Why the government shouldn't tell people how to use food stamps

Restricting food stamps to use on certain foods is only fair if we put restrictions on dozens of other programs that assist people —to attend school, save for retirement, buy homes, take care of their children. Instead, let’s trust Americans to use that assistance as they see fit and not tell them how to live their lives. 

|
Jeff Chiu/AP/File
A shelf of diet and regular soft drinks in a refrigerator at K & D Market in San Francisco. Missouri State Representative Rick Brattin (R-55) has proposed a bill that would prohibit Missourians who participate in the SNAP food stamp program from using their benefits to buy “cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood, or steak.

Missouri State Representative Rick Brattin (R-55) has proposed a bill that would prohibit Missourians who participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, aka food stamps) from using their benefits to buy “cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood, or steak.” But why stop at food stamps? Let’s limit beneficiaries’ use of all federal benefits.

Start with an easy one: unemployment benefits. No spending that money on a new suit for job interviews. That old sport coat or pantsuit will be fine.

How about crop subsidies? Some farmers buy fancy farm implements with GPS and air-conditioned cabs. No more of that. And no spending those subsidies on high tech seeds, fertilizers, and weed killers.

But I’m a tax guy and want to focus on tax benefits. The earned income credit (EITC) is a good place to start—it can use the same rules Representative Brattin has proposed for food stamps. And do the same for the child credit—kids don’t need the omega-3 that they’d get from seafood.

The child care credit? No spending it on private nannies or daycare centers that feed into those tony private schools. Public daycare centers should be fine.

Education credits and deductions for tuition and interest on student loans? No using those to study classics or English lit. Every student getting educational assistance should require to major in a STEM subject. That might even yield a positive return for the government—those majors are the ones getting good jobs these days and they’ll pay lots of taxes.

One of my favorites: the mortgage interest deduction. Some people use the savings to buy houses with Jacuzzi tubs, walk-in wine cellars, and his-and-her master bathrooms. No more of that. People getting a tax break on their mortgages should settle for a tract home no larger than 1,500 square feet with one bathroom and no garage.

Okay, you get my point. Just because you get benefits from the government doesn’t mean the government should tell you how to use them. Maybe Representative Brattin really did see “people purchasing filet mignons and crab legs” with food stamps and maybe he really can’t afford to buy those items. But maybe, just maybe, the person had saved up and was buying them for a special occasion. You can’t afford to buy much food, much less very much expensive food, on a food stamp budget. The average daily benefit in Missouri last year was just $4 per person per day.

Congress created the various federal programs that assist people in many ways—to attend school, save for retirement, buy homes, take care of their children, and, yes, eat. Let’s trust them to use that assistance as they see fit and not tell them how to live their lives. 

The post Why Stop At Food Stamps? Let’s Limit Use Of All Federal Benefits appeared first on TaxVox.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why the government shouldn't tell people how to use food stamps
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Tax-VOX/2015/0416/Why-the-government-shouldn-t-tell-people-how-to-use-food-stamps
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe