Carol Gundlach: Protect SNAP to help thousands of Alabama veterans make ends meet
Alabamians, like all Americans, take time on Veterans Day each year to honor those who have served our country and sacrificed to keep all of us free. But we should treat this holiday as more than a chance to say “thank you.” It also should be an occasion to reflect on our national obligation to provide veterans with the services and support they need to return to civilian life with dignity and security. The unfortunate reality is that many people who served in our military struggle with hunger after they return home. About 26,000 Alabama veterans, or 8 percent of all veterans in the state, use the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to help feed themselves and their families, according to a new study released Thursday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, D.C. Nationally, nearly 1.4 million veterans, representing 7 percent of all American veterans, receive assistance through SNAP, also known as food stamps. SNAP is an essential tool to help these veterans feed their families, just as it fights hunger for tens of millions of other Americans. But a U.S. House proposal threatens to take this vital food assistance away from as many as 2 million people, including tens of thousands in Alabama. The U.S. House and Senate have passed conflicting versions of the Farm Bill, the legislation that authorizes SNAP. The House version, for which six of Alabama’s seven House members voted, would impose harmful new SNAP “work requirements” that would take food away from many hungry families while doing little or nothing to help them find or keep work. Fortunately, the bipartisan Senate bill – with support from Sens. Doug Jones and Richard Shelby – offers a better path. Unlike the House approach of creating punitive new barriers to SNAP, the Senate plan would strengthen core SNAP assistance. The Senate proposal also would make needed investments in employment and training services for seniors, homeless people, people with disabilities and other SNAP participants who face additional barriers to work. Now the House and Senate must reconcile the differences between the two Farm Bills. Congress faces a choice between helping and hurting hungry people, including the veterans who could be devastated by the House version. Veterans face many barriers as they re-enter the civilian labor force. Trying to find a civilian job while still in the military can be difficult, and veterans who come home with disabilities may face additional barriers to employment. SNAP is an especially critical lifeline for families including veterans with disabilities, which are more likely to struggle to put food on the table. Young male veterans have higher rates of unemployment than do similarly situated civilian workers. While the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has programs to help these veterans gain skills and find stable employment, the VA programs are not necessarily aligned with the rigid one-size-fits-all work requirements proposed in the House Farm Bill. Should the House plan become law, many veterans would have to choose between getting the job help offered by the VA and keeping SNAP food assistance. This Veterans Day, we should thank Alabama veterans for their service by supporting SNAP, a program that helps thousands of them put food on the table. We also should urge our members of Congress to pass a final Farm Bill with the Senate’s SNAP provisions. By protecting and strengthening SNAP, Congress can take an important step toward ensuring that no veteran goes hungry after serving our country. ••• Carol Gundlach is a policy analyst for Alabama Arise, a nonprofit, nonpartisan coalition of congregations, organizations and individuals promoting public policies to improve the lives of low-income Alabamians. Email: carol@alarise.org.
Conservative revolt over immigration sinks House farm bill
In an embarrassment for House Republican leaders, conservatives on Friday scuttled a bill that combines stricter work and job training requirements for food stamp recipients with a renewal of farm subsidies popular in GOP-leaning farm country. Hard-right conservatives upset over the party’s stalled immigration agenda opposed the measure, which failed by a 213-198 vote. Some 30 Republicans joined with every chamber Democrat in opposition. The vote was a blow to GOP leaders, who had hoped to tout its new work requirements for recipients of food stamps. The work initiative polls well with voters, especially those in the GOP political base. More broadly, it exposed fissures within the party in the months before the midterm elections, and the Freedom Caucus tactics rubbed many rank-and-file Republicans the wrong way. “You judge each piece of legislation on its own,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. “You don’t hold one thing hostage for something that’s totally different and has nothing to do with it. I would say that’s a mistake in my view.” Key conservatives in the rebellious House Freedom Caucus opposed the measure, seeking leverage to win conservative policies an advantage in a debate on immigration next month. Negotiations with GOP leaders Friday morning failed to bear fruit, however, and the unrelated food and farm measure was defeated. Conservative Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said some members had concerns over the farm bill, but said, “That wasn’t my main focus. My main focus was making sure we do immigration policy right” and “actually build a border security wall.” