What is the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP)?

Introduction 

Social welfare programs in the United States are created to meet the different specific needs of American people. A 2015 report by the Census Bureau indicates that 21.3 percent of the American population were involved, on average, in one or more assistance programs, every month (Irving and Loveless, 2015). Programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are an integral part of the daily lives of Americans and thus requires an in-depth analysis of its objectives and effects and a provision of alternative solutions to the problems that the program seeks to address. 

Description 

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a federal aid program whose goal is to alleviate hunger and malnutrition by providing support for low income individuals living in the United States to increase their food purchasing power. This support is delivered to them in the form of Electronic Benefit Cards that can be used to buy food in authorized retail stores (Caswell and Yaktine, 2013). The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), an agency of the United States Department of Agriculture, runs this program in partnership with State agencies such as the Division of Social Services or Children and Family Services and the retail community (United States Department of Agriculture: Food and Nutrition Service, 2014). 

SNAP: History, Causations and Ideological Foundation 

The beginnings of SNAP were way back in 1933 as part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act which created the Federal Surplus Release Corporation whose purpose was to support farmers during The Great Depression by purchasing farm products from farmers with excess supply (Snap to Health, 2010-2017). These products were then distributed among hunger relief agencies and to local communities that couldn’t afford access to nutritious, well balanced diets as a result of unemployment. This effort was formalized in 1939 when the Food Stamp Program was created to avoid duplicating the functions of local relief agencies. This was greatly credited to the then Secretary of Agriculture, Henry Wallace (Food and Nutrition Service, 2014). The program was meant to align the growing food surpluses with the need to address the deficiencies experienced by the poor. 

Participants in the program were allowed to purchase orange stamps equal to their normal food expenditure. These stamps could be used to purchase any foods. For every dollar worth of orange stamps, they received a blue stamp valued at 50 cents, which could be used to purchase surplus foods (FNS, 2014). In 1943, the program was terminated as unemployment levels decreased significantly. However, the program was not completely abandoned. Before the program was finally reintroduced in 1961, a number of studies were conducted and legislative proposals made in attempts to restart it. The reboot involved pilot programs launched in a select number of states. Food coupons replaced the orange and blue stamps in the original program to eliminate the concept of special stamps for surplus foods. About three years later, in 1964, the Food Stamp Act was passed to make the FSP permanent. Nationwide operation of the program began on July 1, 1974 (FNS, 2014). Revisions were made to the Food Stamp Act in 1977, establishing uniform national eligibility standards, increasing federal support for implementation at state level and expanding the program to minority communities, among other things. Severe budget cuts were enacted reducing the funding for the program in 1981 which resulted in a hunger crisis later in the decade. The rise in hunger triggered restoration of some of the funding for the program in the late 80’s. 

An early version of the Electronic benefit Transfer Cards was also introduced during this period. The EBT Cards completely replaced food stamps in the early 2000’s (Snap to Health, 2010-2017). Greater emphasis was placed on nutritional value of foods that can be purchased through the program since 2008 by legislators. In 2014, The Farm Bill was signed by President Obama making numerous changes to SNAP. Such changes include prohibiting the purchase of tobacco products, alcoholic beverages or any food sold for consumption on the premises. 

Program objectives 

As mentioned earlier, the main goal of SNAP is to help low income individuals, the elderly and disabled to access proper, adequate diets. However, the program also has other goals. One of these goals is to protect families in times of hardship and hunger. When the economy weakens and poverty is on the rise, enrollment to the program is expanded to cover the individuals and families that may be hit by the effects of unemployment. In this way, families are able to survive during temporary periods of loss of income. The program also aims at facilitating healthy eating. Restrictions ensuring that SNAP benefits can only be spent on food increases the spending capacity on food for low income families. They are therefore able to afford more healthy foods. 

In areas stricken by disaster such as floods and tornados, SNAP offers quick relief to the victims through the State governments. A recent example is the disaster benefits provided to victims of Hurricane Harvey in Texas and Louisiana and replacement benefits for victims of Hurricane Irma in Georgia (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2017). The policy also encourages work, besides providing a safety net for low income individuals and the elderly. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, participants who have jobs that promise an increase in future income from their jobs don’t have to face the threat of decrease in their overall income because the benefits are only decreased marginally as the income increases. This is because the benefit formula is structured such that an increase in a participant’s earnings by a dollar is reflected by a gradual decline of only 24 to 36 cents (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2017). The participant is therefore continually supported as they work towards financial stability. 

