Letters to the Editor

Wrong cuts

May 22, 2012


To the editor:

The U.S. House of Representatives recently voted on a package that guts social programs supporting low-income Americans. Specifically, they cut $36 billion from the SNAP program, or food stamps.

I realize we need to balance the budget, but is this the best way to do it? Cutting programs that put food on the table for people in our community that are going hungry every day is not just shortsighted, but it is also just plain morally wrong.

We talk a lot about values in this country, but our elected officials’ votes don’t always seem to back up their words. We need to strengthen our nation’s hunger safety net, not cut the strings to it. If that cut is made law:

l Every SNAP recipient will see a reduction in monthly benefits.

l 2 million people currently on SNAP will lose SNAP benefits entirely.

l 280,000 children will lose free school breakfast and lunch.

And this while military spending and oil production subsidies in the billions (billions!) continue unabated.

Let your representatives know that this is unacceptable.


George Lippencott 1 year, 11 months ago

And my inevitable comment. Who pays.

The increases here and in many other programs were funded with debt. If we do not reduce them (however valid they may be) we must increase taxes. To maintain the current level of expenditures we would almost have to double income taxes paid by the half that pay them.

I would like to believe that all those on here calling for more pay a hefty federal income tax. Unfortunately, I suspect they do not. Once more we see a bunch of people demanding more goodies paid for by others (not the rich).

Just how much is enough? When we are all getting what we feel we need paid for by "the fellow behind the tree"??


uncleandyt 1 year, 11 months ago

My stupider friends have been convinced that the poor people are taking all the money. I've got to wonder if maybe some of the rich people are also getting in on this scheme.


Alyosha 1 year, 11 months ago

To impartial adults, as opposed to partisans with the minds of children, food stamp usage is like the canary in a cold mine of old: a signal that the economy is failing to provide jobs with wages that can support a family.

Meanwhile, the already rich use their profits to muscle legislatures to cut programs that benefit those who, as Jesus put it, are the least among us.


Shane Garrett 1 year, 11 months ago

Your fat children on government handouts should eat less. Just look at the latest studies of childhood diabetes. However, perhaps we could hand out some soylent green snack cakes.
Instead of just handing out food stamps, vision cards, these cards could be programmed with specific meal plans prepared by a dietitian could they not? More fruits and veggies instead of little Debbie? And instead of lobster and albacore tuna, hamburger and frozen swia fish.


rockchalk1977 1 year, 11 months ago

I always thought parents were responsible for feeding their children. The Democrat slogan for 2012... come and get it!


skinny 1 year, 11 months ago

I am a republican! I do not believe in handouts’!


ljwhirled 1 year, 11 months ago

That is what happens when the divide between the haves and the have-nots widens.


weiser 1 year, 11 months ago

Do what I did. Wash dishes in a restaurant and they pay you and give you food. They are always looking for people for that job.


Fossick 1 year, 11 months ago

"The number of people receiving SNAP benefits increased by almost 50 percent between fiscal years 2001 and 2005 and even more rapidly (by 70 percent) between fiscal years 2007 and 2011. During that latter period, spending on SNAP benefits grew by about 135 percent." (from a source)

SNAP cost the feds $78b in FY11, doubled and more in 4 years. With 0% growth going forward, a $310b cut ($31b/yr) would not even reduce SNAP to what it spent in 2007. But one can expect far more than 0% growth going forward.

Fortunately, SNAP cannot maintain its current growth for much longer. As one in 7 Americans is now on SNAP, that number can only double two or three more times until we are all on food stamps.


jhawkinsf 1 year, 11 months ago

The $310 billion cut over the next ten years, does this represent a 10% cut? 1% cut? 0.1% cut? I've seen slowing of growth represented as "cuts". Without additional information, I'll withhold judgement.


Fossick 1 year, 11 months ago

How about we cut the military and all business subsidies as well? As it is the case that for the first time, SNAP has risen to account for more than 10% of all grocery sales, it's obvious that it is just another government giveaway program that has grown out of control.


1 year, 11 months ago

Here's a link to an article on Bloomberg. It supports what David wrote.

From the article (citing the numbers from the congressional Budget Office): "The Republicans’ plan would reduce spending by about $310 billion over a decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It would cut off food stamps to 1.8 million Americans, according to CBO, while reducing aid to millions more. About 280,000 children who receive food stamps would no longer be automatically eligible for free school lunches, CBO said"


xclusive85 1 year, 11 months ago

David, I am curious where the numbers in your letter come from. I would like to read what you did for myself. I hope that it was some unbiased organization.


Commenting has been disabled for this item.