State must fight against food stamp cuts

The issue: A federal proposal to change eligibility standards for the program once known as food stamps could affect thousands of Connecticut residents. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, otherwise known as SNAP, includes a provision called broadbased categorical eligibility, which has allowed Connecticut and 42 other states to expand the number of lowincome residents who qualify. A proposal by Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue to close what he called a “loophole” could dramatically reduce eligibility.

Why this matters: SNAP is available to people who fall below certain income thresholds. The new rule would reset that limit to people earning no more than 130 percent of poverty guidelines, which today stands at $33,475 for a family of four. Connecticut currently allows those who earn up to 185 percent of the federal poverty level to receive SNAP benefits.

Connecticut’s cost of living is among the highest in the nation. The state Department of Social Services has estimated that there are about 11,000 state residents who could be in line to lose their benefits because they have a gross income of 131 percent of the poverty level or higher. That’s a small percentage of the roughly 364,000 state residents who receive food stamps, but it could mean serious hardship.

What we said: “Congress can’t have a reasonable discussion on gun safety to protect children, but members are willing to pluck food out of young mouths.

“How did we get here? We were always here. Food stamps carry the burden of being perceived by some haves as a scam concocted by the havenots.

“This is one reason it is vital to have a diverse Congress; to have members who have lived below the poverty line . ...

“As the U.S. Department of Agriculture develops restrictions on the program, it also lauds SNAP has having one of the lowest rates of fraud among federal programs, which suggests existing watchdog measures are effective. When trafficking of food stamps does occur, it involves swapping benefits for cash or other items. But the government also tracks that 82 percent of them are redeemed in supermarkets.”

Editorial, June 30, 2019 What’s next: Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D3, called the potential move “heartless,” adding that about 500,000 children nationwide would lose access to school meals if the rule were implemented, because children in families that receive food stamps also qualify for free or reducedprice school meals. She said the rule was drafted “in a desperate attempt to implement these cruel provisions because Congress rejected them in last year’s Farm Bill.”

Attorney General William Tong, who has challenged the White House on any number of issues, said this, too, could be the subject of a lawsuit. “We will do everything we can to fight this rule on behalf of Connecticut’s most vulnerable families,” he said.

That’s a good start, and the state’s entire delegation needs to make this a priority. It’s not a funding issue, since the amount of money “saved” doesn’t come close to justifying the harm it would cause. The point seems to be purely ideological, with the benefit of the change accruing to no one in particular.

The pain, as usual, would be borne by those least able to bear any more.

It’s not a funding issue, since the amount of money “saved” doesn’t come close to justifying the harm it would cause.