The Future of SNAP: Moving Past the Pandemic (House Hearing, Serial No. 117-7, May 26, 2021)
Summary
The record of a hearing, The Future of SNAP: Moving Past the Pandemic, before the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations of the Committee on Agriculture on May 26, 2021, Serial No. 117-7, conducted via Zoom with Chairwoman Jahana Hayes presiding. Listed witnesses come from The Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution (Bauer), the No Kid Hungry Campaign (Davis), Watered Gardens Ministries (Whitford), Boston University School of Medicine (Boynton-Jarrett) and Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida (Wilson). Chairwoman Hayes describes the purpose as recounting lessons about food insecurity and nutrition access during the COVID-19 crisis. The Chairwoman also recounts qualifying for SNAP benefits as a young mother who worked two jobs and attended school.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“The Future of SNAP: Moving Past the Pandemic (House Hearing, Serial No. 117-7, May 26, 2021).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/the-future-of-snap-moving-past-the-pandemic-922b8c6248/
, SHA-256 6f0efa31fe7ee372656e1f79c188bdc563d80ae83bb081e14d60451e21c29e0f.Full text
[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE FUTURE OF SNAP: MOVING PAST THE
PANDEMIC
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NUTRITION, OVERSIGHT, AND DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 26, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-7
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-583 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman
JIM COSTA, California GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania,
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts Ranking Minority Member
FILEMON VELA, Texas AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina, Vice ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
Chair Arkansas
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York DOUG LaMALFA, California
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN, DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
Northern Mariana Islands TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire DON BACON, Nebraska
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
RO KHANNA, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida TRACEY MANN, Kansas
J. LUIS CORREA, California RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
JOSH HARDER, California BARRY MOORE, Alabama
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa KAT CAMMACK, Florida
KIM SCHRIER, Washington MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
JIMMY PANETTA, California JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
______
Anne Simmons, Staff Director
Parish Braden, Minority Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut, Chairwoman
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts DON BACON, Nebraska, Ranking
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina Minority Member
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN, Arkansas
Northern Mariana Islands SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire CHRIS JACOBS, New York
JIMMY PANETTA, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York KAT CAMMACK, Florida
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
Katherine Stewart, Subcommittee Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Bacon, Hon. Don, a Representative in Congress from Nebraska,
opening statement.............................................. 4
Submitted statement on behalf of Inmar, Inc.................. 66
Hayes, Hon. Jahana, a Representative in Congress from
Connecticut, opening statement................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Submitted article............................................ 63
Submitted letter on behalf of Hannah Walker, Vice President,
Political Affairs, FMI--The Food Industry Association...... 64
Sablan, Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho, a Delegate in Congress from
Northern Mariana Islands, prepared statement................... 6
Witnesses
Bauer, Ph.D., Lauren Lowenstein, Fellow in Economic Studies, The
Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C....... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Submitted questions.......................................... 72
Davis, Odessa, Washington, D.C.; on behalf of No Kid Hungry
Campaign, Share our Strength................................... 18
Prepared statement........................................... 19
Submitted question........................................... 75
Whitford, D.P.T., James, Co-Founder and Executive Director,
Watered Gardens Ministries, Joplin, MO......................... 20
Prepared statement........................................... 22
Supplementary material....................................... 69
Boynton-Jarrett, M.D., Sc.D., Renee, Associate Professor of
Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine; Pediatrician,
Boston Medical Center; Founder and Executive Director, Vital
Village Networks, Boston, MA................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Submitted questions.......................................... 75
Wilson, Rachel, Orlando, FL; on behalf of Second Harvest Food
Bank of Central Florida........................................ 30
Prepared statement........................................... 31
THE FUTURE OF SNAP: MOVING PAST THE PANDEMIC
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 2021
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
Operations,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 12:00 p.m., via
Zoom, Hon. Jahana Hayes [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee]
presiding.
Members present: Representatives Hayes, McGovern, Adams,
Rush, Sablan, Carbajal, Lawson, Kuster, Panetta, Pingree,
Spanberger, Bacon, Crawford, DesJarlais, Hartzler, Baird,
Cloud, Cammack, and Letlow.
Staff present: Lyron Blum-Evitts, Ross Hettervig, Chu-Yuan
Hwang, Lisa Shelton, Katherine Stewart, Caleb Crosswhite,
Jennifer Tiller, Erin Wilson, and Dana Sandman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAHANA HAYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM CONNECTICUT
The Chairwoman. This hearing of the Subcommittee on
Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations entitled, The
Future of SNAP: Moving Past the Pandemic, will come to order.
Welcome, and thank you for joining us here today. After brief
opening remarks, Members will receive testimony from our
witnesses today, and then the hearing will be open to Member
questions. Members will be recognized in order of seniority,
alternating between Majority and Minority Members, and in order
of arrival for those Members who have joined us after the
hearing was called to order. When you are recognized, you will
be asked to unmute your microphone and will have 5 minutes to
ask your questions or make a comment. If you are not speaking,
I ask that you remain muted in order to minimize background
noise. In order to get as many questions as possible, the timer
will stay consistently visible on your screen. In consultation
with the Ranking Member and pursuant to Rule XI(e), I want to
make sure Members of the Subcommittee are aware that other
Members of the full Committee may join us today.
Good afternoon and thank you, everyone, for participating
today in the first hearing in the 117th Congress of the
Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
Operations. I am honored to serve as Chairwoman of this crucial
Subcommittee and want to publicly express my full commitment to
crafting impactful, lasting policy.
Before beginning the substance of today's hearing, I want
to emphasize to my colleagues on this Subcommittee that our
work will require bipartisan engagement and cooperation. Over
this Congress, we will be tasked with evaluating our response
to COVID-19, leading our communities out of concurrent crises,
and tackling a new farm bill. I am steadfast in my commitment
to ensuring everyone has a seat at the table as we approach
these monumental tasks. I look forward to working with the
Ranking Member, Mr. Bacon, and all the other Members of this
Subcommittee. Please know that my door is always open to you.
In addition to my distinguished friends and colleagues on
the Subcommittee, we are very pleased and grateful to welcome a
panel of experts today. Thank you all for being here. I look
forward to introducing you and hearing your testimony shortly.
The title of today's hearing is, The Future of SNAP: Moving
Past the Pandemic. The purpose of this hearing is to recount
the lessons we have learned about food insecurity and nutrition
access during the COVID-19 crisis, and also to use those
lessons as a roadmap for closing the glaring gaps in policy
which left so many Americans food-insecure in the first place.
After witnessing the events of the past 15 months, there
should be no doubt about the tremendous need for SNAP and other
nutrition programs. Temporary increases to SNAP benefits and
accommodations made to state administrators, along with
creative approaches to feeding students learning from home and
the amazing work of food banks across the country, have helped
to guard against the worst consequences that could have
occurred during these concurrent health and economic crises.
The built-in responsiveness of SNAP to shifting economic
conditions has supported working families who, during this
crisis, found themselves in uncertain economic conditions.
Thankfully, efforts to expand and strengthen the nutrition
safety nets have, for the most part, succeeded.
As we will hear from our panel of expert witnesses today,
SNAP during COVID has been crucial for those suddenly without
an income, as well as parents forced to choose between a job
and caring for their children in remote school. Ms. Davis and
Ms. Wilson will testify to the strain of a household suddenly
without the means to provide. Drs. Bauer and Boynton-Jarrett
will offer data and clinical evidence of the precarious
situation created by the pandemic, especially for women and
children, and how nutrition assistance is essential. Dr.
Whitford, Executive Director of Watered Gardens ministries in
Missouri, will talk about the charity work of his mission and
work training center.
This testimony, I hope, will illustrate what I know to be
true from first-hand experience: that SNAP is a hand-up, and
not a hand-out, for Americans striving to achieve self-
sufficiency. Today's testimony will show that fear of hunger is
not an economic motivator, it is an obstacle to success, and a
threat to public health. And it will show that hunger does not
discriminate. It exists in every one of our districts. Hunger
effects our friends, our neighbors, the elderly, the disabled,
single mothers and working fathers, and people of all races and
beliefs.
During this hearing, I am sure we may also hear some
concerns about SNAP. Things like, ``SNAP discourages work'';
that ``emergency allotments and a 15 percent increase in
benefits are too expensive''; or that ``there is fraud within
the program that requires updated quality control measures.''
While anecdotally those things, at times, may be true, these
programs do work and they are a lifesaver. I know this because
they saved my life.
As a young mother, I worked two jobs and attended school
and I still qualified for benefits. SNAP allowed me to put food
in my children's mouths while I worked my way towards economic
stability.
Even when I was stable and could support my family, my
commitment towards making sure that people had access to food
continued. As a missionary in my church, I worked with the
Bread of Life Ministry for many years to promote feeding hungry
people around the world, and as a volunteer in my community, I
have spent countless hours at local food banks.
That memory of stress, and the threat of hunger for my
children remains a reality for me, that I take into this work
as Chairwoman of this Subcommittee. My lived experiences have
shown me that SNAP, and other safety net programs, are not just
hand-outs for people unwilling to work toward self-sufficiency.
They are critical supports which ensure that hunger is not
another obstacle in the way of Americans striving for
stability.
On this Subcommittee, we have a unique opportunity to
ensure that these supports are strengthened for Americans in
each of our districts. I am excited about this work and I look
forward to continuing to deliver on this promise for the
American people.
With that, I want to once again welcome all of you today
and give a special thanks to our panel for sharing their time
and expertise.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Hayes follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jahana Hayes, a Representative in Congress
from Connecticut
Good afternoon and thank you, everyone, for participating today in
the first hearing in the 117th Congress of the Subcommittee on
Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations. I am honored to serve
as Chairwoman of this crucial Subcommittee and want to publicly express
my full commitment to crafting impactful, lasting policy.
Before beginning the substance of this hearing today, I want to
emphasize to my colleagues on this Subcommittee that our work will
require bipartisan engagement and cooperation. Over this Congress, we
will be tasked with evaluating our response to COVID-19, leading our
communities out of concurrent crises, and tackling a new farm bill. I
am steadfast in my commitment to ensuring everyone has a seat at the
table as we approach these monumental tasks. I look forward to working
with the Ranking Member, Mr. Bacon, and all the other Members of this
Subcommittee. Please know that my door is always open to you.
In addition to my distinguished friends and colleagues on the
Subcommittee, we are very pleased and grateful to welcome a panel of
experts today. Thank you all for being here. I look forward to
introducing you and hearing your testimony shortly.
The title of today's hearing is, The Future of SNAP: Moving Past
the Pandemic. The purpose of this hearing is to recount the lessons we
have learned about food security and nutrition access during the COVID-
19 crisis--and also to use those lessons as a roadmap for closing the
glaring gaps in policy which left so many Americans food-insecure in
the first place.
After witnessing the events of the past fifteen months, there
should be no doubt about the tremendous need for SNAP and other
nutrition programs. Temporary increases to SNAP benefits and
accommodations made to state administrators, along with creative
approaches to feeding students learning from home, and the amazing work
of food banks across the country have helped to guard against the worst
consequences that could have been caused by concurring health and
economic crises. The built-in responsiveness of SNAP to shifting
economic conditions has supported working families who, during this
crisis, found themselves in uncertain economic conditions. Thankfully,
these efforts to expand and strengthen the nutrition safety net have,
for the most part, succeeded.
As we will hear from our panel of witnesses today, SNAP during
COVID has been crucial for those suddenly without an income, as well as
parents forced to choose between a job and caring for their children in
remote school. Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson will testify to the strain of a
household suddenly without the means to provide. Drs. Bauer and
Boynton-Jarrett will offer data and clinical evidence of the precarious
situation created by the pandemic, especially for women and children,
and how nutrition assistance is essential. Dr. Whitford, Executive
Director of Watered Gardens ministries in Missouri, will talk about the
charity work of his mission and work training center.
This testimony will illustrate what I know to be true from first-
hand experience: that SNAP is a hand-up, not a hand-out, for Americans
striving to achieve self-sufficiency. Today's testimony will show that
fear of hunger is not an economic motivator, but an obstacle to
success, and threat to public health. And that hunger does not
discriminate. It exists in every one of our districts. Hunger effects
our friends and neighbors, the elderly, the disabled, single mothers,
working parents, and people of all ages, races and beliefs.
During this hearing, I am sure we may also hear some concerns
regarding the SNAP program. That SNAP benefits discourage work; that
emergency allotments and a 15% increase in benefits are just too
expensive; that there is fraud within the SNAP program requiring
updated quality control measures. While anecdotally there may be such
instances--these programs work and they are lifesavers. I know this
because they saved my life.
As a young mother, I worked two jobs and attended school. But I
still qualified for benefits. SNAP allowed me to put food in my
children's mouths while I worked my way to economic stability.
That memory of stress, and the threat of hunger, is a reality that
I take into this work as Chairwoman of this Subcommittee. My lived
experience has shown me that SNAP, and other safety net programs, are
not just hand-outs for people unwilling to work toward self-
sufficiency. They are a critical support which ensures that hunger is
not another obstacle in the way of Americans striving for stability.
On this Subcommittee, we have an opportunity to ensure that these
supports are strengthened for Americans in each of our districts. I am
excited about this work and look forward to continuing to deliver for
the American people.
With that, I want to once again welcome all of you today and give a
special thanks to our panel for sharing their time and expertise.
The Chairwoman. I would like to welcome at this time the
distinguished Ranking Member, the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr.
Bacon, for any opening remarks that he would like to give.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DON BACON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM NEBRASKA
Mr. Bacon. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate
your words. It has been a pleasure working with you in the
117th Congress in this capacity, and I appreciate the spirit of
teamwork that you are bringing to the Subcommittee.
I just want to initially state, too, that I agree with you.
SNAP fulfills a much-needed program in our community, and I
appreciate your personal experiences with that.
With that said, though, I do think it merits some review
now as we are coming out of COVID, how we want to go forward as
we are moving past this COVID pandemic.
I do want to offer a good afternoon to everyone. I want to
welcome all of our witnesses. Thank you for taking time to
share your knowledge, experiences, and advice on how to best
move forward in our missions to ensure those in need have
access to SNAP.
Based on the title of this hearing, I am hopeful we can use
today to discuss not only the Department's emergency response
to COVID, but where improvement is needed and how we can better
serve our communities. We need to start planning a return to
normalcy as progress takes us past COVID. We responded
effectively, in my mind, to COVID, but now we are on the tail
end of this pandemic. Our economy is coming back open, and our
plans should adjust accordingly.
I would like to take a moment to reflect on the
Subcommittee's previous work related to SNAP. I believe there
are four things to consider as Congress shifts from emergency
spending and programming to a thoughtful policy and a return to
normalcy.
First, serving recipients through innovation, flexibility,
and program delivery. We need to reassess this. Pursuing
independence through employment and training. Returning to and
maintaining program integrity, and improving access and
promoting healthy foods and improve nutrition. If the pandemic
has taught us anything, it is that there are myriad
opportunities for serving families. There is not just one way
to guarantee nutritious foods make it into the hands of those
who need it. Whether it be the expansion of online pilots or
the utilization of new distribution channels in the Farmers to
Families Food Box Program, we need to think bigger on how to
ensure qualified households not only have access to benefits
and relevant services, but can use them in a way that reflects
2021 and not 1972.
While work waivers granted through the former and current
Administrations were logical in response to COVID-19, they
appear now, according to some news reports and some reporting,
to be keeping some employable individuals disengaged, which
reaps significant negative impacts on the families who want
nothing more than to earn a living and to a small business
community who want to get business back to 100 percent
employment. If the Department and states are serious about
inspiring hope and change in the lives of SNAP recipients, then
it is high time to utilize the resources associated with SNAP
employment and training, as well as state-based employment
readiness services to do just that. These programs must
emphasize a multi-generational approach. We are long past
trying and testing--programming.
As it relates to integrity and the principles of SNAP, many
facets of quality control have been waived throughout the
pandemic. As the program shifts to a post-pandemic role, these
waivers need to expire as written, and states should return to
normal modes of data collection, just as the Department should
return to normal modes of analysis.
Last, and something I believe strongly in, is access to and
consumption of healthy foods. Diets cannot be improved without
sufficient access to healthy foods. Employment, including
military readiness, healthcare costs, and general longevity are
highly dependent on the foods we consume. So, together with
improved nutrition educational initiatives, the nutrition
research funding secured in the Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2021, and the existing library of research on healthy
eating, USDA is positioned to improve the nutrition of millions
of households.
So, as we approach the next farm bill, it is time to
rethink targeted and beneficial healthy eating incentives, and
more effective nutrition education strategies to help all
families. I would like to say I am excited about where we go
from here, and I thank you for your indulgence. I look forward
to our witnesses' testimony, and Madam Chairwoman, I yield back
to you.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mr. Bacon, for that
opening statement.
The chair would request that other Members submit their
opening statements for the record so witnesses may begin their
testimony, and to ensure that there is ample time for
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sablan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, a Delegate
in Congress from Northern Mariana Islands
Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and the
Committee for putting together this important hearing on the Future of
SNAP.
As everyone on the Committee knows, the Northern Mariana Islands,
my district is not part of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP), but instead receives assistance through a block grant,
NAP. It has been fixed at $12.148 million for a decade, without any
regard to changes in food costs, natural disasters, and most recently,
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
As the Committee and the witnesses understand, this block grant has
seriously fallen short. I have had to ask for supplemental funding year
after year, and in the meantime families in the Marianas get removed
from the program and benefits are cut.
This hearing today is entitled ``The Future of SNAP: Moving Past
the Pandemic,'' unfortunately my constituents in the Marianas have been
left behind, SNAP is a necessary part of moving my district forward out
of the COVID-19 pandemic and into the future.
Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson, thank you so much for telling your
stories. There are thousands of families in the Marianas struggling
with food insecurity and hearing from individuals like yourself shows
me and the rest of the Committee how vital SNAP is for all Americans.
The Chairwoman. At this time, I will begin to introduce the
witnesses. I am pleased to welcome such a distinguished panel
of witnesses for our hearing today. Our witnesses bring to our
hearing a wide range of experience and expertise, and I thank
you for joining us.
Our first witness is Dr. Lauren Bauer. Dr. Bauer is a
Fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institute. Her
research focuses on social and safety net policies, including
on Federal nutrition assistance programs and education. She is
a member of the New York City Office of Community Schools
Research Advisory Council and holds a B.A. in history and a
M.A. and Ph.D. in human development and social policy, with a
certificate in education sciences, all from Northwestern
University. Welcome.
Our next witness today is Ms. Odessa Davis. Ms. Davis is a
mother, a college student, and a para-educator with Montgomery
County Public Schools. She recently graduated from Montgomery
College with a degree in business management, and is also a
graduate of Le Cordon Bleu College of Culinary Arts in Miami.
She also volunteers for the Community Action Agency, using her
culinary skills to prepare food as a volunteer chef. Welcome.
To introduce our third witness, I am pleased to yield to
our colleague on the Agriculture Committee, the distinguished
woman from Missouri, Mrs. Hartzler.
Mrs. Hartzler. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes. It is an honor
to introduce Missouri's own Dr. James Whitford. Dr. Whitford
has spent more than 2 decades fighting the perils of poverty
and their impact on our communities. The organization he and
his wife founded, Watered Gardens, serves both the poor and
homeless, providing an array of services, including employment
readiness, education, and relief-type needs. Watered Gardens
Workshop is a fascinating approach where people in need trade
their time for services. Dr. Whitford has a personal story that
drives his work, and believes that charity should be coupled
with an expectation of productivity. I welcome James to today's
proceedings, and I look forward to his testimony.
So, thank you, Chairwoman Hayes. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Mrs. Hartzler. Thank you for
your comments.
Our next witness today is Ms. Rachel Wilson. Ms. Wilson is
a self-employed business owner in central Florida. She is
trained as a cosmetologist and works as an independent
hairdresser. She is also a mother to her three children.
Welcome.
Our fifth and final witness today is Dr. Renee Boynton-
Jarrett. Dr. Boynton-Jarrett is a pediatrician and social
epidemiologist, and the founding Director of the Vital Village
Community Engagement Network. Her work focuses on the role of
early life adversity as life course social determinants of
health. Her current work is developing community-based
strategies to promote child well-being and reduce child
maltreatment, using a collective impact approach in three
Boston neighborhoods.
Welcome to all of our witnesses today. We will now proceed
to hearing your testimony. You will each have 5 minutes. The
timer should be visible to you on your screen and will count
down to 0, at which point your time has expired.
Dr. Bauer, please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF LAUREN LOWENSTEIN BAUER, Ph.D., FELLOW IN ECONOMIC
STUDIES, THE HAMILTON PROJECT,
BROOKINGS INSTITUTION, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Dr. Bauer. Good afternoon Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member
Bacon, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to address you this afternoon. My name is Dr.
Lauren Bauer, and I am a Fellow in Economic Studies at
Brookings Institution, where I am affiliated with The Hamilton
Project. In my testimony today, I will describe the state of
food insecurity in the U.S., assess how Federal nutrition
assistance programs have supported families and the economy
over the past year, and apply evidence toward making
recommendations on the future of the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Food insecurity, especially when experienced by children,
has been an acute and persistent problem in the U.S. over the
past year. Congress has taken vitally important action and
prevented even greater hardship. During the pandemic,
nationally representative surveys consistently found overall
rates of household food insecurity above 20 percent, and that
more than one in three households with children were
experiencing food insecurity.
Starting in January 2021, food insecurity rates have
started to decline, but remain far above pre-COVID levels. In
the most recently available data from the Census Bureau
covering April 28 through May 10, 2021, about 16.6 percent of
households were food-insecure, and about 22 percent of
households with children were food-insecure. Food insecurity
among female-headed households and among Black and Hispanic
families with children remain notably elevated over the
average.
Parents will go to great lengths to protect their children
from experiencing hunger. It is an urgent matter of national
concern that parents are reporting that it is sometimes or
often the case that: ``the children in my household were not
eating enough because we just couldn't afford enough food'' at
rates far exceeding past precedent by more than ten percent.
The food insecurity patterns we observe today will not only
affect well-being and economic security in the short-term, but
will reverberate for decades to come. Encouragingly, research
evidence, including from the past year, suggests that providing
additional nutrition assistance can counteract some of the rise
in food insecurity.
SNAP provides insurance protection to those who are
experiencing poor economic outcomes and supports those who are
trying to improve their situation by leveraging powerful
forces, public investment in the private-sector, and choice.
Evidence shows that SNAP reduces food insecurity, increases
health and economic security, including economic self-
sufficiency, and that we all benefit from its effects on the
economy. Bipartisan support for emergency allotments, the SNAP
maximum benefit increase, and Pandemic EBT, among others, has
been critical in helping families put food on the table this
past year.
Although SNAP is already a highly effective program, there
are modest but important steps that Congress can take to
improve it as we look to the future. These reforms include
automatically increasing benefit levels and ensuring that the
program expands during a recession, adopting a timely and
efficient process for waiving or ending SNAP work requirements,
and adjusting the SNAP benefit formula to increase benefit
adequacy and support work.
While the COVID-19 recession is ongoing, SNAP is an
integral part of the economic recovery. To augment work
incentives in the SNAP Program rules, Congress could increase
the earnings disregard, increase the value of the EITC for
childless adults, and add a basic needs allowance, all of which
would increase food security among workers, servicemembers, and
their families.
Tying in a nationwide work requirement suspension to the
HHS emergency declaration remains good policy, yet well-
designed studies of SNAP work requirements do not show that
they increase labor force participation, even during an
economic expansion. In fact, they penalize workers and those
who face meaningful barriers to consistent employment. Easing
administrative burdens and tying a SNAP maximum benefit
increase to economic indicators that signal a recession has
started will help our country be better prepared to fight the
next recession. The value of the SNAP maximum benefit is not
sufficient, and SNAP purchasing power has decreased even more
since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. To reduce food
insecurity and improve nutrition, benefit calculations and
allowable purchases need modernization.
I believe that ending hunger in America is possible, and
that it starts with SNAP. Thank you, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bauer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lauren Lowenstein Bauer, Ph.D., Fellow in
Economic Studies, The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution,
Washington, D.C.
Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and Members of the
Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee this
afternoon.
My name is Dr. Lauren Lowenstein Bauer, and I am a Fellow in
Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution where I am affiliated
with The Hamilton Project. I conduct research on issues of economic and
public concern, including human capital development and safety net
programs. One of my areas of expertise is Federal nutrition assistance
programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP; formerly known as the Food Stamp Program).
In my testimony today I will describe the state of food insecurity
in the United States, assess how Federal nutrition assistance programs
have supported families and the economy over the past year, and apply
evidence toward making recommendations on the future of SNAP.
Food insecurity, especially when experienced by children, has been
an acute and persistent problem in the United States over the past
year. Congress took vitally important action centered on enhancing SNAP
and providing resources to purchase food to families with children,
which prevented even greater hardship. Although SNAP is already a
highly effective program, there are modest but important steps that
Congress can take to improve the program. These reforms include (i)
automatically increasing benefits levels and ensuring that the program
expands during a recession, (ii) adopting a timely and efficient
process for waiving or ending SNAP work requirements, and (iii)
adjusting the SNAP benefit formula to increase benefit adequacy and
support work.
Food Insecurity During the COVID-19 pandemic
Food insecurity increases during economic downturns and tend to
remain elevated long after the official end to a recession because the
economic recovery of low-income households typically lags higher-income
groups. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, about 11 percent of households
were food-insecure and about four percent of households reported very
low food security in 2019.i
Early in the pandemic, nationally representative surveys
consistently found overall rates of household food insecurity above 20
percent and that more than one in three households with children were
experiencing food insecurity. In fact, during the course of 2020, food
insecurity rates remained elevated, peaking for most groups in December
2020. These elevated levels are illustrative of how food insecurity has
been a crisis within the larger crisis of the COVID-19
pandemic.ii Starting in January 2021, food insecurity rates
started to decline but remain far above pre-COVID levels. In the most
recently available data from the Census Household Pulse Survey, fielded
from April 28 to May 10, 2021, about 16.6 percent of households were
food-insecure and about 22 percent of households with children were
food-insecure.iii
Nevertheless, families with children, and specifically single
mother households, have experienced especially high levels of material
hardship over the past year. Figure 1 shows the share of adult
respondents to the Census Household Pulse Survey who reported food
insecurity at key points over the past year, divided by hunger (very
low food security) and low food security. As of late March 2021, single
mothers had a higher rate of food insecurity (almost 35 percent) than
respondents with children or all households had at any point during the
pandemic.
Figure 1
Food Insecurity Among Different Types of Families, April 2020, December
2020, March 2021
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Pitts and Schanzenbach 2021 (Census Household Pulse
Survey; Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement);
correspondence with author.
Note: Household Pulse Survey weeks 1, 21, and 27 are shown.
For additional details, please see the Pitts and Schanzenbach
2020.
Rates of food insecurity and insufficiency (reporting sometimes or
often not having enough food) also have been particularly elevated
among Black and Hispanic families with children (figure 2). While rates
of food insecurity and food insufficiency are substantially lower for
all groups in May 2021 relative to December 2020, they are still about
double among Black and Hispanic families with children over white
families with children.
Figure 2
Food Insecurity and Insufficiency, by Race, December 2020 and May 2021
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Schanzenbach 2021.
Note: For additional details on the conversation to food
insecurity from the Census Household Pulse, please see the
appendix to Bauer, et al., 2020.
Food insecurity affects the entire household but within food-
insecure households, adults will go to great lengths to protect their
children from experiencing hunger.iv Over the past year,
there is evidence of a substantial increase in the food insecurity of
children.v Figure 3 shows the share of parents (all, Black,
and Hispanic) who responded that it was sometime or often the case that
in the past week ``the children in my household were not eating enough
because we just couldn't afford enough food.'' As illustrated in the
figure below, this marks a significant increase from 2019 annual rates,
whether food insecurity or very low food security among children
(dashed lines).
Figure 3
Food Insecurity Among Children, by Race, 2020-2021
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: USDA (2020); Census Household Pulse Survey (2020-21).
Note: The Census Household Pulse survey asks: ``Please
indicate whether the next statement was often true, sometimes
true, or never true in the last 7 days for the children living
in your household who are under 18 years old: `The children
were not eating enough because we just couldn't afford enough
food.' ''
Elevated rates of food insecurity are associated with worse
contemporaneous health and academic outcomes and indicate that a
household is facing more general economic challenges; in the long term,
children's exposure to adverse economic shocks has persistent negative
health and economic consequences.vi Therefore, the food
insecurity patterns we observe today will not only affect well-being
and economic security in the short-term, but will reverberate for
decades to come. Encouragingly, research evidence, including from the
past year, suggests that providing additional nutrition assistance can
counteract some of the rise in food insecurity.