Effects of the Program 

SNAP has had a variety of effects on the families and communities that receive the benefits. Families that are impacted by the program are those with low incomes or no income whatsoever. A report by the Family impact institute lists family responsibility as one of the family impact principles upon which the effects of a program or policy can be examined (Bogenschneider, Little, Ooms, Benning and Cadigan, 2012). The program enhances the ability of families to meet their responsibilities by alleviating poverty. Data from the Census Bureau indicates that in 2011, 3.9 million people; including 300,000 elderly people and 1.7 million children, were lifted above poverty line if SNAP benefits are considered as income (U.S Census Bureau, 2012). In the same financial year, of the households that participated, 13 percent went above the poverty line when benefits were added to gross income. The program mitigates the effects of unemployment and supplements the incomes of those with low wages. By providing financial security for families, the policy enhances the ability of families to carry out their functions in society, among which is providing economic support. 

The benefits also reduce food insecurity. According to a study that used national data, the odds of low income households facing food insecurity that were SNAP participants becoming food secure within two years were nearly four times higher than those of non-participants (Vericker and Mills, 2012). In addition, individuals that receive benefits have improved dietary intake. Each SNAP dollar added to a household’s income improved its score for overall dietary quality (Basiotisis, Kramer-Leblanc and Kennedy, 1998). From a sample of children picked nation-wide, a study determined that participation of a household in SNAP increased preschool children’s intake of nutrients including Vitamin A, zinc, iron and thiamin (Rose, Habicht and Devaney, 1998). Families that have access to SNAP benefits are able to maintain stable routines that encourage proper child development even in times of hardship. In this way, the program promotes family stability; another principle by which the effect of the program can be assessed, by reinforcing family commitments. When parents are able to provide economic support for their children, they are less likely to neglect or abandon their families. 

Like any policy and program interventions, SNAP has also had some unintended consequences. Then program creates dependence of the recipients on the benefits. To be considered eligible for the program, families have to be below a certain asset limit. This creates an incentive for families to make the choice of not accumulating assets or to spend their assets so that they can remain eligible to receive the benefits (Ratcliffe, McKernan, Wheaton and Kalish, 2016). Household that lack savings are more susceptible to unexpected financial costs and they find themselves incapable of handling such costs without experiencing some strain on their budgets. In this way, the program somewhat infringes on the responsibility of families instead of helping them build capacity to fulfil their functions; in this case, economic support. In a sense, the program takes over the financial responsibilities of households. 

Alternative Policies 

SNAP has been faced with a number of challenges, among them high administrative cost and significant abuse in terms of fraud. A possible alternative to the program is providing US citizens with a basic income. By providing a basic income, the government can scrap all other welfare programs that it runs. This solution may prove to be less expensive than funding all the different welfare programs that are currently in existence as it would also eliminate fraud. 

Some aspects of the program can also be altered to make it better and less susceptible to fraud. Basic food distribution stores that are funded by the federal government can replace the system of EBT cards. American citizens can be allowed access to these stores where they can get all the basic nutritional requirements. Such stores would obviously not stock snacks and this would eliminate the problem of SNAP recipients taking advantage of EBT cards to purchase foods that may have little to no nutritional benefits. 

Conclusion 

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program has been a part of the lives of Americans for almost 80 years in various shapes and forms. Though the program, like many of the social welfare programs, has flaws, it has helped millions of Americans avoid hunger for decades and with a few alterations, can help millions more in years to come. 

References 

Basiotis, P. P., Kramer ‐ LeBlanc, C. S., & Kennedy, E. T. (1998). Maintaining nutrition security and diet quality: the role of the Food Stamp Program and WIC. Family Economics and Nutrition Review, 11(1 and 2), 4 ‐ 16. 

Bogenschneider, K., Little, O., Ooms, T., Benning, S., and Cadigan, K. (2012). The Family Impact Handbook: How to View Policy & Practice through the Family Impact Lens. Madison, Wisconsin. The Family Impact Institute. 

Caswell, J., Yatkine, A. (2013). Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Examining the Evidence to Define Benefit Adequacy. Washington D.C. The National Academics Press. 

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (3 October, 2017). Policy Basics: Introduction to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Retrieved from https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-introduction-to-the-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap 

Irving, S., Loveless, T. (May, 2015). Dynamics of Economic Well-Being: Participation in Government Programs, 2009–2012: Who Gets Assistance? Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p70-141.pdf 

Ratcliffe, C., McKernan, M., Wheaton, L., and Kalish, E. (July, 2016). The Unintended Consequences of SNAP Asset Limits. Washington, D.C. Urban Institute. 

Rose, D., Habicht, J. and Devaney, B. (1998). Household participation in the Food Stamp and WIC programs increases the nutrient intakes of preschool children. Journal of Nutrition, 128(3), 548 ‐ 555. 

Snap to Health! (2010-2017). The History of SNAP. Retrieved from https://www.snaptohealth.org/snap/the-history-of-snap/ 

United States Department of Agriculture: Food and Nutrition Service. (20 November, 2014). A Short History of SNAP. Retrieved from https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/short-history-snap 

U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage: 2011. Webinar. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/pdf/20120912_ip_%20slides_noplotpoints.pdf 

Vericker, T. and Mills, G. (2012). Childhood Food Insecurity: The Mitigating Role of SNAP. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.