Missouri may be banning steak and seafood from Food Stamp Program

[CPT Tripss]

Kansas joined the craziness

Last week, the Kansas legislature passed House Bill 2258, punishing the poor by limiting their cash withdrawals of welfare benefits to $25 per day and forbidding them to use their benefits “in any retail liquor store, casino, gaming establishment, jewelry store, tattoo parlor, massage parlor, body piercing parlor, spa, nail salon, lingerie shop, tobacco paraphernalia store, vapor cigarette store, psychic or fortune telling business, bail bond company, video arcade, movie theater, swimming pool, cruise ship, theme park, dog or horse racing facility, pari-mutuel facility, or sexually oriented business . . . or in any business or retail establishment where minors under age 18 are not permitted.”

Is Kansas like NJ in putting all cash benefits on the "card?" People receiving temporary disability and unemployment, not means tested benefits, have these cards. Seems beyond demeaning to have this laundry list of restrictions. Then again, if middle class conservatives are faced with this they might not be so quick to point fingers.

 

[Anesthesia Fine]

I am also mystified by all these people who "see" people abusing EBT (or SNAP as it's known here). Really? I pay zero attention to how other people pay for the items in their cart, or what they are. It's none of my business, is it?

And, even if you do "see" something, you know NOTHING about the situation, except what your own prejudices and preconceptions tell you to "see."

MYOB applies pretty well here.

As one of my friends likes to say, "All those magazines are in the checkout line to help you mind your own d**n business."

 

[bcla]

Why cant we be worried about ebt/welfare fraud and abuse AND corporate fraud and abuse, why does it have to be either or. I would like the govt to crack down on both.

Easier target.

 

[Colleen27]

LBI,
I always wonder the same thing?? And then how do you know they are judging you? do people actually say something to some one who is shopping with a EBT card? I have never seen/heard anyone in a supermarket say derogatory things to another shopper.

I always feel like such a moron after these threads. lol, you could offer me a million dollars the second after I checked out if I could tell you how the person in front of you paid for their groceries. I'd lose that bet every time. most of the time I'm either busy mentally tallying up my food, looking through coupons or skimming a mag to remotely pay attention.

I'm the same way, but people do notice. And people aren't shy with their opinions. I was in line once behind a customer who was ranting about the person in front of her using an EBT card to the cashier, and the cashier was agreeing rather enthusiastically. Not very professional but not unusual, I don't think, in a "red" area.

DD6 has a good friend who is one of 10 children in his family, 8 of whom are fosters or adopted from foster care. His mother has gone through special training to deal with babies with a history of prenatal drug exposure, and has adopted two sibling pairs where the baby was born addicted and the older child was removed as well. She has told some real horror stories about using the food stamps/WIC benefits for which foster kids are categorically eligible, and like a previous poster she doesn't take the kids shopping when using the card because she doesn't want them to hear what people might say. Yes, she drives a nice car, has nice clothes, and even an iPhone. And strangers do feel comfortable commenting on all of that without knowing anything else about her.

They had transactions in Hawaii, Las Vegas, and even Florida, which angered a lot of people.

However, whether or not restrictions happen with these programs won't be dependent on the successes, but on the way in which they're used that looks bad to the public and the politicians who write the laws.

Yep. The out of state use thing has been in the news here too, and there were lawmakers who wanted to change the rules so benefits could only be used in state. Fortunately someone decided to look a little deeper into the numbers and found that more than 95% of the out-of-state use was in Ohio or Indiana... and since there are many areas along the southern end of the state where the closest real grocery store is across state lines that took the wind out of the sails of those pushing for geographic limitations.

 

[bcla]

Kansas joined the craziness

Is Kansas like NJ in putting all cash benefits on the "card?" People receiving temporary disability and unemployment, not means tested benefits, have these cards. Seems beyond demeaning to have this laundry list of restrictions. Then again, if middle class conservatives are faced with this they might not be so quick to point fingers.