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., took steps to call for a re-vote in the future but it’s not clear when the measure might be revived. A handful of GOP moderates opposed the bill, too, but not enough to sink it on their own. The farm bill, a twice-per-decade rite on Capitol Hill, promises greater job training opportunities for recipients of food stamps, a top priority for House leaders. Democrats are strongly opposed, saying the stricter work and job training rules are poorly designed and would drive 2 million people off of food stamps. They took a victory lap after the vote. “On a bipartisan basis, the House rejected a bad bill that failed farmers and working families,” said Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “Republicans wrote a cruel, destructive Farm Bill that abandoned farmers and producers amid plummeting farm prices and the self-inflicted damage of President Trump’s trade brinkmanship.” Currently, adults 18-59 are required to work part-time to receive food stamps, officially called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or agree to accept a job if they’re offered one. Stricter rules apply to able-bodied adults 18-49, who are subject to a three-month limit of benefits unless they meet a work or job training requirement of 80 hours per month. Under the new bill, the tougher requirement would be expanded to apply to all adults on SNAP, with exceptions for of seniors, pregnant women, caretakers of children under the age of 6, or people with disabilities. “It sets up a system for SNAP recipients where if you are able to work, you should work to get the benefits,” said Ryan, R-Wis.” And if you can’t work, we’ll help you get the training you need. We will help you get the skills you need to get an opportunity.” The measure would have greatly expanded funding for state-administered job training programs, but Democrats and outside critics say the funding for the proposed additional job training would require huge new bureaucracies, extensive record-keeping requirements, and that the funding levels would fall far short of what’s enough to provide job training to everybody covered by the new job training requirements. “While I agree that there are changes that need to be made to the SNAP program, this is so clearly not the way to do it,” said Rep. Colin Peterson of Minnesota, top Democrat of the Agriculture Committee. “The bill cuts more than $23 billion in SNAP benefits and will result in an estimated 2 million Americans unable to get the help they need.” He said it “turns around and wastes billions … cut from SNAP benefits to create a massive, untested workforce training bureaucracy.” In addition to food stamps, the measure would renew farm safety-net programs such as subsidies for crop insurance, farm credit and land conservation. Those subsidies for farm country traditionally form the backbone of support for the measure among Republicans, while urban Democrats support food aid for the poor. On Thursday, supporters of the agriculture safety net easily defeated an attempt to weaken the government’s sugar program, which critics say gouges consumers by propping up sugar prices. The measure mostly tinkered with farm programs, adding provisions aimed at boosting high-speed internet access in rural areas, assist beginning farmers, and ease regulations on producers. But since the measure makes mostly modest adjustments to farm policy, some lawmakers believe that the most likely course of action this year is a temporary extension of the current measure, which expires at the end of September. In the Senate, the chamber’s filibuster rules require a bipartisan process for a bill to pass. There, Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., promises a competing bill later this month and he’s signaling that its changes to food stamps would be far more modest than the House measure. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Carol Gundlach: Congress should oppose Farm Bill changes that would make Alabamians poorer, hungrier
Americans across the political spectrum have long agreed on the importance of reducing hunger in our country. But the U.S. House is now considering a Farm Bill reauthorization that would do the opposite. It would be a step in the wrong direction for children, seniors and struggling families across Alabama. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a proven success with a long history of bipartisan support and a strong track record of reducing hunger, creating jobs and supplementing wages. But the proposed Farm Bill would erode our shared commitment to fighting hunger. Instead, it would punish people who have very low incomes by slashing SNAP for as many as 2 million Americans, including tens of thousands Alabama adults and their children. This misguided move would increase hunger, deepen poverty and take a heavy toll on our state’s economy and budgets. The cuts would hit especially hard in rural communities, where some stores would close without SNAP income. SNAP, often called food stamps, is the largest program in the Farm Bill. It helps more than 40 million Americans make ends meet and has lifted more than 8 million families out of poverty, including 195,000 Alabamians. In Alabama alone, SNAP benefits are spent in more than 5,000 stores and contribute $1.3 billion a year to the state economy. With Alabama’s General Fund already struggling to pay for essential services like health care and prisons, the House plan would force the state to hire more SNAP eligibility workers and create expensive systems to track compliance with new work and child support mandates. It also would force Alabama to return to the costly, ineffective practice of verifying whether applicants have cars or other assets that might make them ineligible for SNAP. The Farm Bill seeks to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Half of all adult SNAP participants without a disability are working, as are 60 percent of participants with children – often in retail, construction and other jobs with low wages, irregular or seasonal hours, and few benefits. In exchange for cutting their nutrition assistance, the House plan would create an underfunded employment and training system that would do little to help people actually find good-paying jobs. The bill also would extend these stricter requirements to people who are now exempt. That would include nearly all participants with children ages 6 and over, as well as jobless Alabamians in their 50s – even