescription drugs and/or keeping to their special medical diets. Hungry people (adults and children) are less productive at work and at school. SNAP has been shown to reduce food insecurity by as much as 30%, and is most effective among those who are the most vulnerable … children. Early access to SNAP not only improves birth outcomes in pregnant moms, but also the individual child’s long-term health.
As of December 2017, SNAP (which goes by 3SquaresVT in Vermont) dispersed monthly checks to more than 41 million qualified Americans. Approximately 70,000 of these were Vermonters receiving those monthly benefits. Fortunately, as the recession has improved, these numbers have continued to decline.
The Trump administration wants to make changes as to how states determine expanded eligibility for SNAP. Nationally this could result in 3 million Americans, including hundreds of thousands of children, losing their food assistance. Currently, the federal government allows states to help low-income families who have insufficient income to pay for child care, housing and other critical expenditures to purchase nutritious foods. Most states, such as Vermont, currently can choose to have the flexibility of not cutting off benefits to recipients as soon as the family’s gross income exceeds 185% of the poverty line, allowing a slower phase-out of the food assistance, so as to address families who may have fluctuating incomes.
Since the new proposal could result in a quarter of a million children being affected nationally, at least 5,000 children in Vermont would be affected by the proposed rule. The new rules could disqualify them from free school breakfasts and lunches. The Trump administration’s new proposal could also eliminate benefits for many seniors and individuals with disabilities, in that it would cut food assistance off for individuals whose assets (savings, etc.) exceed $3,500. Having this cap discourages low-income individuals from saving for emergencies. It also adds an administrative burden to track an individual’s bank account and assets.
Fraud is certainly a concern with any public program, but it has been estimated the less that 2% of SNAP monies is diverted fraudulently. It would be extremely unusual for someone to be able to have significant assets with little income, which would include interest on savings and investments, to become the recipient of SNAP benefits.
We should not be throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater; this Republican administration is being pennywise and pound foolish!
In 2017 SNAP’s benefits were modest, on average $1.40 per person per meal. All too often we take a short-sighted approach to public programs looking for short-term saving while not taking the long view to see if they are truly cost effective. With the reduction in the incidence of chronic diseases seen with SNAP benefits, we would be paying more than the proposed saving forecasted by the changes made to the program that the Trump administration is seeking.
Our country’s children and their families need our help. The easiest way to do so, would be to submit a comment on the Trump administration’s proposed categorical eligibility rule. Go through the special Hunger Free Vermont webpage where you will be able to find all of the information that you would need to write and submit a comment.
Please state clearly and succinctly that the proposed SNAP rule change should not go into effect.
The comment period runs through Sept. 23.