At least in California, the card for unemployment benefits is administered separately from the Golden State Advantage card. The former is a standard Visa debit card only issued by BofA for California EDD clients. The latter is a multi-agency card that works with CalFresh (food stamp replacement program), CalWorks, and refugee assistance. While it is a debit card, it isn't a Visa or MC debit card, and I believe that the state has to approve outlets where they will allow debit transactions for this card.

Also - unemployment benefits are never means tested for assets. One could get laid off from a $500,000 salary a year job, drive a nice car, and still qualify. Heck - when I was laid off I was making several multiples of what unemployment was paying out. I wouldn't say it was demeaning, but it was very disappointing. It didn't even cover our mortgage.

 

[Colleen27]

Kansas joined the craziness

Is Kansas like NJ in putting all cash benefits on the "card?" People receiving temporary disability and unemployment, not means tested benefits, have these cards. Seems beyond demeaning to have this laundry list of restrictions. Then again, if middle class conservatives are faced with this they might not be so quick to point fingers.

The $25/day restriction seems particularly heinous to me. I don't know about Kansas, but in Michigan fee-free ATMs for the EBT network aren't exactly on every corner. A low limit like that would mean people are getting hit with $2-3 ATM fees every time they take out cash. Since most people poor enough for cash aid don't have a checking account, that could add up to a ridiculous amount of fees if they need to pay a bill that doesn't accept the card directly or are trying to save money by buying used clothing/household goods or otherwise need to actually use the cash assistance they receive.

All of the rest is meaningless - someone inclined to gamble away their cash benefit or spend it on cigarettes just has to use the ATM at the gas station or convenience store on the way to his/her vice now.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

Why cant we be worried about ebt/welfare fraud and abuse AND corporate fraud and abuse, why does it have to be either or. I would like the govt to crack down on both.

We can. The issue is that I don't think people are worrying about both, or certainly not worrying about them equally, much less worrying in degrees proportional to the dollar value of the abuse that is taking place.

Right now in America we have a group of heavily armed and well-organized criminals launching simultaneous attacks on Fort Knox and on the wallets of every person in America and a child shoplifting a candy bar at the corner store, and we, the very people having our wallets fleeced, are sending the SWAT teams and the news choppers after the child. But darn it, we'll take that kid to the ground and beat the crap out of him to teach him a good lesson, and we'll all feel like we stopped crime and taught that kid who's boss today...

 

[Mkrop]

We can. The issue is that I don't think people are worrying about both, or certainly not worrying about them equally, much less worrying in degrees proportional to the dollar value of the abuse that is taking place.

Right now in America we have a group of heavily armed and well-organized criminals launching simultaneous attacks on Fort Knox and on the wallets of every person in America and a child shoplifting a candy bar at the corner store, and we, the very people having our wallets fleeced, are sending the SWAT teams and the news choppers after the child. But darn it, we'll take that kid to the ground and beat the crap out of him to teach him a good lesson, and we'll all feel like we stopped crime and taught that kid who's boss today...

That sounds a bit hyperbolic.

 

[bcla]

We can. The issue is that I don't think people are worrying about both, or certainly not worrying about them equally, much less worrying in degrees proportional to the dollar value of the abuse that is taking place.

I'm not a supply-sider, but at the very least tax breaks can be couched in terms of economic benefit. Federal food programs are actually USDA programs, and they're at least have some support from agricultural interests.

However, as with many things it's all about perception. It's hard to see someone getting a tax break, but one can walk into a supermarket and be stuck behind someone having an issue with an EBT card, and who may outwardly appear to be doing well enough to not need it.

 

[Colleen27]

I'm not a supply-sider, but at the very least tax breaks can be couched in terms of economic benefit. Federal food programs are actually USDA programs, and they're at least have some support from agricultural interests.

