The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the most extensive feeding program by the federal government through the United States Department of Agriculture. Initially called the Food Stamp Program, SNAP serves to provide food assistance to people of inadequate economic means (Wilde, 2018). In 2018 alone, SNAP was reported to have benefited about forty million Americans who needed help (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019). Research indicates that the program has helped alleviate poverty for millions of people, improved food security, and has helped people achieve better health (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019). SNAP is so intertwined with the health and welfare of people that any changes to its policy are bound to affect millions of lives.
With the recent coronavirus pandemic developments, congress has passed legislation bound to affect the SNAP program. To start with, the work requirements and time limits that were initially in place have been suspended temporarily. Also, states have been allowed to request special waivers to provide temporary relief to households that benefited from SNAP (Day-Burget, 2020). Besides, children who were receiving school meals will now benefit from SNAP. However, the proposal does not increase SNAP benefits and makes it more difficult for people to qualify for the program.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
I support the policy proposal that allows states to provide temporary relief during the pandemic and the provision of food to students who benefited from school meals. During this pandemic, many families have lost sources of income, increasing the number of families with no or low income. This means that the number of people who qualify for the SNAP program increases. The program has long provided healthy meals to families who could afford none (Wilde, 2007). This provision, especially during this pandemic, ensures that the country does not go back on the gains it had made in healthcare. The provision of healthy meals to families reduces hospital visits and generally improves health. When hospitals are flooded with patients, the provision of such meals helps reduce the burden on hospitals.
While some of the changes made have been positive, some of the changes are bound to have a long term adverse effect on communities if implemented. According to Giridhar Mallya, a senior policy advisor in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWFJ), these policy changes would affect the eligibility of millions of families (Day-Burget, 2020). He further explains that about 3.7 million would lose eligibility, while another 4.5 million would see a significant reduction in the benefits receives (Day-Burget, 2020). This policy change would affect the lives of millions of children who managed to be healthy because of these meals. The loss of eligibility for most families means children in these families will not be beneficiaries of the school feeding programs.
I would advocate against this policy, based on the consequences that are bound to come with it. The advantage of SNAP has been the ability to respond quickly when the need arises, especially during disasters and pandemics such as coronavirus. The changes made to the policy emphasize the flexibility of the program, which is highly needed now. However, the change should not be implemented with changes that seek to take back the gains made by the SNAP program. Making it harder for families to access SNAP, in the long run, overrules the benefits of adjusting the program to meet the pandemic's short-term needs. If the short-term adjustments made through the pandemic have to come with long-lasting negative changes, it would be better to offer relief through other channels.
SNAP has, over the years, eliminated starvation and malnutrition in the United States. IN THE 1960s, doctors found that children in the rural South had symptoms of malnutrition and informed the government (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019). President Richard Nixon and lawmakers established eligibility requirements and standards of what is now SNAP. After a decade, the situation in the South was dramatically improved, with little or no malnutrition (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019). Such benefits have been brought out by eligibility criteria that objectively analyze families' ability to meet their basic needs. A change in the eligibility criteria that locks out many families translates to an increase in malnutrition, poverty, and a drop in school performance.
Malnutrition affects a child's physical, mental, and academic development. This means that children locked out of the SNAP program risk contracting several illnesses due to a lowered immunity. Most of these children come from families unable to access healthcare, so feeding is the surest way of preventing disease. Hence, leaving them out of feeding programs makes the health situation worse than it already is. Also, nutrition affects a child's academic performance directly and indirectly. Directly in that a well-fed child is more likely to attend school, especially when they are fed in school (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019). In addition, nutrients are essential for the development of a child's intellect. Hence, a policy that locks children out of the SNAP and indirectly, the school feeding program does more harm than good.
SNAP has come with several benefits that have eliminated many problems caused by a lack of food. One fundamental problem it has solved is malnutrition. Policy proposed seeks to expand the accessibility of SNAP benefits during the pandemic yet tries to make eligibility harder for many families in the long run. This policy change is bound to bring more bad than good and take away the gains made by the SNAP program in reducing poverty, preventing malnutrition, and improving education. This policy change ought to be opposed to preserve the one program that has managed to solve some of America's most significant problems in the most straightforward manner possible: feeding.
References
Day-Burget, J. (2020, April 3). Retrieved from https://www.rwjf.org/en/blog/2020/04/the-impact-of-changing-snap-and-school-meals-during-covid-19.html
Wilde, P. (2018). Food policy in the United States: An introduction . Routledge.
Wilde, P. E. (2007). Measuring the effect of food stamps on food insecurity and hunger: research and policy considerations. The Journal of nutrition , 137 (2), 307-310.
Keith-Jennings, B., Llobrera, J., & Dean, S. (2019). Links of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program With Food Insecurity, Poverty, and Health: Evidence and Potential. American journal of public health , 109 (12), 1636-1640.