though they often remain unemployed longer than younger people do, no matter how hard they look for work. Participants who cannot prove they have worked enough hours could be denied SNAP for one year or longer. These proposed SNAP changes would hurt children, too. When parents lose food assistance because they can’t find a job or their work hours drop below an arbitrary minimum, their children are deprived of nutrition they need to grow and thrive. That makes it harder for children to succeed in school – and it’s simply cruel. Another way the plan could hurt kids is by requiring single parents to “cooperate” with child support collection. Child support is critical to eliminating child poverty, and more than 70 percent of low-income custodial parents already receive child support services. But taking food off the table doesn’t help a parent pay child support; it only makes the family hungrier. The proposal also could put applicants who are victims of domestic violence or child abuse at greater risk, along with costing Alabama millions of dollars for additional child support administration. Alabama’s congressional delegation will play an important role in Farm Bill reauthorization. Our representatives will vote on the plan when it reaches the House floor as soon as mid-May. Sen. Richard Shelby is the influential new chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. And Sen. Doug Jones is an important member of a bipartisan group of Senate moderates, some of whom are expected to offer their own version of the Farm Bill in the next few weeks. Alabamians are caring people, and we have a shared responsibility to keep our neighbors from going hungry. As our state’s members of Congress consider the Farm Bill, we urge them to oppose any efforts to weaken SNAP’s ability to help struggling Alabama families keep food on the table. ••• Carol Gundlach is a policy analyst for Alabama Arise, a nonprofit, nonpartisan coalition of congregations, organizations and individuals promoting public policies to improve the lives of low-income Alabamians. Email: carol@alarise.org.
New study reveals SNAP benefits don’t cover meal cost in Alabama
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides monthly food budget assistance to more than 42 million eligible, low-income Americans across the country. The Urban Institute, a liberal-leaning think tank, released a the study — How Far Do SNAP Benefits Fall Short of Covering the Cost of a Meal? — on Friday that shows meals in Alabama cost more than SNAP benefits allow — ranging from 10 percent more in Colbert County to 43 percent more per meal in Baldwin County. On a monthly basis, SNAP benefits fall short of the cost of an average meal by $46.50 per person nationwide. But according to a new study, even the maximum SNAP benefit does not cover the cost of an average meal in any of Alabama’s 67 counties. Barry Spear, public information manager for Alabama’s Department of Human Resources (ADHR), which administers SNAP, told The Associated Press that SNAP only meant to meet supplemental food needs. “It’s not the only source that they have to find food,” Spear said. “A lot of people think it’s supposed to take care of all their needs, and it’s not designed to do that.” He said individuals can join other federal programs like WIC, which gives aid to women and children, or go to food banks run by nonprofit organizations or churches. According to government records, more than 850,000 Alabamians, or 1 in 6 residents, received SNAP benefits for the entirety of 2016 (the last year the numbers are available).
Alabama residents join pet food stamp fight
A viral new petition is asking the federal government to extend food stamp benefits to pet food, and Alabamians are getting in on the action. Edward B Johnston Jr. is petitioning the Food and Nutrition Service – U.S. Department of Agriculture to extend Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits (formerly known as food stamps) to pets. He said he has personally only been receiving SNAP benefits for a few months, but has been unable to feed his dog due to the government regulations — hence the need for the petition. Under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, households cannot use benefits to buy pet food, according to the USDA. The Care2 petition, called “Don’t Let Pets Starve – Include Pet Food in SNAP Benefits!,” has already reached more than 101,000 signature, past its 90,000 goal. The petition reads: “Each year, over 40 million low- or no-income people in the United States rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to help purchase food for themselves and their families. It is the most wide-reaching program in the domestic hunger safety net, helping keep millions of families from starving. But what about their pets? Unfortunately, SNAP benefits cannot be used to buy pet food, leaving poor families with pets in a difficult position. “ The petition also argues a family’s financial status can change at any moment, so pet owners should not be forced to give up their animals simply just because they can’t afford them. “Should someone be forced to give up a pet they’ve had for years just because they hit a financial rough patch?” the petition reads. Alabama’s Austyn P. agrees. “Pets are just as important as children and people!!! They have feelings and get hungry to!!! I think this is a great thing!!” she wrote. Other Alabamians who have commented on the petition said they treat their pets as children and that they also deserve to eat. “My dogs are a part of my family not only do I treat them as my children but I cook most of their meals which means rather than buy enough for just myself I have to buy enough for them as well, two extra mouth to feed,” posted Alabama signer Kimberly K. “Because every life deserves to have food,” said Alabama supporter Betty T. Meanwhile other Alabamians aren’t so keen on the idea. “This has got to be a joke…Animals on Food Stamps. If this is proposed, this entity will be very embarrassed,” posted one Alabama signer.