The Importance of Federal Nutrition Assistance Programs to the Economy
The goals of safety net programs are to provide insurance
protection to those who are experiencing poor economic outcomes and to
support those who are trying to improve their situation. SNAP achieves
these goals by leveraging powerful forces--public investment, the
private-sector, and choice--to ensure that eligible participants and
families have food when they have no or low income. Evidence shows that
SNAP reduces food insecurity, increases health and economic security
among families in the short term, economic self-sufficiency in the long
term, and that we all benefit from its effect on the
economy.viii
Food insecurity and economic hardship typically increase in
recessions and decrease in economic expansions. The safety net plays an
important role in mitigating the negative effects in recessions, partly
by automatically expanding during economic downturns as income-based
eligibility for safety net programs increases, and partly through
Congressional actions that increase the generosity of and eligibility
for safety net programs.vii
Congress has a track record of taking action to preserve and
improve SNAP's ability to turn the tide on economic downturns. During
the Great Recession, the statutory increase to the SNAP maximum benefit
reduced food insecurity and improved economic conditions within the
household, keeping a million people out of poverty in
2010.viii Studies show that when SNAP payments increase to a
local area in response to an economic downturn, they serve as stimulus;
for example, every $1.00 in new SNAP benefits spurred $1.74 in economic
activity in the first quarter of 2009, and spurred $1.22 even as late
as the first quarter of 2015. Indeed, additional SNAP benefits had the
highest multiplier of any of the policies adopted during the Great
Recession.ix
COVID-19 Recession and Congressional Response
It is difficult to overstate the extent of economic disruption
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The onset of the COVID-19 recession
was swifter and the nadir deeper than the Great Recession.x
Figure 4 shows the percent change in employment relative to business
cycle peaks. Job losses resulting from COVID-19 wiped out 113 straight
months of job growth, with total non-farm employment falling by 20.5
million jobs in April 2020.xi Based on the most recent
employment report, employment is still more than five percent below its
February 2020 level. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated economic
shutdown affected all workers, but the impact was harshest for women,
non-white workers, lower-wage earners, and those with less
education.xii
Figure 4
Percent Change in Employment Relative to Business Cycle Peak, by
Business Cycle, 1980-2020
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLIS) 1990-2020;
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) n.d.; authors'
calculations.
Note: Figure shows the percent change in total non-farm
employment from the peak of a business cycle until employment
returns to the level of the previous business cycle peak.
Deteriorating economic conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
have made it even more difficult for many low-income households,
including those with children, to afford groceries. Families responded
to these challenges by relying on community resources and safety net
programs.
Food banks have reported consistent increases in demand throughout
2020, with more people availing themselves of food pantries or
receiving other forms of direct food assistance from a community or
religious organization than at any point since at least
2014.xiii Reported use of charitable food increased 50
percent between December 2019 and December 2020: in December 2020, 20
percent of adults reported that in the past year their household had
received charitable food.xiv Charitable food assistance has
helped families during the COVID-19 recession, but these alternative
sources of food are not adequate to meet demand.xv
The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated recession have led, both
automatically and through Congressional and Executive action, to an
expansion in eligibility for and generosity of nutrition assistance
programs in the United States. Through SNAP, additional resources for
existing programs including SNAP, WIC, child nutrition programs
(National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, and Summer
Food Service Program), and new programs like Pandemic EBT and Farmers
to Families boxes, Congress has supported millions of eligible
households with vouchers to purchase food as well as commodities and
meals.
In addition to taking action to increase SNAP enrollment during the
course of the past year, Congress authorized two pieces of legislation
that increased the value of SNAP benefits: SNAP Emergency Allotments
(EAs; beginning April 2020) and a 15 percent SNAP maximum benefit
increase (beginning January 2021). The maximum benefit increase
affected the benefit generosity for all participating households; until
last month, only households not receiving the SNAP maximum benefit were
eligible for EAs. In combination, these additional resources prevented
greater food hardship than otherwise would have been experienced over
the course of the past year and allowed families to use their non-SNAP
financial resources on other necessities.
Because school meal programs are integral to addressing child food
insecurity in the United States, many entities, including Congress, the
USDA, states, and schools, took action in response to COVID-19-related
school closures to reconstitute the food safety net for children. My
colleagues and I (Abigail Pitts, Krista Ruffini, and Diane
Schanzenbach) evaluated the impact of one of the planks: the initial
rollout of Pandemic EBT during the summer of 2020.xvi As
shown in figure 5, during the first week after Pandemic EBT benefits
are paid, the rate of children not getting enough to eat declines by
about 8 percentage points (30 percent). Evidence of the effect of
Pandemic EBT during its rollout in the summer of 2020 is consistent
with prior evidence on the effect of Summer EBT.xvii
Figure 5
Effect of Pandemic on Measures of Food Hardship
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Census Household Pulse Survey 2020; Current
Population Survey Food Security Supplement 2008, 2018; authors'
calculations.
Note: Hollow bars indicate results that are not statistically
significant at the ten percent level. The striped bar indicates
results are significant at the ten percent level. Solid bars
indicate [] results are significant at the one or five percent
level. Please refer to the technical appendix for additional
details.
While the COVID-19 recession is ongoing, SNAP is an integral part
of the economic recovery. SNAP is designed to support work and to
ensure food consumption during spells of unemployment or when a person
is unable to work or work consistently. SNAP addresses work
disincentives through an earnings disregard of 20 percent and a gradual
benefit reduction schedule. This means that when a person moves from
being a labor force nonparticipant to working while on SNAP, total
household resources will increase; as a beneficiary's earnings approach
the eligibility threshold, total household resources continue to
increase.xviii
Work requirements in SNAP are intended to increase labor force
participation and hours worked among program participants. However,
evidence suggest that SNAP work requirements do not increase employment
and penalize workers who are eligible for SNAP. During the Food Stamp
Program's introduction in the 1960s and 1970s, reductions in employment
and hours worked were observed, particularly among female-headed
households.xix But in general and in the modern era, there
is little evidence that SNAP receipt itself depresses work
effort.xx
Work requirements make SNAP a less-effective automatic stabilizer
by preventing newly eligible people from maintaining access to the
program during economic downturns.xxi The law provides for a
safety valve--work requirement waivers--that allows states to apply for
exemptions where there is evidence of a lack of sufficient jobs. These
standing criteria have not substituted for Congressional action; during
both the Great Recession and the COVID-19 Recession, Congress acted to
suspend SNAP work requirements nationwide.
Reforms to Improve Countercyclicality in SNAP
Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Hilary Hoynes
(University of California--Berkeley) and Diane Schanzenbach
(Northwestern University) proposed policies to leverage SNAP to counter
economic downturns. In their piece, they argue for tying a 15 percent
maximum benefit increase and a nationwide work requirement suspension
to economic indicators that signal a recession has
started.xxii This proposal provides a base for reforms to
improve the countercyclicality of SNAP, in addition to codifying some
of the measures that Congress took over the past year.
In response to pandemic conditions, USDA approved state waivers to
extend certification periods, reduce paperwork and interview burdens,
and allow for telephonic signatures--all of which made it easier for
eligible individuals to enroll in and stay on SNAP.xxiii
While easing administrative barriers should be a part of reform more
generally, it is particularly important to put in place mechanisms to
do so automatically when the economy is contracting and the rolls of
means-tested programs should expand. In December 2020, income from
Unemployment Insurance became newly disregarded as part of the SNAP
benefit calculation. Given evidence that SNAP participation increases
when households lose jobs and income and decreases as participants earn
more, extending this provision would provide greater public insurance
to workers.xxiv
Reforms to Promote Work in SNAP
To augment work incentives in the SNAP program rules, Congress
could increase the earnings disregard. This would provide a larger
incentive to program participants to work and earn more. A Hamilton
Project proposal from Diane Schanzenbach (Northwestern University)
recommends increasing the earnings disregard to 30
percent.xxv Similarly, military families should not be
prevented from accessing SNAP because of the ways in which their work
is compensated; a basic needs allowance is a sensible solution to
increase food security among servicemembers and their families.
Another way to increase work incentives in SNAP is to increase the
value of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for childless adults.
Prior to the American Rescue Plan (ARP), the EITC for households with
no children was about $540. The ARP increased the value of the EITC for
this group to about $1,500 and expanded who qualified. The EITC is pro-
work on its own and would make SNAP more pro-work because EITC is not
counted in the SNAP benefit formula.
SNAP's fundamental role as an automatic stabilizer and safety net
should guide reform. I do not believe that there is evidence to justify
time limits on SNAP program participation, in good economic times or
ill; SNAP work requirements should be eliminated. In the event of their
continuation, work requirement waivers should be tied to additional
responsive economic triggers and SNAP Employment and Training slots
should be more widely available.
Addressing Food Insecurity through SNAP
The value of SNAP benefits that a household receives are the
function of three factors: how much USDA determines it minimally costs
to achieve a healthy diet, i.e., The Thrifty Food Plan (the Thrifty),
how much money a household has available to purchase groceries, and
what share of that available money does the government expect a
household to spend on groceries. Because households who have no
resources to contribute to the purchase of groceries receive the
maximum benefit, the purchasing power of the Thrifty should meet their
food needs.
The value of the SNAP maximum benefit is not sufficient to provide
adequate nutrition assistance for eligible households. The value of the
Thrifty varies widely across different locations; in no market area
does SNAP purchasing power cover more than 80 percent of the price of
the Thrifty and in high cost areas, it covers less than 65 percent
(figure 6).xxvi But even in more local areas with lower
relative food costs to others, the Thrifty is not adequate: in 2018,
the SNAP maximum benefit per meal did not cover the cost of a Thrifty-
tied meal in 99 percent of counties in the U.S.xxvii In
places with higher food prices, rates of household, adult, and child
food insecurity are higher.xxviii
Figure 6
SNAP Purchasing Power by Market Group, 2020
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Bronchetti, Christensen, and Hoynes 2018.
Furthermore, evidence suggests that SNAP purchasing power has
decreased even more since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher
food prices, increasing demand for food to be prepared at home and
shelf-stable nutritious foods, competition among retailers and food
banks, reduced low-price food given demand, day-over-day disruptions
that result in empty shelves, and restricted ability to comparison shop
all contribute to lower SNAP purchasing power and exacerbate even
further the inadequacy of the maximum SNAP benefit.xxix This
contributes to rising food insecurity and household financial
instability, which have detrimental near- and long-term effects.
Reforms to Address SNAP Benefit Adequacy
In order to increase the adequacy of SNAP benefits for
participating households to reduce food insecurity and improve
nutrition, benefit calculations and allowable purchases need
modernization. For The Hamilton Project, James Ziliak (University of
Kentucky) summarized the evidence and proposed mechanisms for updating
the calculation of the Thrifty Food Plan, focusing on accounting for
the cost of time.xxx There are additional levers throughout
the benefit formula and through the calculation of the Thrifty itself
that would more closely align benefits with the needs of families.
While additional benefits alone spur the purchase of healthy foods,
direct incentives to purchase fruits and vegetables and allowing for
the purchase of certain low-cost, high-value hot items (like rotisserie
chickens) would reduce food insecurity and improve diet
quality.xxxi
The fact that many who receive benefits remain food-insecure does
not imply that the programs are ineffective, as families most in need
of food assistance are most likely to enroll in nutrition programs. I
believe that that ending hunger in America is possible--and it starts
with increasing SNAP purchasing power. While the Thrifty was previously
recalculated infrequently and on an ad hoc basis, Congress now mandates
regular updates to the Thrifty Food Plan: every 5 years starting in
2022. I understand that USDA is currently in the process of responding
to this Congressional mandate.
To reduce food insecurity and support America's economic recovery,
sensible reforms to SNAP include (i) automatically increasing benefits
levels and ensuring that the program expands during a recession, (ii)
adopting a timely and efficient process for waiving or ending SNAP work
requirements, and (iii) adjusting the SNAP benefit formula to increase
benefit adequacy and support work.
Endnotes
i Coleman-Jensen, Alisha, Matthew Rabbitt, Christian Gregory, and
Anita Singh. 2020. ``Household Food Security in the United States in
2019.'' Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
ii Waxman, Elaine. 2020. ``Many Families Are Struggling to Put Food
on the Table. We Have to Do More.'' Urban Wire (blog), Urban Institute,
Washington, D.C.; Bauer, Lauren. 2020. ``The COVID-19 Crisis Has
Already Left Too Many Children Hungry in America.'' Blog. The Hamilton
Project, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.; Schanzenbach, Diane,
and Abigail Pitts. 2020. ``Estimates of Food Insecurity During the
COVID-19 Crisis.'' Institute for Policy Research Rapid Research Report,
Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.; Schanzenbach, Diane and Abigail
Pitts. 2020. ``Food Insecurity in the Census Household Pulse Survey
Data Tables.'' Institute for Policy Research Rapid Research Report,
Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. When comparing similar
populations across these (overall, families with children, and mothers
of young children) response rates to food insecurity questions were
statistically indistinguishable.
iii The Census Household Pulse Survey (HPS) asks respondents
whether, in the past 7 days, its household was able to consume the
quantity and types of food it wanted; was able to consume enough, but
not of the type of food it wanted; sometimes was not able to eat
enough; or often was not able to eat enough. This question is identical
to that asked in the Current Population Food Security Supplement (CPS-
FSS, December supplement). Since the HPS does not ask the full battery
of food security questions, Schanzenbach and Pitts map CPS-FSS food
insufficiency and food insecurity to the HPS food insufficiency
question, following the approach in Bitler, et al. (2020). They take
the CPS-FSS from 2015 through 2019 and calculate the share of food-
insecure households (overall, with children, single mothers) in each
food insufficiency category by state, then multiply these rates for the
HPS responses in order to obtain a state-by-week level measure of food
insecurity. As shown in Bitler, et al. (2020), 92 percent of the
increase in household food insecurity from pre-COVID to transformed
food insecurity post-COVID can be explained by an increase in
unemployed, while only 65 percent of the increase in household food
insecurity among households with children can be similarly explained.
Their work both validates the technique of transforming the HPS
questions into the food insecurity concept and affirms that the loss of
school meals and disproportionate loss of employment among women
explain a higher share of elevated food insecurity among these
families. Bitler, Marianne P., Hilary W. Hoynes, and Diane Whitmore
Schanzenbach. 2020. ``The Social Safety Net in the Wake of COVID-19.''
Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Brookings Institution,
Washington, D.C.; Schanzenbach, Diane, and Abigail Pitts. 2020. ``How
Much Has Food Insecurity Risen? Evidence from the Census Household
Pulse Survey.'' Institute for Policy Rapid Research Report,
Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
iv The USDA defines a household as food-insecure if it reports that
it had difficulty at some time during the year providing enough food
for all of its members due to a lack of resources. This broad measure
of food insecurity includes households that report a reduction in the
quality, variety, and desirability of diet but little or no reduction
in food intake, as well as households that experience very low food
security--that is, who report disruptions in eating patterns and
reductions in food intake.
v Bauer, Lauren. 2020. ``The COVID-19 Crisis Has Already Left Too
Many Children Hungry in America.'' The Hamilton Project, Brookings
Institution, Washington, D.C.; Bauer, Lauren. 2020. ``Hungry at
Thanksgiving: A Fall 2020 update on food insecurity in the U.S.'' The
Hamilton Project, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
vi Alaimo, Katherine, Christine M. Olson, and Edward A. Frongillo.
2001. ``Food insufficiency and American school-aged children's
cognitive, academic, and psychosocial development.'' Pediatrics 108,
no. 1: 44-53; Case, Anne, Angela Fertig, and Christina Paxson. 2005.
``The lasting impact of childhood health and circumstance.'' Journal of
Health Economics 24, no. 2: 365-389; Currie, Janet. 2009. ``Healthy,
wealthy, and wise: Socioeconomic status, poor health in childhood, and
human capital development.'' Journal of Economic Literature, 47, no. 1:
87-122; Jyoti, Diana F., Edward A. Frongillo, and Sonya J. Jones. 2005.
``Food insecurity affects school children's academic performance,
weight gain, and social skills.'' The Journal of Nutrition 135, no. 12:
2831-2839; Casey, Patrick H., Kitty L. Szeto, James M. Robbins, Janice
E. Stuff, Carol Connell, Jeffery M. Gossett, and Pippa M. Simpson.
2005. ``Child Health-Related Quality of Life and Household Food
Security.'' Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 159 (1): 51-
56; Mangini, Lauren D., Mark D. Hayward, Yong Quan Dong, and Michele R.
Forman. 2015. ``Household Food Insecurity Is Associated with Childhood
Asthma.'' Journal of Nutrition 145 (12): 2756-64; Kirkpatrick, Sharon
I., Lynn McIntyre, and Melissa L. Potestio. 2010. ``Child Hunger and
Long-term Adverse Consequences for Health.'' Archives Pediatric
Adolescent Medicine 164, no. 8: 754-762; Fram, Maryah Stella, Lorrene
D. Ritchie, Nila Rosen, and Edward A. Frongillo. 2015. ``Child
Experience of Food Insecurity Is Associated with Child Diet and
Physical Activity.'' Journal of Nutrition 145(3): 499-504; Cook, John
T., Deborah A. Frank, Carol Berkowitz, Maureen M. Black, Patrick H.
Casey, Diana B. Cutts, Alan F. Meyers, Nieves Zaldivar, Anne Skalicky,
Suzette Levenson, Tim Heeren, and Mark Nord. 2004. ``Food Insecurity Is
Associated with Adverse Health Outcomes among Human Infants and
Toddlers.'' The Journal of Nutrition 134(6): 1432-1438; Skalicky, Anne,
Alan F. Meyers, William G. Adams, Zhaoyan Yang, John T. Cook, and
Deborah A. Frank. 2006. ``Child Food Insecurity and Iron Deficiency
Anemia in Low-Income Infants and Toddlers in the United States.''
Maternal and Child Health Journal 10(2): 177-185; Eicher-Miller,
Heather A., April C. Mason, Connie M. Weaver, George P. McCabe, Carol
J.
Boushey. 2009. ``Food insecurity is associated with iron deficiency
anemia in U.S. adolescents.'' The American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition 90(5): 1358-1371; Howard, Larry L. 2011. ``Does Food
Insecurity at Home Affect Non-Cognitive Performance at School? A
Longitudinal Analysis Of Elementary Student Classroom Behavior.''
Economics of Education Review 30 (1) (2): 157-76; Huang, J, Oshima, KM
& Kim, Y. 2010. ``Does food insecurity affect parental characteristics
and child behaviors? Testing mediation effects.'' Social Service Review
84(3): 381-401; Whitaker, Robert C., Shannon M. Phillips, and Sean M.
Orzol. 2006. ``Food Insecurity and the Risks of Depression and Anxiety
in Mothers and Behavior Problems in Their Preschool-Aged Children.''
Pediatrics 118 (3): e859-e868; Hoynes, Hilary W., and Diane Whitmore
Schanzenbach. 2018. Safety net investments in children. No. w24594.
National Bureau of Economic Research.
vii Boushey, Heather, Jay Shambaugh, and Ryan Nunn. Recession Ready.
Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Press.
viii See Hoynes and Schanzenbach 2018 for a review.
ix Blinder, Alan S., and Mark Zandi. 2015. ``The Financial Crisis:
Lessons for the Next One.'' Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,
Washington, D.C.; Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore, Lauren Bauer, and Greg
Nantz. 2016. ``Twelve Facts about Food Insecurity and SNAP.'' Economic
Facts, The Hamilton Project, Washington, D.C.
x Bauer, Lauren, Kristen Broady, Wendy Edelberg, and Jimmy
O'Donnell. 2020. ``Ten facts about COVID-19 and the U.S. economy.''
Economic Facts, The Hamilton Project, Washington, D.C.
xi Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 1980-2020. ``Current Population
Survey.'' Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, D.C. Retrieved From IPUMS.
xii Stevenson, Betsey. 2020. ``The Initial Impact of COVID-19 on
Labor Market Outcomes across Groups and the Potential for Permanent
Scarring.'' The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution, Washington,
D.C.
xiii Bitler, Marianne P., Hilary W. Hoynes, and Diane Whitmore
Schanzenbach. 2020. ``The Social Safety Net in the Wake of COVID-19.''
Working Paper 27796, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge,
MA; Feeding America. 2020. ``Nine months later, food banks continue
responding to rising need for help.''
xiv Waxman, Elaine, Poonam Gupta, and Dulce Gonzalez. 2021.
``Charitable food use increased nearly 50 percent from 2019 to 2020.''
Urban Institute, Washington, D.C.
xv Friedersdorf, Conor. 2020. ``Food Banks Can't Go On Like This.''
The Atlantic, May 6.
xvi Bauer, Lauren, Abigail Pitts, Krista Ruffini, and Diane Whitmore
Schanzenbach. 2020. ``The effect of Pandemic EBT on measures of food
hardship.'' Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
xvii Collins, Ann M., Ronette Briefel, Jacob Alex Klerman, Anne
Wolf, Gretchen Rowe, Ayesha Enver, Christopher W. Logan, Syeda Fatima,
Marina Komarovsky, Julia Lyskawa, and Stephen Bell. 2014. ``Summer
Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: 2013
Final Report.'' Nutrition Assistance Program Report, Food and Nutrition
Service, Office of Policy Support, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
xviii Wolkomir, Elizabeth, and Lexin Cai. 2018. ``The Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program Includes Earnings Incentives.'' Center on
Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, D.C.
xix Hoynes, Hilary Williamson, and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach.
2012. ``Work incentives and the food stamp program.'' Journal of Public
Economics 96, no. 1-2: 151-162.
xx Fraker, T. and Moffitt, R. 1988. The effect of food stamps on
labor supply: A bivariate selection model. Journal of Public Economics,
35(1), pp. 25-56; Gray, Colin, Adam Leive, Elena Prager, Kelsey
Pukelis, and Mary Zaki. 2020. ``Employed in a SNAP? The Impact of Work
Requirements on Program Participation and Labor Supply.''; Han,
Jeehoon. 2020. ``The impact of SNAP work requirements on labor
supply.'' Available at SSRN 3296402; Harris, Timothy F. 2021. ``Do SNAP
Work Requirements Work?'' Economic Inquiry 59, no. 1: 72-94.; Hoynes,
Hilary Williamson, and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach. 2012. ``Work
incentives and the food stamp program.'' Journal of Public Economics
96, no. 1-2: 151-162; Ku, Leighton, Erin Brantley, and Drishti Pillai.
2019. ``The effects of SNAP work requirements in reducing participation
and benefits from 2013 to 2017.'' American Journal of Public Health
109, no. 10: 1446-1451; Bauer, Lauren, Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, and
Jay Shambaugh. 2018. ``Work requirements and safety net programs.'' The
Hamilton Project, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.; Bauer,
Lauren. 2018. ``Workers could lose SNAP benefits under Trump's proposed
rule.'' Upfront Blog, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
xxi Ganong, Peter, and Jeffrey B. Liebman. 2018. ``The decline,
rebound, and further rise in SNAP enrollment: Disentangling business
cycle fluctuations and policy changes.'' American Economic Journal:
Economic Policy 10, no. 4: 153-76; Harris, Timothy F. 2021. ``Do SNAP
Work Requirements Work?'' Economic Inquiry 59, no. 1: 72-94.; Ziliak,
James P., Craig Gundersen, and David N. Figlio. 2003. ``Food stamp
caseloads over the business cycle.'' Southern Economic Journal: 903-
919.
xxii Hoynes, Hilary W. and Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach. 2019.
``Strengthening SNAP as an automatic stabilizer.'' Boushey, Heather,
Jay Shambaugh, and Ryan Nunn. Recession Ready. Washington, D.C.: The
Brookings Press.
xxiii U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2021. ``SNAP: COVID-19 waivers
by state.''
xxiv East, Chloe N., and David Simon. 2020. How Well Insured are Job
Losers? Efficacy of the Public Safety Net. No. w28218. National Bureau
of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
xxv Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore. 2013. ``Strengthening SNAP for a
more food-secure, healthy America.'' The Hamilton Project, The
Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
xxvi Todd, J.E. and Ephraim S. Leibtag. 2010. New Database Shows
Substantial Geographic Food Price Variation (No. 1490-2016-127275, pp.
52-53); Hoynes, Hilary and James Ziliak. 2018. ``Increasing SNAP
purchasing power reduces food insecurity and improves child outcomes.''
The Hamilton Project, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
xxvii Waxman, E., Craig Gundersen, and Megan Thompson. 2018. ``How
far do SNAP benefits fall short of covering the cost of a meal.'' Urban
Institute. Washington, D.C.
xxviii Gregory, C.A. and Alisha Coleman-Jensen. 2013. ``Do high food
prices increase food insecurity in the United States?.'' Applied
Economic Perspectives and Policy, 35(4), pp. 679-707.
xxix Bureau of Labor Statistics. April 10. ``Consumer Price Index
Summary.'' Dzhanova, Yelena. 2020. ``Food banks are closing and losing
their workforce because of the coronavirus.'' CNBC, April 28; Teitz,
Liz. 2020. ``CT food pantries struggling to stock shelves as donations
dwindle.'' The Middletown Press, May 5; Haigh, Susan and Dave Collins.
2020. ``Food aid groups try to outbid others; state seeks a solution.''
Associated Press, May 4; Sun, Deedee. 2020. ``WA food banks in
desperate need of help as demand keeps rising.'' KIRO 7 News, April 30;
Masunaga, Samantha. 2020. ``Why are eggs getting so expensive? Blame
coronavirus demand.'' Los Angeles Times, April 8; Odzer, Ari. 2020.
``Prices of Basic Foods Soar Due to Coronavirus.'' NBC 6 South Florida,
April 8; Hall, Kevin G. and Carlos Frias. 2020. ``Food prices are going
up. Because of coronavirus, experts can't say by how much.'' McClatchy,
April 7; Sousa, Agnieszka de, Ruth Olurounbi, and Pratik Parija. 2020.
``Key Food Prices Are Surging After Virus Upends Supply Chains.''
Bloomberg, April 6; Kang, Jaewon and Jacob Bunge. 2020. ``For Grocers,
Eggs Are Getting More Expensive Amid Coronavirus.'' Wall Street
Journal, April 6; Kelley, Alexandra. 2020. ``Prices on some food items
are surging during coronavirus pandemic.'' The Hill, March 31;
Bottemiller Evich, Helena. 2020. ``USDA let millions of pounds of food
rot while food-bank demand soared.'' Politico, April 26; Reiley, Laura.
2020. ``Full fields, empty fridges.'' The Washington Post, April 23;
Clapp, Jennifer. 2020. ``Spoiled Milk, Rotten Vegetables and a Very
Broken Food System.'' The New York Times, May 8; Garcia, Tonya. 2020.
``Grocery prices are rising as eat-at-home demand soars during the
coronavirus pandemic.'' MarketWatch, April 13; Prosser, Faye. 2020.
``Grocery prices increasing significantly on certain items during
pandemic.'' WRAL News, March 31.
xxx Ziliak, James P. 2016. ``Modernizing SNAP benefits.'' The
Hamilton Project, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
xxxi Anderson, Patricia and Kristin Butcher. 2016. ``The
Relationships Among SNAP Benefits, Grocery Spending, Diet Quality, and
the Adequacy of Low-Income Families' Resources.'' Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities, Washington, D.C.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Dr. Bauer.
Our next witness, Ms. Davis, please begin when you are
ready with your testimony.
STATEMENT OF ODESSA DAVIS, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ON
BEHALF OF NO KID HUNGRY CAMPAIGN, SHARE OUR STRENGTH
Ms. Davis. Good afternoon. Thank you for providing me with
the opportunity to be here today. My name is Odessa Davis. I am
a mom, a college student, a hunger advocate with Share Our
Strength and Manna Food Center. I am here to speak on the
importance of nutrition programs like SNAP and school meals.
Before the pandemic, my dream was to become a chef. I got
my associate's degree at Le Cordon Bleu, Miami. During that
time, I had a beautiful baby boy and became a single mom. I had
to work minimum wage and I needed government assistance. I had
to put my pride to the side to get the assistance that I
needed. I got SNAP, which helped me pay my bills and decrease
my stress. My son received Medicaid and free breakfast and
lunch at school. This helped my son stay focused on his
schoolwork.
I wanted a better life for my son, so I updated my dream to
become a multi-business owner, including a restaurant. I
started working for Montgomery County Public Schools as a
special ed para-educator. Doing that, I updated my SNAP
information, which means that by working hard, my SNAP
decreased. Later, my SNAP was cut-off and I was on the benefit
cliff. Even though my job was 10 months, I had to work four
jobs. My son ended up getting free breakfast and reduced lunch.