But the supply side/economic benefit of tax cuts has little evidence-based support outside of partisan "think tanks". And if we're going to lean on flimsy economic justification, rather than the basic morality of not wanting citizens of a prosperous nation to go hungry, we can't overlook the immediate and direct economic stimulus of the food stamp program. It is money that is spent, each and every month, much of it in stores that serve poor communities. The "food desert" issue has already been mentioned on this thread - it would be made much worse without food stamp dollars flowing to stores in impoverished neighborhoods as cash sales wouldn't be enough to keep those stores in business.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Kansas joined the craziness

I've got a problem with the "bail bond" one. So poor people can't get out of jail, basically.

 

[bcla]

But the supply side/economic benefit of tax cuts has little evidence-based support outside of partisan "think tanks". And if we're going to lean on flimsy economic justification, rather than the basic morality of not wanting citizens of a prosperous nation to go hungry, we can't overlook the immediate and direct economic stimulus of the food stamp program. It is money that is spent, each and every month, much of it in stores that serve poor communities. The "food desert" issue has already been mentioned on this thread - it would be made much worse without food stamp dollars flowing to stores in impoverished neighborhoods as cash sales wouldn't be enough to keep those stores in business.

I said I wasn't a supply-sider. In many ways I believe the arguments can be dubious, although taxing the rich to extremes probably isn't healthy for an economy either.

I understand the "food desert" issue, but what's most visible to the majority of middle class Americans is shopping at the same stores in middle class areas, where it's clear that at least some EBT users have access to private transportation. Again, perhaps this is an unfair perception, but one that won't die as long as some perceive there are abuses.

 

[Colleen27]

I've got a problem with the "bail bond" one. So poor people can't get out of jail, basically.

No, they just have to use an ATM elsewhere. That's what makes those rules so pointless... you can't take cash out at the bail bond office, or at the casino. You can at the gas station or convenience store next door.

But jail is a whole 'nother issue in terms of how this country screws people simply for being poor... the $140/day fee for being incarcerated (along with the risk of probation violation and more jail time for not paying, essentially a modern-day debtors' prison), the fact that prisoners have to purchase their own supplies via the "vendor" that sells $10 toothpaste and $5 pairs of athletic socks, the huge bias in the courts that have poor people serving time for things that better-off defendants are able to buy their way out of (paying fines to avoid jail time), etc. Once there is contact with the criminal justice system it never ends for many poor people.

 

[spima3]

I haven't read the entire thread, nor do I intend to.

However, thread title caught my eye because I just ran into something recently w/ my youngest DD, Many of her friends live in families that are on SNAP. She was recently at the one girls house for the weekend. When she came home, she told me she felt bad because there wasn't much to eat in the house, and they had run through the money for the month.

In the next sentence, she remarked how come they don't have money for food, but they have flat screen TV's in every room and her friend had just gotten a new smart phone for her birthday and $200 sneakers. And many of her other friends live that way.

I told her I don't know how they have so much "stuff" that we don't have, but IF they are spending money on those things instead of saving it for extra groceries then it wasn't very smart.

It is that kind of thing that you just have to shake your head at, but I try to make it a teachable moment about making smarter choices in life.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

That sounds a bit hyperbolic.

No, not in terms of pure dollars. The impact of true corporate fraud (not just massive tax subsidies) is massive relative to food stamp/SNAP fraud. The former caused the collapse of the global economy, after all. And buying lobster on SNAP is just as legal as taking advantage of biased tax subsidies, so neither is fraud. One does take billions upon billions out of the nation's tax base, however, and it's not the lobsters.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

I'm not a supply-sider, but at the very least tax breaks can be couched in terms of economic benefit. Federal food programs are actually USDA programs, and they're at least have some support from agricultural interests.

However, as with many things it's all about perception. It's hard to see someone getting a tax break, but one can walk into a supermarket and be stuck behind someone having an issue with an EBT card, and who may outwardly appear to be doing well enough to not need it.