Some Medicaid recipients in Alabama may be required to work
According to Gov. Kay Ivey and state Medicaid officials, Alabama is hoping to become the newest state to institute a work requirement for some Medicaid recipients. As part of her General Fund Budget proposal, Ivey instructed Alabama’s Medicaid Commissioner Stephanie Azar to develop a policy for implementing a work requirement for Medicaid receivers. All work requirements would only be applicable to “able-bodied” adults, with exemptions being made for the elderly, people with disabilities, and children. Ivey’s current plan would also require copay increases for Medicaid recipients. Her goal is to “increase efficiency and decrease costs related to Medicaid, all in an effort to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars…I look forward to future implementation of those policies.” This proposal comes after President Donald Trump‘s Administration sent a letter to all state Medicaid directors notifying them that they would allow states to impose work requirements on non-disabled working age Medicaid recipients. However, a work requirement is not the only option suggested by the Trump Administration. Recipients may also volunteer, attend a school or enter a work training program. Earlier in January, Bryant-Republican State Rep. Tommy Hanes pre-filed HB6, which would also require able-bodied adults who are recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , formerly known as food stamps, to participate in a work requirement with similar guidelines to the proposed medicaid work requirements. According to the Lagniappe; “Alabama’s Medicaid costs took up one-third of the current General Fund budget, and the program is routinely the most expensive item lawmakers have to fund…despite that, a recent report from the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission found Alabama already runs the leanest program of any state based on the average medical benefit received by its enrollees.” Alabama has approximately 1.043 million Medicaid recipients, with over half of recipients being children, and only 18 percent being non-disabled adults. Several other Republican majority states are seeking similar Medicaid work waivers, with Kentucky being the first state to move forward with the work requirements.
GOP House member pre-files bill to nix waivers for able-bodied SNAP work requirements
On Alabama state rep is working to get more able-bodied Alabamians off of the government rolls and back to work. Ahead of the 2018 Legislative session, State Rep. Tommy Hanes (R-Bryant) pre-filed HB6, which prohibits the Alabama Commissioner of the Department of Human Resources from requesting a waiver of federal work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents who are applicants or recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) formerly known as food stamps. In 2009, the Obama administration passed a stimulus bill that allowed states to apply for waivers from regulations requiring able-bodied adults without dependents to work. Throughout former President Barack Obama‘s tenure, food stamp usage soared. In 2017, Alabama implemented laws requiring food stamp recipients work at least 20 hours per week, enroll in school, or take part in state-approved job training if they receive benefits for more than three months. Turns out the work requirements worked and the state saw large decreases in SNAP enrollment as a result of the work requirements. According to National Review, after Alabama reinstated food-stamp work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents, the rolls dropped by 85 percent. Now, Hanes is looking to drop the ability to ask for waivers, to require all SNAP recipients, who don’t have dependents, to meet work requirements to continue to receive benefits — which will hopefully encourage more Alabamians to go back to work. This bill requires all able-bodied adults without dependents who are applicants or recipients of SNAP benefits to participate in minimum work requirements, provide documentation of engaging in work training, or participate in volunteer community service and would provide limited exemptions from these work requirements. If passed, it will become effective on the first day of the third month following its passage and approval by Governor Kay Ivey.