I went back to school to get my associate's degree in
business management, thanks to my support system from
scholarships, family, friends, and coworkers. I wouldn't have
done it without them. A lot of people do not have that support.
During school, I met other moms in the same situation. I
started a support group called Back on Track. Fifty percent of
my members graduated.
During COVID, it became more stressful. Three of my jobs
were closed because of COVID. I had to use my savings and I was
denied unemployment because my 10 month job was considered a
full-time job, even though I don't get paid during summertime,
winter break, spring break, or professional days.
But there was a light at the end of the tunnel. I did
receive the P-EBT card, and that helped me be able to pay for
nutritious foods such as meat and veggies. I also received food
from the food pantry, and I started volunteering to cook food
for my friends and family that were not qualified for SNAP. So,
when they got food from food pantries, I made it for them
because they can't cook.
I did graduate during the pandemic, May 2020, from
Montgomery College and got my associate's degree in business
management with honors.
As you can see, nutrition programs such as SNAP and school
meals are really helpful, and decrease our stress to not have
to worry about food, and be able to pay for our bills.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Davis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Odessa Davis, Washington, D.C.; on Behalf of No
Kid Hungry Campaign, Share our Strength
Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for convening this important conversation and for
providing me with the opportunity to appear before you today. My name
is Odessa Davis and I am a mom, a college student, special education
para-educator and hunger advocate with Share Our Strength and the Manna
Food Center in Montgomery County, Maryland.
I am so glad this hearing is focused on the challenges women face
in trying to make ends meet and put food on the table for their
families. As you work to improve access to important nutrition programs
like SNAP and school meals, I'd like to share my story to help you
understand how important the investments you make in these vital
programs are to improving the lives of families like mine in every
community around the country.
I have always believed in the importance of working hard to achieve
your dreams. After high school, I graduated from Le Cordon Bleu College
of Culinary Arts in Miami. I then returned to Maryland with my son to
pursue a degree in Business Management at Montgomery College. With help
from scholarships and a supportive family and friend network, I
recently earned my Associates Degree, graduating with honors! This
fall, I will be starting at the UMD Global Campus.
To make ends meet during school, I worked as many as four jobs,
including as a special education para-educator with Montgomery County
Public Schools. But even before the pandemic, it was hard to make ends
meet. My job with the school system only pays when school is in
session, meaning there is no income during the summer months, over
winter and spring breaks, or on other days when the schools are closed.
So, I was also working as a contractor for the school's sports league
and at a summer job with Montgomery County Recreation Therapeutics--
both of which were eliminated due to COVID-19.
Prior to the pandemic, my son and I were financially limited, and,
even watching every penny, there never seemed to be enough to go
around. There were so many months when I had to make tough choices. How
was I going to buy enough food and pay the light bill? Put gas in the
car or get groceries? These are the questions that face so many
families like mine and the financial strain got even tighter once COVID
hit.
These challenges and difficult decisions don't just affect me, I
also have my 11 year old son to think about. Many of you here today are
parents, so you understand that, as a mom, I want to build a strong,
healthy and successful life for him. I want him to get the food he
needs--every single day--so he can focus and learn, so he can stay
healthy and happy.
Programs like SNAP and school meals made it possible for me to keep
food on the table. But we need to make sure these programs work
together and work effectively. Strengthening all of the Federal
nutrition programs is essential because they work together to reach
families with kids of all ages where they live and learn.
Before the pandemic, my son participated in the free and reduced-
price meal program at school, which was a huge relief--knowing he was
getting the nutrition he needed to focus and learn. For a while, we
were also receiving support from SNAP each month, but we lost those
benefits once my earnings increased just over the threshold for the two
of us. Once you factor in rent, the electric bill, gas for the car,
water bill, and all the things that seem to pop up like medicine, car
repairs, replacing a pair of shoes my son grew out of, there just isn't
much left for food.
Then the pandemic hit and times got really tough for us. My jobs
with school sports and the Parks & Rec department were canceled due to
new safety measures. It then took me nearly a year to get unemployment
benefits--our state's unemployment system is outdated and makes it more
complicated to show income loss with multiple low-wage jobs.
And not only did I lose income, when schools closed, my son also
lost access to the school meals that had been such a vital source of
nutrition during the school year. While his school still offered meals,
they were only distributed in the middle of the day, while he was in
virtual school. I tried to pick them up when I could, but our schedules
made it really hard to ensure that he was those nutritious meals on a
consistent basis.
When Pandemic EBT rolled out, it was a life saver. This benefit put
$5 a day onto a grocery benefit card so I could buy more of the food my
son needed, when he needed it. P-EBT really helped me put food on the
table during the height of the pandemic, but, when that benefit ended
in November, things got really hard. I ran through the small savings
that I had worked so hard to build, and we, like so many other
Americans, relied on food pantries to make sure we had enough to eat.
The increased struggle to make ends meet and provide for our small
family due to COVID-19 is not unique, nor are the challenges that we
faced before the pandemic. I am talking to you today, but I know dozens
of women, just like me, who have their own stories to tell. Parents who
are working multiple jobs, pursuing an education and raising families,
all while under extreme financial strain. We are stretching every penny
to provide for their families, but can use some help to make it
through.
That is why programs like school meals and SNAP are so important.
Knowing that our kids are getting the food they need, allows us to
focus on climbing out of these hard times and, once we do, we can give
a hand to others.
When I was at Montgomery College, I started a club called ``Back on
Track.'' It was a small group of adult students who were facing similar
financial challenges. We worked hard to support one another and to help
each other navigate the programs that could help. This year, 50% of our
group was successful in graduating.
Today, along with my job with the school system, I'm working for
the Community Action Agency and using my culinary skills as a volunteer
chef, preparing food for people who are also facing tough times.
Thank you for allowing me to meet with you today and I hope my
story helps you to better understand the importance of nutrition
programs in the everyday lives of families across the country. I am
grateful for our time together.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Ms. Davis, for your
testimony today.
Our next witness, Dr. Whitford, please begin your testimony
when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF JAMES WHITFORD, D.P.T., CO-FOUNDER AND
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WATERED GARDENS MINISTRIES, JOPLIN, MO
Dr. Whitford. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking
Member Bacon, and the Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you
for hearing my testimony today.
About 25 years ago, I was serving at a homeless mission in
Ft. Worth, Texas, and my heart broke as I engaged men, women
and children living on the streets. Not long after that, I met
my beautiful bride, Marsha, and we married in the chapel of
that same mission with homeless as our guests. Three months
after that, we opened the doors to our own small, compassion-
driven ministry called Watered Gardens in the southwest
Missouri community of Joplin.
About 20 years later, our ministry is the largest privately
funded poverty-fighting organization in our four-state area. We
meet tens of thousands of needs every year, helping both the
poor and homeless with everything from emergency shelter to
workforce development.
Now, I said we help them, but really, they help themselves
through a unique ministry we operate called the Worth Shop. We
call it the Worth Shop because we found that work awakens worth
in people's lives. It is a place where people can trade their
time to earn everything they need, from clothing, to shelter,
or furniture, or food.
Just last week I sat across from Hope in our Worth Shop, a
young woman who was earning her food. I asked her, Hope, why do
you earn your food here instead of going to get it for free
from somewhere else? She said I like it this way. I feel better
about myself.
Now, I have heard countless comments like that over the
years. One man said, ``You take the shame out of the game.''
One lady named Beth, who was earning her food by knitting
stocking caps for newborns in the local hospital, called me
later and left a voice message that said thank you for treating
me as equal.
Now beyond anecdotes, research bears this out also. The
American Journal of Applied Psychology published a paper in
2015 titled, Personality Change Following Unemployment, a study
of 6,000 unemployed adults. They discovered the longer people
are without work, the more they suffer. Specifically, they
found a decline in three psychosocial metrics: agreeableness,
openness, and conscientiousness. In other words, people become
disheartened and grumpy when they are not working.
So, if we want to really help energize people to get back
in the workforce, then we should couple our charity with an
expectation to be productive, because people feel better about
themselves when dignity is restored. We do this at our mission
every day, viewing people who many call poor and needy as
people who also have great potential, capacity, and ability.
April was one of those. When she first stepped into our
doors, she was homeless, addicted, and had lost her kids. She
was on SNAP and had been in and out of HUD housing, but it was
at the mission surrounded by people who cared for her that she
found the courage to get clean, get a job, and turn in her SNAP
card. She said that last part was the one of the hardest things
she had ever done because she had never known that she had the
ability to provide for herself. But with a compassionate
support team, she did it. Not only that, but she got her kids
back, went back to school, and then she ended up working full-
time as our office manager.
I have a lot of other first-hand stories of people finding
freedom from dependency simply because we viewed them as unique
individuals with unique gifts rather than charity cases
intended to be stuck on the receiving end of someone's
benevolence.
Unfortunately, I have no shortage of stories that go in a
different direction. Kenny, who was horribly addicted to
alcohol, would stand on the median with a cardboard sign that
read Food Stamps half price, just to get another drink.
Now, the right kind of help, rehabilitation and
development, they are available for guys like Kenny, but for
him and countless others, means-tested welfare programs
disincentivize work that would otherwise lead to a flourishing
life.
James Madison, debating on the floor of the House in 1794,
asserted: ``Charity is no part of the duty of government.''
Twenty-one years later, that makes sense to me. The government
doesn't know, Kenny, April, Beth, or Hope. I know them. And
without a personal knowledge of each individual and what is
really going on in their lives, needs cannot be met in a way
that doesn't trap people in dependency and strip them of
dignity.
Charity has never been administered well from the
government. FDR himself admitted this in his 1935 State of the
Union Address. After comparing dependency on relief as a
narcotic, he went on to promise, ``The Federal Government must
and shall quit this business of relief.'' That was sound
conviction because although the government might be able to
feed people, it can never give those struggling in poverty what
justice demands, dignity and friendship. That comes by way of
compassionate neighbors like the ones who volunteer at my
mission who also develop vital relationships with those who
come for food.
So, I implore this Committee, please, consider what you can
do to safeguard the future of those vital relationships that
are certainly undermined or crowded out when food simply comes
on a card with nothing required.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Whitford follows:]
Prepared Statement of James Whitford, D.P.T., Co-Founder and Executive
Director, Watered Gardens Ministries, Joplin, MO
Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and the Members of the
Subcommittee. Thank you for receiving my written testimony today
regarding the SNAP program.
About 25 years ago, I was impacted significantly while serving at a
homeless mission in Ft. Worth, Texas. I felt like my heart literally
broke as I engaged men, women and children living on the streets. Not
long after that, I met my beautiful bride and we married in the chapel
of that same mission, the homeless as our witnesses. Three months later
we opened the doors to our own compassion-driven ministry called
Watered Gardens in our SW Missouri community of Joplin.
After the first year of operation, we made the difficult decision
of reducing my full-time work as a physical therapist to part-time.
This was a sacrifice for us and our five children, but it was evident
the ministry needed more of my attention. My wife and I worked hard to
build a team of compassionate volunteers and for the next 9 years it
remained completely volunteer driven with no payroll at all.
But the sacrifice paid off.
The ministry is now the largest privately funded poverty-fighting
organization in our four-state area. Today, we serve both the poor and
the homeless, offering 105 beds in three facilities serving those in
long term recovery, adult men and women in need of emergency shelter,
homeless moms with children and we have a respite unit for those
discharged from the hospital who have nowhere to go to finish their
recovery. Our non-homeless services include workforce development,
education, and meeting basic needs like furniture, appliances, clothing
and food. We served more than 60,000 meals last year and from our
Mission Market we helped nearly 400 families with more than 57,000
pounds of food for their homes through private donations. I say, ``We
helped them,'' but really, they helped themselves through a unique
ministry we operate called the Worth Shop. We call it a Worth Shop
because we have found that work awakens worth in people's lives. It is
a place where people can trade their time to earn everything from
clothing and shelter to furniture or food. Work is dignifying whether
it's through helping in the recycling section of our Worth Shop or
staining and sewing together beautiful leather journals.
Just last week I sat across from Hope in our Worth Shop, a young
woman who was earning her food. I asked her, ``Hope, why do you earn
your food here instead of going to get it for free from somewhere
else.''
``I like it this way,'' she said. ``I feel better about myself.''
I've heard countless comments like that over the years. One man
said, ``You take the shame out of the game.'' Another person said,
``It's like we get to keep our dignity.'' One lady named Beth who was
earning her food by knitting stocking caps for newborns in the local
hospital called me later and left a voice message that said, ``Thank
you for treating me as equal.''
These are more than just anecdotal stories. Research also bears
this out. The American Journal of Applied Psychology published a paper
in 2015 ``Personality Change Following Unemployment,'' a study of 6,000
unemployed, subsidized adults.\1\ They discovered the longer people are
without work, the more they suffer. Specifically, there was
statistically significant decline in three of five psychosocial
metrics: agreeableness, openness, and conscientiousness. In other
words, people become disheartened and grumpy when they're not working.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/apl-a0038647.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, if we want to help energize people to get back in the
workforce, then we should couple our charity with an expectation to be
productive--they'll feel better about themselves as dignity is
restored.
We do this at our mission every day, viewing people who many call
poor and needy as people who also have great potential, capacity and
ability.
April was one of those people. When she first stepped into the
doors of our mission, she was homeless, addicted and had lost her
children. She was on SNAP and had been in and out of HUD housing, but
it was at the mission surrounded by people who cared for her--willing
to develop a relationship with her--that she found the courage to get
clean, get a job and turn in her SNAP card. She said that was the one
of the scariest things she ever did because she simply had never known
that she had the ability to provide for herself. But with a
compassionate support-team who esteemed her as able, she did it. Not
only that, but she got her kids back, went back to school and ended up
working as our office manager before opening and leading her own
recovery ministry where she now inspires women to discover their God-
given potential.
I'll never forget Mike, a middle-aged man who has a third grade
education, riding his bicycle down to the mission after seeing one of
our public service announcements. When I greeted him, he said, ``I saw
you on the TV say that the working poor are happier than the welfare
poor, so I went and got a job!'' He was so excited. When I asked him
what he needed that day, he said he wanted to earn his food at the
mission instead of using his SNAP card. That was 7 years ago and Mike
still has that same job and loves it.
I have many more first-hand stories of people finding freedom from
dependency simply because we viewed them as unique individuals with
unique gifts rather than charity cases intended to be stuck on the
receiving end of someone's benevolence.
