The Washington Post

States finding ways to skirt cuts in food stamps, frustrating congressional goals

Congress last month passed a revamp of agriculture and food policy that was supposed to save the U.S. government $8.6 billion in food-stamp costs over a decade.

That may not happen, though, now that some states are finding a way to avoid the cuts.

New York, Connecticut and Pennsylvania are triggering extra nutrition spending by adding money to a home-heating subsidy tied to increased food-stamp aid. The move feeds needy families while thwarting spending-
reduction goals.

Deficit watchers say they are disappointed, while anti-hunger activists are lobbying other states to do the same. If more follow, the federal government would have to spend much of the $8.6 billion it planned to save, as states reduce spending on other programs to meet the new mandate.

“Some states will be able to do it, some states will not be able to. No one knows for how long they’ll be able to do it,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said. “They have jumped into the breach where the federal government abdicated its responsibility.”

Federal spending on food stamps — formally called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — has more than doubled in the past five years, with most of the money spent at retailers. The program cost a record $79.9 billion in fiscal 2013, almost one-eighth of the roughly $650 billion a year that Americans spend on groceries.

Some of that food aid is tied to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, also known by its acronym, LIHEAP.

Under the previous farm law, states that gave residents as little as $1 a year in home-heating assistance — a move nicknamed “heat-and-eat” — could qualify that person’s household for an average of $1,080 in additional food stamps annually from the U.S. government.

About 15 states and the District of Columbia did just that, catching the attention of lawmakers who sought savings through the farm bill. “States were gaming the system,” Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) said last month.

The new law raises to $20 a year the home-heating aid needed for a household to get extra food-stamp money. The idea is that most of those 15 states will stop qualifying residents for the food aid and save the U.S. government money.

That’s not happening in New York. The state said it raised home-heating spending by $6 million, triggering an additional $457 million a year in federal food-stamp spending.

Lawmakers who supported even deeper cuts to food stamps than those eventually included in the farm law have criticized states for using the rules to erode savings.

“We didn’t expect that, or we would’ve written it in the language to prohibit it,” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), chairman of the House Agriculture subcommittee that oversees food stamps and nutrition aid. The move, though legal, is “perverse, just perverse,” he said.

States pushing to maintain the aid call it necessary.

“These federal cuts have made it harder for our state’s most vulnerable residents to put food on the table. The state has intervened on behalf of these low-income New Yorkers,” Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) said in a statement Feb 25. “New York is stepping up to help families in need.”

Connecticut is spending an extra $1.4 million to preserve federal food-stamp money for about 50,000 households, Gov. Dan Malloy (D) said the day before Cuomo’s announcement. Pennsylvania said Wednesday that it will spend $8 million to preserve $300 million in food-stamp funding for up to 400,000 families.

The moves are encouraging in their commitment to helping the hungry, said Ellen Vollinger, a food-stamp lobbyist with the Food Research and Action Center in Washington.

At the same time, it’s frustrating that states may have to divert resources from other necessary programs to counteract congressional budget cuts, she said.

“This was always budget-
driven,” Vollinger said. “Discussions in Washington can be academic, but $90 a month for needy families is a real number. It’s shifting a burden to the states, and it’s doubtful how many of them will be able to do it.”

Vollinger said anti-hunger activists are lobbying states affected by mandates in the new law to increase their home-heating assistance.

Recently, 16 senators and 81 House members wrote to the U.S. Department of Agriculture seeking a delay in the food-stamp cuts. The agency, in a memo to states on Wednesday, said it cannot put off the reductions.

Meanwhile, budget watchdogs who supported the cuts are not pleased, either.

“True reform would have included stringent work requirements for food-stamp eligibility,” said Andy Roth, government affairs vice president with Club for Growth, a Washington small-
government advocacy group. “Even better, devolve the program back to the states” as block grants, which would end the temptation to exploit quirks in federal law, he said.

About 47 million Americans got food stamps in November, the latest month for which data were available, the USDA said Friday.

— Bloomberg News

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Get Zika news by email

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Comments
Show Comments
The Democrats debated Thursday night. Get caught up on the race.
The Post's Chris Cillizza on the Democratic debate...
On Clinton: She poked a series of holes in Sanders's health-care proposal and broadly cast him as someone who talks a big game but simply can't hope to achieve his goals.

On Sanders: If the challenge was to show that he could be a candidate for people other than those who already love him, he didn't make much progress toward that goal. But he did come across as more well-versed on foreign policy than in debates past.
The PBS debate in 3 minutes
Quoted
We are in vigorous agreement here.
Hillary Clinton, during the PBS Democratic debate, a night in which she and Sanders shared many of the same positions on issues
South Carolina polling averages
Donald Trump leads in the polls as he faces rivals Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz heading into the S.C. GOP primary on Feb. 20.
South Carolina polling averages
The S.C. Democratic primary is Feb. 27. Clinton has a significant lead in the state, whose primary falls one week after the party's Nevada caucuses.
62% 18%
Fact Checker
Trump’s claim that his border wall would cost $8 billion
The billionaire's claim is highly dubious. Based on the costs of the Israeli security barrier (which is mostly fence) and the cost of the relatively simple fence already along the U.S.-Mexico border, an $8 billion price tag is simply not credible.
Pinocchio Pinocchio Pinocchio Pinocchio
The complicated upcoming voting schedule
Feb. 20

Democrats caucus in Nevada; Republicans hold a primary in South Carolina.

Feb. 23

Republicans caucus in Nevada.

Feb. 27

Democrats hold a primary in South Carolina.

Upcoming debates
Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

March 3: GOP debate

on Fox News, in Detroit, Mich.

Campaign 2016
Where the race stands
Most Read

politics

Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Close video player
Now Playing

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.