Mike Rogers: Agriculture and East Alabama
As most folks across East Alabama know, the agriculture industry is a money maker and job creator in our state. The agriculture industry boasts over 500,000 jobs and brings in more than $70 billion total a year to Alabama. Because of this, I know firsthand how important agriculture is to all of us. As a senior member on the House Agriculture Committee, I make it a priority each year to hear back from folks across the state so I can best represent them in Congress. Since I was first elected, I have held meetings with the Third Congressional District Agriculture Advisory Committee, which is made up of farmers and producers from each of the 13 counties that make up the district. When I am in Washington, I meet regularly with agriculture groups from Alabama about issues important to them. Just in the past few months, I have met with Golden Flake Snack Foods and George Atwood, an egg producer from Alexandria, Alabama, about GMO labeling standards. I met with representatives from the Southern Crop Production Association on issues important to their organization. I also met with the Alabama Cattlemen’s Association regarding the overreaching EPA and trade issues important to them as well as the American Association of Crop Insurers about President Obama’s dangerous proposed cuts to crop insurance in his budget. In May, I attended an Agriculture Full Committee Hearing titled, “Past, Present and Future of SNAP: The Retailer Perspective.” Opelika’s own Jimmy Wright, owner of Wright’s Market, testified at that hearing. This year I supported H.Res. 591, which commends cooperative owners and employees of the Farm Credit System, which was signed into law through the Farm Loan Act of 1916, for their continued service in meeting the credit and financial services needs of rural communities and agriculture. Today, the Farm Credit System plays a vital role in the success of rural communities in all 50 states and provides over $237 billion in loans to more than 500,000 customers. I also signed onto to letters that are important to our state’s agriculture industry. One was a letter to House Leadership opposing a Senate Resolution of disapproval of the Catfish Rule. The catfish inspection rule provides important oversight for American consumers when they buy catfish. It guarantees they are buying American-raised, properly inspected catfish. Another was sent to the secretary of the USDA, Tom Vilsack, to express concern regarding the Food and Nutrition Service’s (FNS) recently proposed rule to modify retailer eligibility requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These are just a few examples of what is going on in Washington when it comes to Alabama’s agriculture industry. I will continue to fight for our hard-working farmers and all individuals in that industry. • • • Mike Rogers is a member of the U.S. Congress representing Alabama’s 3rd Congressional District.
Felony drug offenders now eligible for SNAP, TANF benefits in Alabama
On Saturday Alabama joined most U.S. states by allowing people with a past felony drug conviction to receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, as well as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) assistance, according to a news release by Alabama Arise. The lifetime ban on SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, and TANF benefits for drug offenders grew out of a 1996 federal welfare reform law enacted by former President Bill Clinton, though the law does allow states to request a waiver. Though most other states requested a waiver before, Alabama included reinstating the benefits in a 2015 prison reform law sponsored by Sen. Cam Ward (R-Alabaster) with a floor amendment offered by Sen. Linda Coleman (D-Birmingham). Restrictions still apply to drug offenders seeking benefits, including the completion of their sentence and probation requirements. Further, persons with a drug offense in the past five years may be required to pass a drug test to receive TANF benefits. People previously denied Snap or TANF benefits because of a drug offense can apply at a local Department of Human Resources office after Monday. Further, households already receiving benefits but have a household member not included because of a drug conviction can report the “newly eligible person” to the household’s caseworker. “The end of Alabama’s SNAP and TANF bans is good news for state budget and for families,” the Arise news release said. “The policy change will help cut corrections costs in the cash-strapped General Fund budget by making it easier for released prisoners to reintegrate into the community, which will help reduce recidivism. Importantly, restoring SNAP and TANF benefits also will help prevent hunger and homelessness among some of Alabama’s most vulnerable families.” Officials with Alabama Arise estimate that 30,000 to 80,000 Alabamians would become eligible for SNAP benefits under the change, with TNF benefits being harder to monitor because they are more difficult to secure. Both programs are funded by federal dollars, so the influx of new beneficiaries will add no new costs to the state.
45,000 Alabamians at risk of losing food stamp benefits as work requirements resume
A federal waiver which allowed states to waive work requirements for recipients of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, formerly known as the Food Stamp program, expired Jan. 1. The expiration of the federal waiver means that about 45,000 Alabamians receiving SNAP benefits must acquire work to maintain their benefits. The change does not affect recipients with physical or mental disabilities, only those who are “able-bodied” adults, ages 18 to 49, without dependents and receiving $194 a month in benefits. Along with exceptions for disabled recipients, those who are pregnant or caring for an incapacitated person. Though the expiration of the waiver requires these able-bodied Alabamians to work, or be enrolled in a training program, at least 80 hours a month, SNAP benefit recipients affected are allowed three months without a job during a 36-month period. The highest number of affected recipients is in Jefferson County, 6,377, with Mobile County close behind at 5,068. The work requirement waiver will continue to be observed in 13 of Alabama’s 67 counties suffering from high unemployment rates, including Barbour, Choctaw, Clarke, Conecuh, Dallas, Greene, Hale, Lowndes, Monroe, Perry, Sumter, Washington and Wilcox counties. As many as 1 million people nationally could lose SNAP benefits as a result of the waiver expiration, 40 percent of them women and a quarter who do not have a high school diploma, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
