Earlier this month, Wal-Mart stores in my home turf of northern Louisiana experienced a computer glitch allowing recipients of the state’s food stamp program to go on a free two hour shopping spree.
Once word got out that EBT cards – essentially, debit-type cards for those on food stamps – showed no limits at select Wal-Marts in Mansfield and Springfield, crowds of people naturally rushed to the stores to take advantage and load up on groceries.
It’s estimated that between 150-200 shoppers benefited from the malfunction; however, despite both the relatively low level of abuse and the fact that Louisiana taxpayers weren’t affected, Sen. David Vitter urged Louisiana officials Wednesday to pursue charges and strip benefits from the mooching thieves.
Really, what can you say about that?
Sure, maybe 200 people unlawfully benefited from the outage on Wal-Mart’s own dime. But Vitter wants the obviously starving shoppers identified, disqualified from the program and prosecuted.
At this point, we’re talking about a political party’s state of mind that experiences positive glee in inflicting further suffering on the already miserable.
While this is merely one battle being waged by the Republican Party in the war on food stamps, – House Republicans already voted last month to sharply decrease federal subsidies to the tune of $39 billion over the next ten years – let’s look at the fundamental issue at hand.
Is the food stamp program – or, to use its proper name, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program – in general a good idea? Or is it, as Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee, puts it, an example of turning the safety net into “a hammock that lulls able-bodied people to lives of dependency and complacency?”
In a way, you can see why SNAP has become a target of the Republican Party
Conservatives are deeply committed to the view that the size of government has drastically increased under President Obama, but that’s literally the opposite of what has happened.
More specifically, Republicans face the awkward reality that public employment is down sharply, while overall spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product is, too, falling significantly.
Public spending on SNAP, however, really has grown a lot, with enrollment rising from 26 million Americans in 2007 to nearly 48 million as of now.
To Republicans, they see this as proof of skyrocketing spending by Obama on an unsustainable government program.
To anyone with a basic understanding of economics – which as we’ve seen with the very public battles over the debt ceiling, sequester and ObamaRomneyCare, appears to be no one in politics land – see a safety-net program doing exactly what it’s designed to do: help people in a time of economic distress.
Indeed, the recent, explosive growth in SNAP is a direct result of the Great Recession from 2007-2009. As we experienced the worst economic slump in our nation since the Great Depression, millions of people were laid off, thereby allowing them to qualify for means-tested programs, such as nutritional aid.
Programs like SNAP, it turns out, have actually helped mitigate the weak economy resulting from the recession by lifting four million people out of poverty and reducing hardship for millions more, according to data the Census Bureau released last month.
SNAP, in short, is public policy at its best. Two-thirds of SNAP beneficiaries are children, the elderly or disabled, with the remainder consisting of mostly adults with children.
It helps people help themselves and, most importantly, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that ensuring adequate nutrition for children actually makes it less, not more likely that those children will be poor and need public assistance when they grow up.
So, in regards to Wal-Mart’s unplanned grocery shopping spree giveaway, I commend the global retailer for not taking action against the hungry culprits yet.
Sen. Vitter, I know second quarter revenue was weak this quarter, but Wal-Mart still managed over $4 billion in profits. I mean, I like depriving poor kids of much needed food just as much as the next guy, but, c’mon man, keep it in your pants.
Jay Meyers is a 20-year-old economics junior from Shreveport.