Unfortunately, I have no shortage of stories that go in a different
direction. For us and others who operate work-oriented missions like
ours, SNAP benefits are often more hurtful than helpful. Kenny,
horribly addicted to alcohol, would stand on the median with a
cardboard sign that read ``Food Stamps \1/2\ price.'' I have recorded
testimonies of others who have openly shared with me how easy and
common it is to liquidate these benefits at 50 on the dollar.
Last week, I met with Kevin an able-bodied homeless man at our
mission. He earns his bed and meals like everyone else because he can,
but when I asked him about employment, he said, ``No way. I can only
work for cash under the table. I'm waiting on my disability.'' That
conversation led to SNAP. He pulled his card out and leaned across the
table, ``James,'' he said. ``They put hundreds of dollars on my card
last month. I don't even know what I'm going to do with it. I think I'm
going to go buy some bulk food and give it away.'' Unfortunately, I
learned over the weekend that Kevin failed his drug test. He's back out
on the streets.
The right kind of help--rehabilitation and development--are
available for guys like Kevin and Kenny but for them and countless
others, means-tested welfare programs disincentivize work that would
otherwise lead to a flourishing life.
In fact, before SNAP work requirements were waived in my state in
2016, more than 43,000 able-bodied adults were on the program not
working at all. But by the end of the year, after the waiver for SNAP
work requirements had been removed, that number had dropped by 85%.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://thefga.org/paper/missouri-food-stamp-work-requirements/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I remember that--before the new law went into effect. There was a
lot of talk in the news about how people might go hungry. But when it
passed, no one went hungry. Why? Because on average, there was a 70%
increase in earnings by those able-bodied adults on the program and the
rest of it was taken up by private-sector charity.
We should never underestimate the incredible potential of civil
society's response in times of need. Just this last Saturday, we
recognized the 10th anniversary of an incredible disaster in my
community. On May 22 of 2011 one of the most historically devastating
F5 tornadoes tore through the center of our city rendering more than
7,000 people homeless in an hour and killing 161. It wasn't Federal
Government relief that saved us. Caring neighbors, compassionate
citizens and local leaders were involved in rescue, relief and then
organized a coordinated response long before government help showed up.
James Madison, debating on the floor of the House in 1794,
asserted, ``Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the
government.'' After twenty-one years of fighting poverty, that makes
sense to me. The government doesn't know Kevin, Kenny, Mike, April,
Beth, or Hope. I know them. And without a personal knowledge of each
individual and what's really going on in their lives, needs cannot be
met in a way that does not tend toward trapping people in dependency
and stripping them of dignity.
Charity has never been administered well from the government. FDR
himself admitted this in his 1935 State of the Union Address. After
comparing dependency on relief as a narcotic--``a subtle destroyer of
the human spirit,'' he went on to promise, ``The Federal Government
must and shall quit this business of relief.'' That was sound
conviction because although the government might be able to feed
people, it can never give those struggling in poverty what justice
demands--dignity and friendship. That comes by way of compassionate
neighbors like the ones who volunteer at our mission who also develop
vital relationships with those who come for food.
I implore this Committee to consider what it can do to safeguard
the future of those vital relationships that are certainly undermined
or crowded out when food simply comes on a card with nothing required.
James Whitford,
Co-Founder, Executive Director,
Watered Gardens Ministries.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Raw interview with Dennis and his SNAP experience https://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcOizE7xWVo.
Editor's note: the video is retained in Committee file.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Kenny's cardboard sign.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Dr. Whitford.
Now we have Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. When you are ready, please
unmute and begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF RENEE BOYNTON-JARRETT, M.D., Sc.D.,
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF PEDIATRICS, BOSTON
UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE; PEDIATRICIAN, BOSTON MEDICAL
CENTER; FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VITAL VILLAGE NETWORKS,
BOSTON, MA
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member
Bacon, and distinguished Members of the Committee, good
afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
Committee to provide testimony on the important role of the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for families and
children during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. I am honored
to be here.
My name is Dr. Renee Boynton-Jarrett. I am a Pediatrician
at Boston Medical Center, the largest safety net hospital in
New England, and Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Boston
University School of Medicine, a researcher on social and
structural factors that impact population health, and the
founding Director of Vital Village Networks. In partnership
with community residents and organizations, Vital Village
develops strategies to promote child well-being and advance
health and educational equity through research data sharing and
collective action. I am also a member of the National Academy
of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, committed on exploring
the opportunity gap for young children from birth to age 8.
As a primary care pediatrician at a safety net hospital, I
know firsthand that all parents, regardless of personal
resources, seek to ensure that their children have what they
need to thrive. Such necessities include nutritious food, a
safe and stable home, high quality childcare and education, and
healthcare. We know that when children lack access to these
basic necessities, even for brief periods of time, their health
is jeopardized. Research consistently shows that when children
live in families struggling with food insecurity, they are more
likely to be in poor health, hospitalized, and at risk for
developmental and learning delays. Adults and children who are
food-insecure also experience increased rates of mental health
issues.
However, supporting children's health and developmental
goals goes well beyond ensuring that they receive proper
nutrition. Parental well-being is foundational to healthy
growth of children and their development, and when mothers are
able to afford the basic needs for their children and are well-
supported, they are less likely to be depressed or anxious, and
able to provide responsive care-giving that children need to
develop healthy.
Currently, who gets help and how much help they receive
from society is driven by a narrative of deservingness, yet
food insecurity is distressing and painful. Children who are
food-insecure experience physical, cognitive, and emotional
awareness of hunger, and I ask what is our moral and ethical
responsibility?
Unfortunately, due to persistent structural inequities, low
wage work, and lack of high quality, affordable childcare,
financial stability is out of reach for many families. Black,
indigenous, Latina, and immigrant mothers in particular are
disproportionately shut out of systems that promote economic
advancement due to discrimination and systemic racism. Well
before the pandemic, I met mothers in my clinic who worked
multiple jobs, owned their own businesses, and despite their
best efforts, struggled to put food on the table for their
children. Parents in food-insecure households routinely make
tradeoffs between food and basic necessities, such as
utilities.
Due to food scarcity during the pandemic, an estimated 13
million children, or one in six, may experience food insecurity
this year. Mental health issues have been climbing among those
who are food-insecure, and for these families, programs like
SNAP and school meals and WIC are crucial to filling the gap
between insufficient incomes and the cost of raising children.
SNAP is not only effective in reducing food insecurity, but
improves child and maternal health outcomes.
During the pandemic, we have seen dramatic increases in
food insecurity and other hardships among families, with school
and childcare closures, the shuttering of businesses and
service sectors that disproportionately employed women. These
circumstances have placed an outsized burden of economic
hardship and stress on mothers and women of color have been
more profoundly impacted by these economic shocks, because they
hold a higher share of low wage service industry jobs.
Expansion of SNAP and the Pandemic Electronic Benefit
Transfer Program passed in relief packages by Congress have
been a lifeline for many families during this pandemic, but
unfortunately, these are scheduled to sunset without further
action. Failure to ensure the nutritional needs of children are
met will exacerbate inequities in health and educational
attainment. The time is now to move from short-term policy
solutions to permanently expand eligibility and access to
government nutrition programs. Working in partnership with
families and communities to generate solutions is crucial.
As vaccination rates increase and as schools and childcare
settings reopen, and as people return to work we cannot lose
sight of three things. First, the longstanding structural
inequities that existed before the pandemic; second, the
lessons learned during the pandemic, including the essential
role of partnerships with families and communities; and third,
the urgent need for long-term policy solutions that respond to
the realities families, women, and children face. In order to
live in a country where all children have the opportunity to
reach their fullest potential, we must seek to understand ways
in which current recovery efforts are leaving them and mothers
behind.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Boynton-Jarrett follows:]
Prepared Statement of Renee Boynton-Jarrett, M.D., Sc.D., Associate
Professor of Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine;
Pediatrician, Boston Medical Center; Founder and Executive Director,
Vital Village Networks, Boston, MA
Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and distinguished Members
of the House of Representatives Agriculture Committee, good afternoon.
Thank you for the opportunity for me to appear before this Committee to
provide testimony on the important role of the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP) for families with children during and after
the COVID-19 pandemic. I am honored to be here.
My name is Dr. Renee Boynton-Jarrett. I am a Pediatrician at Boston
Medical Center, the largest safety-net hospital in New England, I am an
Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Boston University School of
Medicine, and researcher on social and structural factors that impact
population health (social epidemiology). I am the Founding Director of
Vital Village Networks. In partnership with community residents and
organizations, Vital Village Networks develops community-based
strategies to promote child well-being and advance health and
educational equity through research, data sharing, and collective
action. I am also a member of the National Academy of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) committee on Exploring the
Opportunity Gap for Young Children from Birth to Age Eight.
As a primary care pediatrician at a hospital that predominantly
serves low-income patients, I know firsthand, that all parents,
regardless of personal resources, seek to ensure their children have
what they need to thrive. Such necessities include nutritious food, a
safe and stable home, high-quality child care and education, and health
care. We know that when children lack access to these basic
necessities--even for brief periods of time--their health is
jeopardized. Research consistently shows that when children live in
families struggling with food insecurity, they are more likely to be in
poor health, be hospitalized, at-risk of developmental delays, and
experiencing difficulties learning in school.(1, 2) Adults
and children who are food-insecure experience increased rates of mental
health issues.(3) Food insecurity is also associated with
childhood obesity.(4-6)
However, supporting children's health and development goes well-
beyond ensuring that children receive proper nutrition. Parental well-
being is a foundation of healthy child growth and development. When
mothers are able to afford basic needs for their children and are well-
supported, they are less likely to be depressed or
anxious.(7) As a result, mothers are better able to provide
the responsive care-giving their children need early in
life.(8, 9)
Currently who gets help and how much help they receive from society
is driven by a narrative of deservingness.(10) Yet, food
insecurity is distressing and painful--children who are in food-
insecure households experience physical (hunger, fatigue), cognitive
(knowledge of scarcity), and emotional awareness
(worry).(11) I ask, what is our moral and ethical
responsibility? During the pandemic rates of hunger and food insecurity
increased, particularly among lower income, Black, Latinx and Native
American households.(12, 13) However, these issues were
longstanding before the pandemic and call for a paradigm shift that
uses a trauma-informed approach to develop policies that promote
resilient and equitable food systems in collaboration with communities
and families.
Unfortunately, due to persistent structural inequities, low-wage
work, and a lack of high-quality affordable child care, financial
stability is out of reach for many families. Black, Indigenous, Latina,
and immigrant mothers, in particular, are disproportionately shut out
of systems that promote economic advancement due to prejudice,
discrimination and systemic racism. Well before the pandemic, I met
mothers in my clinic who worked multiple jobs or owned their own
businesses and despite their best efforts struggled to put food on the
table for their children. Parents in food-insecure households routinely
have to make tradeoffs between food and basic
necessities,(14) and over 69% report having to choose
between food and utilities.(15)
Prior to the current crisis, approximately one in seven families
with children nationally experienced food insecurity (16)--
at Boston Medical Center, that number is closer to one in five. Due to
food scarcity during the pandemic, an estimated 13 million children (or
one in six children) may experience food insecurity in
2021.(16) Mental health issues also increased in relation to
food insecurity during the pandemic.(17) For these families,
programs like SNAP, school meals, and WIC, are crucial to filling the
gap between insufficient incomes and the costs of raising children.
SNAP in particular is not only effective in reducing food insecurity,
but also improves child and maternal health outcomes.(18)
For children who receive \2/3\ of their daily nutritional needs through
school and childcare center meals, replacing these meals was an
immediate priority but has not led to long-term policy
solutions.(19)
During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen a dramatic increase in
food insecurity and other economic hardship among families with
children. School and child care closures coupled with the shuttering of
businesses in service sectors that require face-to-face interaction and
disproportionately employ women--these circumstances placed an outsized
burden of economic hardship and stress on mothers. Women of color have
been more profoundly impacted by these economic shocks because they are
hold a higher share of low-wage and service industry
jobs.(20) Throughout this pandemic, mothers have had to
juggle remote schooling, child care responsibilities, paying bills when
their incomes were cut, and ensuring that they and their children can
remain healthy. Sadly, across the U.S. and in the 15 largest
metropolitan areas there is a direct correlation between COVID-19
mortality rate and food insecurity among households with children under
age 18. These patterns worsen among those with lower levels of
education, by racial/ethnic group, and geography.(21)
Expansions in SNAP and the Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-
EBT) program passed in relief packages by Congress have been a lifeline
for many families during this pandemic. Unfortunately, these expansions
are scheduled to sunset without further action. Failure to ensure the
nutritional needs of children are met will exacerbate inequities in
health and educational attainment. The time is now to move from a
short-term policy solution to permanently expand eligibility and access
to government nutrition programs. Working in partnership with families
and communities to generate solutions is crucial.(22, 23)
As vaccination rates increase, as schools and child care settings
reopen, and as people return to work, we cannot lose sight of three
things: first, the longstanding structural inequities that existed
before the pandemic; second, the lessons learned during the pandemic
including the essential role of partnerships with families and
communities; and, third, the urgent need for long-term policy solutions
that respond to the realities of families, women, and children. In
order to live in a country where all children have the opportunity to
reach their fullest potential, we must seek to understand the ways in
which current recovery efforts are leaving women and mothers behind.
Data show women and women of color not only lost jobs at higher rates
than men during the pandemic, but they are now returning to the
workplace at a slower rate than men.(20) Women-owned small
businesses like family home daycare centers, catering businesses, and
salons suffered significant revenue loss during the pandemic. These
significant declines in income that continue to persist have an impact
on the well-being of children, families, and communities given the
central role mothers play in the lives of others.(20)
Moreover, as of December 2020, 13% of both child care centers and
family child care homes remained closed.(24)
Given our understanding of the significant consequences of food
insecurity and scarcity, and the fragility of our current food system,
solutions to address food insecurity should employ a trauma-informed
approach.(11) We urge Congress and the Administration to
work alongside communities across the country to build a resilient food
system that eradicates hunger, supports families and children optimally
and upholds their dignity.