I actually think the root cause is something very different. I believe it is driven by a bully mentality that makes some people demean and degrade others in order to build themselves up, if only in their solipsistic worlds. Bullies get a kick out of hurting weaker people and they defer to the stronger; in this country, and in the world, money is the only real power, and power is strength, so they'd never pick a fight with the wealthy. They want to see themselves as better than others, as people who might one day make an income in the tens of millions of dollars per year, despite the fact that most of them will never get a sniff of real money, so they "oppose taxes" on principle when they don't really understand the economic issues they are claiming to support and oppose, all the while wrapping themselves in the banner of historical events that they vastly misunderstand and/or misrepresent.

 

[Mkrop]

that wasnt the part of your post I found over the top...swat teams taking down a thief at a corner store????

No, not in terms of pure dollars. The impact of true corporate fraud (not just massive tax subsidies) is massive relative to food stamp/SNAP fraud. The former caused the collapse of the global economy, after all. And buying lobster on SNAP is just as legal as taking advantage of biased tax subsidies, so neither is fraud. One does take billions upon billions out of the nation's tax base, however, and it's not the lobsters.

 

[Colleen27]

I actually think the root cause is something very different. I believe it is driven by a bully mentality that makes some people demean and degrade others in order to build themselves up, if only in their solipsistic worlds. Bullies get a kick out of hurting weaker people and they defer to the stronger; in this country, and in the world, money is the only real power, and power is strength, so they'd never pick a fight with the wealthy. They want to see themselves as better than others, as people who might one day make an income in the tens of millions of dollars per year, despite the fact that most of them will never get a sniff of real money, so they "oppose taxes" on principle when they don't really understand the economic issues they are claiming to support and oppose, all the while wrapping themselves in the banner of historical events that they vastly misunderstand and/or misrepresent.

I don't think it rises to that level of conscious malevolence. If you think about it, the logical inverse of the very American belief that anyone who works hard can "make it" is that anyone who isn't making it simply isn't working hard enough. If individual merit is the key to wealth, not circumstances of birth or native ability, then it follows that those mired in poverty are lacking in that merit. To admit otherwise about the poor and needy (at least those who are able-bodied/sound of mind) would also be to admit that we're also limited by circumstances outside of our control, and that goes against our most deeply held cultural myths. I think that's what underlies the viciousness of opposition to social welfare programs. It isn't intentional meanness, it is a reaction to the cognitive dissonance of believing in the American dream in the face of contradictory real-world experiences.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

that wasnt the part of your post I found over the top...swat teams taking down a thief at a corner store????

That was an analogy that equates to the scale of indignation on this issue, as too many people direct all their rage, i.e. "the SWAT teams and law enforcement" in my analogy, to the people who may be misusing, even illegally, food stamps, i.e. the "child stealing the candy bar" while not sending the same degree of rage, much less a proportional-to-the-scale-of-the-issue degree of rage, towards the true theft and fraud that is going on in other ways. As an analogy, therefore, I do not think it was hyperbolic, although if I stated it was happening in that fashion in real life it would absolutely be.

Put another way, in the medium of the Dis alone, I cannot find any threads that originated on the subject of corporate fraud in the past year but I was able to find over a dozen about food stamp and welfare fraud. It is possible that my search skills are failing me, but the ones on SNAP/"welfare"/"food stamp" fraud were easy to find. If people really want to be concerned with both, the number of threads should theoretically be equivalent. If they want to be concerned relative to the scale of the issue, there should be far more about corporate fraud. But they are not equal, or scaled, and that puzzles me when people then argue that "we can be concerned with both." Honestly, I'm not concerned with both; the cost of "welfare" fraud is a rounding error in our nation's total spending and it does not really concern me when we have such massive issues to fix. It would be akin to the Captain of the Titanic sending a crew to touch up the paint scratch from hitting the iceberg and another crew to try to bail the water pouring in. Corporate fraud, e.g. Lehman Brothers, Freddie Mac, Bernie Madoff, etc. is far larger, and the use of legal loopholes by corporations to fleece the economy again dwarf the misuse of legal loopholes by those on welfare to exploit the system because the numbers are so much larger so the outcomes are, as well.

 

[undertheradar]

This thread is turning too political, let's try and avoid getting it locked.