Increasing Federal investments into programs like SNAP and child
nutrition programs not only improves health and well-being, but also
helps boost local economics--supporting local farmers, small
businesses, and food retailers of all sizes that accept SNAP
dollars.(25) A recent analysis from the USDA Economic
Research Service (ERS) found that $1 billion in new SNAP benefits would
generate an additional $32 million in income for the U.S. agriculture
industry and nearly 500 full-time agricultural jobs.(26)
An equitable recovery for all will require comprehensive, family-
centric policies that recognize the unique needs of mothers and
children, particularly for those with low incomes. An equitable
recovery, that invests in families and children, must also consider the
important role child care plays in economic security and child
development. Increasing SNAP benefits, improving child nutrition
programs, investing in high-quality, affordable child care, improving
families' ability to afford rent, ensuring access to health care and
prescription medicines, increasing wages, providing paid leave, and
implementing a permanent, inclusive child allowance are all evidence-
based steps Congress can and should take to improve the health and
well-being of women, children, and families.
The COVID-19 pandemic has clearly demonstrated the urgent need to
develop a resilient and secure food system based on policy and the
tremendous cost for millions of American children of our failure to do
so.(19) I hope Members of Congress will utilize a trauma-
informed lens and consider the full range of needs that children and
families have--from needing nutritious food to having healthy, safe,
and high-quality child care programs to attend--that matches our values
and supports the human rights of children and the ideals of our
democracy.
Thank you for your consideration. Once again, I am honored to be
here, and I look forward to our discussion.
References
1. de Oliveira K.H.D., de Almeida G.M., Gubert M.B., Moura A.S.,
Spaniol A.M., Hernandez D.C., et al. Household food insecurity and
early childhood development: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Matern Child Nutr. 2020; 16(3): e12967.
2. Pai S., Bahadur K. The Impact of Food Insecurity on Child Health.
Pediatr. Clin. North Am. 2020; 67(2): 387-96.
3. Whitaker R.C., Phillips S.M., Orzol S.M. Food insecurity and the
risks of depression and anxiety in mothers and behavior problems in
their preschool-aged children. Pediatrics. 2006; 118(3): e859-68.
4. Suglia S.F., Duarte C.S., Chambers E.C., Boynton-Jarrett R.
Cumulative social risk and obesity in early childhood. Pediatrics.
2012; 129(5): e1173-e9.
5. Kaur J., Lamb M.M., Ogden C.L. The association between food
insecurity and obesity in children--The National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
2015; 115(5): 751-8.
6. Suglia S.F., Duarte C.S., Chambers E.C., Boynton-Jarrett R.
Social and behavioral risk factors for obesity in early childhood. J.
Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 2013; 34(8): 549-56.
7. Zaslow M., Bronte-Tinkew J., Capps R., Horowitz A., Moore K.A.,
Weinstein D. Food security during infancy: implications for attachment
and mental proficiency in toddlerhood. Matern. Child Health J. 2009;
13(1): 66-80.
8. Reading R., Reynolds S. Debt, social disadvantage and maternal
depression. Soc. Sci. Med. 2001; 53(4): 441-53.
9. Manuel J.I., Martinson M.L., Bledsoe-Mansori S.E., Bellamy J.L.
The influence of stress and social support on depressive symptoms in
mothers with young children. Soc. Sci. Med. 2012; 75(11): 2013-20.
10. Jensen C., Petersen M.B. The deservingness heuristic and the
politics of health care. American Journal of Political Science. 2017;
61(1): 68-83.
11. Hecht A.A., Biehl E., Buzogany S., Neff R.A. Using a trauma-
informed policy approach to create a resilient urban food system.
Public Health Nutr. 2018; 21(10): 1961-70.
12. Siddiqi S.M., Cantor J., Dastidar M.G., Beckman R., Richardson
A.S., Baird M.D., et al. SNAP Participants and High Levels of Food
Insecurity in the Early Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Public Health
Rep. 2021: 333549211007152.
13. Center for Translational Neuroscience. Medium2020. Available
from: https://medium.com/rapid-ec-project/facing-hunger-the-weight-of-
the-pandemic-is-falling-on-american-families-1cbeb047a955.
14. Knowles M., Rabinowich J., Ettinger de Cuba S., Cutts D.B.,
Chilton M. ``Do You Wanna Breathe or Eat?'': Parent Perspectives on
Child Health Consequences of Food Insecurity, Trade-Offs, and Toxic
Stress. Matern. Child Health J. 2016; 20(1): 25-32.
15. Weinfield N., Mills G., Borger C., Gearing M., Macaluso T.,
Montaquila J., Zediewski S. Hunger in America [Internet] 2014.
Available from: https://www.feedingamerica.org/research/hunger-in-
america.
16. Feeding America. The Impact of the Coronavirus on Food
Insecurity in 2020 & 2021 [Internet] 2021 March. [May 20, 2021].
Available from: https://www.feedingamerica.org/research/coronavirus-
hunger-research.
17. Fang D., Thomsen M.R., Nayga R.M. The association between food
insecurity and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public
Health. 2021; 21(1): 607.
18. Ettinger de Cuba S.A., Bovell-Ammon A.R., Cook J.T., Coleman
S.M., Black M.M., Chilton M.M., et al. SNAP, Young Children's Health,
and Family Food Security and Healthcare Access. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2019;
57(4): 525-32.
19. Dunn C.G., Kenney E., Fleischhacker S.E., Bleich S.N. Feeding
Low-Income Children during the Covid-19 Pandemic. N. Engl. J. Med.
2020; 382(18): e40.
20. Bateman N., Ross M. Brookings. 2020 October 2020. Available
from: https://www.brookings.edu/essay/why-has-covid-19-been-especially-
harmful-for-working-women/.
21. Krieger N., Testa C., Waterman P.D., Chen J.T. Harvard Center
for Population and Development Studies, editor 2021 February 13, 2021.
[cited Volume 21, Number 2]. Available from: https://
cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1266/2021/02/21_krieger-
et-al_C19HH-pulse_HCPDS_Vol-21_No-2_Final.pdf.
22. Boynton-Jarrett R. Culture of Health Blog [Internet]: Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation. 2019. [cited 2021]. Available from: https://
www.rwjf.org/en/blog/2019/10/listening-to-families-and-communities-to-
address-childhood-obesity.html.
23. Skouteris H., Bergmeier H.J., Berns S.D., Betancourt J., Boynton-
Jarrett R., Davis M.B., et al. Reframing the early childhood obesity
prevention narrative through an equitable nurturing approach. Maternal
& Child Nutrition. 2021; 17(1): e13094.
24. Haynie K. Washington, D.C.: Child Carre Aware of America. 2021
February 22, 2021. Available from: https://info.childcareaware.org/blog/
analysis-shows-child-care-supply-attendance-better-but-waivering.
25. Wolkomir E. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: Washington,
D.C., USA [Internet] 2018. Available from: https://www.cbpp.org/
research/food-assistance/snap-boosts-retailers-and-local-
economies#_ftn5.
26. Canning P., Morrison R.M. Quantifying the Impact of SNAP
Benefits on the US Economy and Jobs. Amber Waves: The Economics of
Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America. 2019; 2019 (1490-
2020-727).
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, for
your testimony.
I apologize. In error, I skipped Ms. Wilson. Thank you, Dr.
Whitford for your testimony previously.
And now, we will hear from our final witness, Ms. Wilson.
When you are ready, if you would unmute and please begin your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF RACHEL WILSON, ORLANDO, FL; ON BEHALF OF SECOND
HARVEST FOOD BANK OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
Ms. Wilson. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Hayes and the rest
of the Committee.
I have done things a little differently than it seems like
a lot of the other speakers have. I have decided to speak from
my heart and I haven't written out a full testimony.
The first thing I want you to understand is that when we
talk about kids, we are talking about my kids. We are talking
about these ones. These kids that have the best hearts of
anyone that I could possibly talk about. This is Grace on her
14th birthday applying for her first job because she knows what
it means to struggle. She spends her days on my roof under a
full moon trying to manifest things, good things, for my family
and for herself, and understanding body positive image.
This is Tyler. I have set a standard for Tyler to
understand that SNAP is not a way of life. Government
assistance is not a way of life, and for him, entry level
position with the Brevard County School District with teacher's
benefits and teacher's pay, and he is doing amazing.
This is Jack. Jack is 5. He has three different behavior
disorders, including Autism Spectrum Disorder. He does tae kwon
do to understand self-discipline and control. He is--I am doing
my very best with government assistance to get them the
assistance that they need, and the therapy that he needs
through the government programs.
My job as a mother is to set the standard for these kids as
to what acceptable is, to understand that government assistance
is not a way of life. They do not need to feel the burden of
what poverty feels like, or a pandemic crisis.
I have a few notes, so if I get a little bit distracted,
please bear with me.
Before COVID, I was self-sustaining. I had a great income.
I could take care of my kids on my own. Like I said, I have
grown up on government assistance. I do not want that for my
kids.
Right now, since the salons have opened back up, I am now
working at 50 percent capacity of what I was before COVID.
Whether it is people are scared to come in due to lack of
vaccines or because of the virus that is out there, or because
they have decided that hair and makeup is just not an expense
they are willing to put into their budget.
Sometimes as parents, we have to understand that we have to
set aside all of our pride to make sure that our kids don't
feel the push of poverty. Their job as a kid is to do well in
school, to be healthy, functional adults, and not worry about
what they have to eat in the evening or during the day.
I have looked into a lot of different jobs. When I hear
people tell me that I need to get a second job: I have looked
at McDonalds. I have looked at Sonic. I have worked as a
manager of a fast-food restaurant. They pay exactly $11 an hour
to start out with. That is $440 a week before taxes, and $339 a
week after taxes. The total on that is $1,356 a month after
taxes. In Florida, you have to prove that you make three times
the amount of income to afford a household. As a legal
requirement, I have to have three bedrooms. A three-bedroom
house in Florida is $1,000 a month. I can't even prove that on
a management position at a fast-food restaurant.
SNAP has been a lifeline for me since the pandemic to be
able to give my kids what they need, the food that they need,
the lack of concern, other than their schoolwork and doing
well. My daughter wants to be a pediatric oncologist. The last
thing she needs to worry about is how much food she has on the
dinner table. She needs to worry about her schoolwork and what
school she chooses to go to because it has the best dual
enrollment program for an associate's degree. It is not their
job to feel this.
SNAP is supplemental. SNAP is a step up. SNAP is a way to
help me get my feet back under me after a pandemic, and to
build my clientele back up to provide the life that my children
need from this point forward. But sometimes we need help. We
just need help. Just because we need help does not mean that we
need to live under the means of basic human decency. We are not
looking for it for the rest of our lives. We are just looking
for it for a short time to help us get back to where we are
going, and provide a functional, healthy lifestyle for our
kids.
I thank the Chairwoman. That will be all.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Wilson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rachel Wilson, Orlando, FL; on Behalf of Second
Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida
Dear Chairwoman Hayes and Committee Members,
My name is Rachel Wilson. I am a 39 year old single mother of
three. I grew up in poverty and on government assistance. I grew up
barely having enough food. I grew up believing when the power was shut
off it was by choice because my mother had convinced my brother and I
that we were learning what it was like to live like pilgrims. Well into
adulthood I had just assumed this was the way of life. The more aware
of real life I became, the more I realized I didn't want that for
myself. I never really believed I would do much more than ``just make
it'', but I wanted to. I moved out of my mother's house at the age of
17 with my high school sweetheart and before I knew it, I was a mother
at 19 years old and once again on government assistance. The WIC
program was a lifeline. At 22 years old I found myself in the position
to either stay in an abusive relationship, or be a single mother with
no education, and try to support my child. I worked as a waitress,
bartender, and even laid tile to provide for my baby. But even in 2004,
I had to work two jobs that covered rent, gas, diapers and used WIC and
the SNAP program to pay for basic food needs. I quickly became
accustomed to the lifestyle I so desperately didn't want to have.
I met my ex-husband and was married with a second child recently
born by the middle of 2007. I worked as many shifts as I could between
the bar and a fast food restaurant to provide for my family. Most days
I worked 10 to 12 hours a day. In order to pay my bills, I had to make
too much money to qualify for the SNAP program. I struggled every day
of that life. The man I married was an alcoholic that just wouldn't
hold a job so providing for the kids rested on my shoulders. I
understand that my struggles are a reflection of my choices. However,
when you grow up in poverty and what most refer to as ``the ghetto'',
these are normal ways of thinking. Having a drug addict or alcoholic
spouse is the ``norm''. Having more than one family member in a gang,
in prison, or murdered is the norm. Believing that this is as good as
it will ever get for you, is the norm. And all of these things were
embedded in my mind. In 2010 I left my husband and moved in with my
mother. I had decided enough was enough. I didn't want this life for my
children. I didn't want them to struggle like I did. I wanted to teach
them a new way of life. A new normal. For 2 years I raised two babies
with the help of my mother and step-father. I had always talked about
big dreams and going back to school. But it wasn't until then and their
encouragement, for the first time, my idea of ``making it'' was bigger
than making management at a fast food restaurant.
In 2011, I enrolled in cosmetology school. I extended my schooling
an extra 4 months so I could leave early to get to work. I missed my
children every day for 14 months so I could better myself. I went to
school Tuesday through Saturday from 8:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m. and went
to work as a waitress at a country club from 3 p.m. until 12 a.m. I
again enlisted in the help of SNAP to help provide food for my children
in my mom's home.
In 2012, I graduated cosmetology school. I had never been more
proud of myself. I had actually completed something and was going to be
someone. My children and I had moved into our first duplex alone. I was
so proud that I didn't just have a job, but I had a career. Yet, I
still found myself in the position of having to work two jobs to make
it work. I had to work two jobs to keep myself off government
assistance. I had to leave my 10 year old son home at night with my 4
year old daughter to go to a job waiting tables after my shift at the
salon. I made it work. I made it work at the expense of my son's
innocence and childhood and being an absent parent when my children
needed me.
In 2013, my grandfather passed away and left me a portion of a life
insurance policy. As you can imagine, it was quite difficult to spend
the money he had left due to the circumstances I had received it. I
held that money for approximately 2 months trying to decide what to do
with it. I decided I was going to make a list of what he would have
wanted me to do. I invested in myself and decided to jump into self-
employment as a hairdresser. It took me 2 years of the most mentally
and physically exhausting work I had ever done; but I did it. I was
going to become everything everyone said I'd never be. I was self-
sustaining, and not on any form of assistance. I was living just on the
other side of the county line to keep my kids out of ``the ghetto'',
and they were out. They were in good schools and not growing up the way
I had. I sheltered them from that lifestyle. I wanted to set the
standard of what was an acceptable lifestyle and set new standards for
myself.
In 2015, I had my third child. I had to work harder than I ever had
before. I found myself alone in a pregnancy not wanting to ask anyone
for help. I did it though. I had saved money through the pregnancy for
time off and I never did need anyone's help. But it cost my kids 7
months of their childhood. After 3 weeks of having Jack in September of
2015, I went directly back to work to avoid requesting assistance with
bills, food and housing. I felt that I had reached the peak of what was
available to me in Kansas. I had started noticing the influx in the
crime rates and my 15 year old son starting to show interest in being
around the same type of people I grew up with. At that point I decided
to pack up my kids, everything I could in a 6 x 12 trailer and move
to Florida. I just wanted a better life for them and myself and there
was nothing I wouldn't do for that.
As with any big move there are struggles. The struggles I had
included the ability to not only sustain a living situation for myself,
but for the kids as well. I obtained a job at a hair salon locally.
Because it was an hourly pay, and I had now worked for a corporation,
not only was I not making enough money, but I was also being worked
hours of the day that my children were home and needed me. They needed
my help with homework, cooking dinner, their 7 month old infant
brother, but mostly they just needed me. Again, I enlisted in the help
of the SNAP program. I only needed the assistance for 6 months before I
decided to get back into self-employment to better care for my
children.
Up until the COVID shut down, I did not need any assistance from
the SNAP program. As a small business owner, when the salon was shut
down, I was not eligible for unemployment. I was flat out of a job. My
mother gave me a credit card to utilize to pay my bills but I still had
to figure out how to make the monthly payment. When I found out that
the State of Florida waived work requirements for SNAP, I immediately
applied. SNAP was the only way myself and my children were provided
food through the shutdown. When it was time for me to requalify after
the salon opened back up, even though I was only working at 50% of my
normal clientele, I no longer qualified for the same amount. I had hit
the benefits cliff and I couldn't understand why. I could barely pay my
rent. I realized I was being measured on a scale of my total incoming
dollars instead of what I had to pay out to work and buy supplies. I
couldn't seem to find my way through the website to find and submit a
profit and loss worksheet. I had literally lost all hope and slowly I
was losing everything just trying to keep a place of employment and
feed my children. I obtained a resource packet from Miss Angela who
runs head start at my son's school for VPK. It was there I found an
actual phone number to someone who could help me sign up for SNAP. As I
hysterically cried to her on the phone that I don't know which way to
turn or how to get help, she asked me to join her at the local library
so she could assist me in being accepted into the SNAP program.
The aftermath of COVID is much worse than the COVID shutdown
itself. People have either decided that getting their hair done just
isn't a necessity, or they're still scared to get out in public. I
still work on about 50% of my original clientele. I barely pay my bills
and am standing on a prayer when it comes to my rent and the COVID
restrictions keeping me from being evicted. I don't choose to be on
SNAP. I never have. I request help from the program when there's
nowhere else to turn. Throughout my life, SNAP has been the only reason
myself or my children have had the ability to eat like normal human
beings should. We are not lesser of people because we need help. We
don't want to reside in a state of poverty. Sometimes life just happens
and more often than not it's happening to people who are trying to
break the cycle of poverty. We are trying to set a new standard for
ourselves, and our children. There is no amount of pride not worth
giving up if that means our children do better than we did. SNAP is
such an important program to make sure no one goes hungry whether it's
due to sudden loss of employment or being a product of environment and
not knowing any other way. With the resources supplied by the
government, I believe we can get better. We can do better. But we need
help. As a whole, with help from programs like SNAP and parents who
just want better for their children, we can push for a ``better'' next
generation. But we can't make that change alone.
Thank you,
Rachel Wilson.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Ms. Wilson, for sharing
your very heartfelt statement with us today.
That is all of our witnesses. At this time, we will
recognize Members for questioning. The Members on the Committee
will be recognized in order of seniority, alternating between
Majority and Minority Members. You will be recognized for 5
minutes each in order to allow us to get to as many questions
as possible. Please keep your microphones muted until you are
recognized in order to minimize background noise.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Ms. Davis, we are pleased to welcome you to the House
Committee on Agriculture for this Subcommittee hearing. Thank
you so much for sharing your story. Your story is my story.
Your testimony clearly demonstrates that SNAP is a crucial
support system which enables recipients to have peace of mind
while working towards economic stability for themselves and
their families.
You testified that you recently hit the benefits cliff,
which is an arbitrary dollar amount, above which you are cut
off from benefits, just as you are beginning to feel stable.
Can you describe to this Committee how the end of your SNAP
eligibility is affecting your household budget, even as your
income from working has increased?
Ms. Davis. Sure, I can do that. I can honestly say getting
help from SNAP helps us a lot, but when we start doing better,
we feel like we are being punished. So, I can say for myself, I
really felt like I was being punished for just getting a little
bit ahead, and I was still struggling. So, even though I
achieved something, it was like they took it away, they took
away something that I still needed. I wasn't financially ready
to be financially steady to pay for everything.
So yes, I felt like I was being punished.
The Chairwoman. Thank you. Your testimony also demonstrates
that SNAP was just one part of your family's larger budget and
economic stability. In Montgomery County where you live, it is
a very high cost of living. Have you had to make any other
sacrifices to stay in Montgomery County, and how did the end of
your benefits impact your housing considerations?
Ms. Davis. Yes, I love Montgomery County, but the prices
are high. I have to live with my mom. I tried applying for
programs, other programs, but I am not qualified for it because
of my salary from MCPS.
So, it is a real struggle. I think of the education in
Montgomery County for my son, and that is what keeps me going.
So, that is why I stay in Montgomery County.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Ms. Wilson, you had similar testimony about a working mom
who through no fault of your own, your hours were cut, and you
are trying to do everything that you can. It is important to
note that this is the face of our SNAP beneficiaries right now,
our children. Not people who willingly choose not to work. As
you said, kids should have the responsibility of just being
children.
Can you please describe how this stress has affected you
and your children as you struggled with reduced hours with less
of an income and still trying to put food on the table?
Ms. Wilson. Absolutely. I have not allowed my kids to feel
the stress of what is going on. I have taken it on all on
myself. I apologize if I get a little bit emotional. I have
spent countless hours locked in the bathroom crying, trying to
figure out how to take care of my kids without them
understanding what is going on; countless hours in my bedroom,
not wanting them to feel these things.
I remember when I first called SNAP and I first got in
contact with a gal who helped with Second Harvest, and I called
her completely ugly crying because I didn't know what I could
do. My work hours being cut down, I haven't been able to make
my rent payment. The only thing that is saving me right now is
the COVID restrictions of eviction. I have been working on
paying bills and my car payment, making sure that I can get to
and from work and my kids can get to school, and making sure
there is food provided on the table. The fact that SNAP has
been able to provide those benefits for my kids to eat healthy
meals, I have been able to pay a few more bills. I have been
able to make small payments to my landlord.
But aside from that, my kids--I have not allowed them to
feel that because I don't want them to feel that. It is not
their job to feel that. They don't need to know what I am
struggling through. They just need to live healthy lives as
kids and worry about their studies and worry about mom being
home with them, and cooking dinner and helping with homework.
That is their job.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Ms. Wilson.
That is all I have for questioning. I thank both of you for
sharing your stories here with the Committee today. I now
recognize the gentleman from Nebraska for 5 minutes, the
Ranking Member, Mr. Bacon, for his questions.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate this.
I appreciate, too, Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson's stories and
sharing their journey. Again, it does show where SNAP provides
a very valuable and important role in this time where people
need this, and COVID surely caused more of these situations.
So, we thank you for sharing.
I, too, am concerned about the cliff effect, and it does
hold some people back from trying to get more employment. So,
we need to relook at how we can modify policies to minimize the
problems of cliff effects. So, I appreciate you sharing.
My first question is to Dr. Bauer, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, and
Dr. Whitford. As you all know, in response to the pandemic
Congress provided nearly $70 billion in additional nutrition
programming and funds. Were any of you surveyed about these
needs or asked to provide testimony during this pandemic in the
lead up of all this aid? Thank you.
I will go first to Dr. Bauer.
Dr. Bauer. In my role at a think tank, one of my jobs is to
provide education and evidence to policymakers, so yes, I did
speak publicly on potential Federal response to the COVID-19
pandemic on nutrition assistance programs.
Mr. Bacon. Did you say you talked to people on the
Agriculture Committee here?
Dr. Bauer. I did, yes.
Mr. Bacon. Okay, thank you.
How about you, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett?
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. I did not speak to Members of the
Agriculture Committee during these changes.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you.
Dr. Whitford?
Dr. Whitford. No, I did not and was not asked.
Mr. Bacon. One of the concerns we had is we didn't have
Committee hearings as we were determining $70 billion in new
spending.
A question for you three again. Just recently it was
reported that 43 percent of businesses say they want to hire
but they can't find employees right now. Forty-three percent,
it is a pretty huge number. But yet last month, unemployment
went up a little bit. I know businesses are closing early
because they have a lack of employees.
So, my question is do you think government has any role in
this, or have we inadvertently had a negative impact here? Dr.
Bauer, I know you were suggesting otherwise in your testimony,
but I am curious of your thoughts.
Dr. Bauer. Yes, I both suggest otherwise and the evidence
suggests otherwise.
SNAP is a program that stimulates the economy, helping to
turn the tide from contraction to expansion so every dollar
that the Federal Government and SNAP generates more than a
dollar, more like $1.50 or $1.70 in local economic activity.
One of the reasons that SNAP is so effective is because of the
way that it is targeted to families that need the benefit and
want to spend those benefits quickly. And so, SNAP is an
integral part of getting the economy back on track.
Mr. Bacon. Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, what are your thoughts? We
have 43 percent of businesses wanting to hire, yet unemployment
went up. Has government inadvertently caused that? Thank you.
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Thank you so much for the question. I
want to echo the comments of Dr. Bauer that SNAP really boosts
local economy. It supports local farmers, small businesses, all
size food retailers.
So, there was a study done by the USDA that showed a $1
billion investment in SNAP would lead to nearly 500 new
agricultural jobs, and over $32 million in revenue for the
agricultural industry. So, if you have ever seen a child who
has used their--like what we call them locally as Bounty Bucks
to get--try a mango, try fresh fruits and vegetables, to get
collard greens at the local farmers' markets. Schools do it,
families do it, and it is so encouraging for children.
But I have another piece to the response. So, as of
December 2020, 13 percent of child centers and family care
homes remained closed. We know high quality childcare is
essential for women, mothers, and primary caregivers to return
to the workforce. This is our key structural responsibility
that must be met with policies that provide safety for early
care and education providers, as well as prioritize high
quality and accessible childcare so that children can be
healthy and develop well.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett.
I have to give Dr. Whitford a chance. I have 30 seconds
left.
Dr. Whitford?
Dr. Whitford. I just want to say four words to remember,
``No way'' and ``Hell no.'' Now, these were the words spoken by
two individuals just recently at our mission when they were
approached, and I said, ``Hey, how are things going?'' The one
guy said, ``Well yeah, everything is going great.'' I said,
``Are you employed?'' He said, ``No way,'' and then began to
tell me how he thought that employment would actually hurt the
benefits that he is receiving. I shared that in a staff
meeting. One of my directors said that is interesting. I had
another conversation with another person, and they said almost
something very similar. They said hell no. Now, one of those
guys actually pulled out his food stamp card when I was meeting
with him and he said, ``They put $300 on this card last month.
I don't even know what I'm going to do with it.'' Then he said
I think I will go down and buy some----
The Chairwoman. All right, Dr. Whitford. I am sorry to cut
you off, but the gentleman's time has expired.
Dr. Whitford. Okay. That is not any way to stimulate the
economy.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Dr. Whitford.
I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much.
Before I recognize the next witness, I just want to add
that while the economy is starting to recover as businesses
reopen, there are still eight million fewer jobs than there
were before the pandemic, and jobs are down more than twice as
much in low-paying industries compared to those that pay more.
The majority of jobs lost because of the pandemic were in
industries paying low to average wages, and not providing
health coverage. The very jobs that many of our public benefit
recipients work.
Also, there is the issue of childcare. So, there is so much
to consider when we talk about unemployment and the economy and
returning to work.
I now recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms.
Adams, for 5 minutes for your questioning. Ms. Adams, can you
please unmute and begin your testimony?
Ms. Adams. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Can you hear me?
The Chairwoman. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Adams. Great. Thank you so much to you and the Ranking
Member for hosting the hearing today. Thank you to our
witnesses as well for their testimony. I am delighted that we
are having this discussion.
Right now, 16.6 percent of households and 22 percent of
households with children in the U.S. are facing food
insecurity. In my state alone, 1.5 million people currently
depend on SNAP to put food on their tables. And in the county
that I represent, there are more than 150,000 people receiving
SNAP benefits, which is an increase of more than 50,000 since
March of last year. So, it is clear that there is a hunger
crisis in our nation and while SNAP is a critical lifeline to
families, the current benefit level is not simply inadequate.
The average benefit is only $1.40 per person per meal, and so
that is why soon I am going to be reintroducing the Closing the
Meal Gap, which permanently increases benefits by 30 percent,
and eliminates the time limit on benefits because working hard
is just not enough if you don't make enough. I know that
firsthand. When I was a student raising two children on my own,
I depended on SNAP to put food on my table, and I might not be
here today if I didn't get that help when I needed it.
So, as you know, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the
difficulties faced by those with the least, including people
receiving SNAP.
So, my question is, do you think that flexibilities such as
telephonic signatures, face-to-face interview waivers, and
automatic extensions of the certification periods were
significant contributors to the success of local governments
managing a large influx in enrollees, and ensuring that the
program continued to run smoothly during the pandemic and do
you believe that it would be beneficial for some or all
flexibilities, if they were made permanent?
Ms. Wilson?
Ms. Wilson. I apologize. I had to unmute my camera.
Ms. Adams. I understand.
Ms. Wilson. I don't believe that assistance should be made
permanent; however, I do believe that they should be based off
of a sliding scale fee. I need to go back to the previous
speaker before you who had stated that somebody said hell no,
he is not going to get a job because of the benefits.
Well, I will tell you as a mother, the one thing that I am
fully aware of at all times is how much money I make, because
if I make $1 more than what SNAP assistance says that I can
make, which is $2,300 a month gross, to raise two children, I
will lose $500 a month assistance in SNAP benefits. So, $2,300
a month minus taxes will not even pay my rent and my electric
bill, and that is a very terrifying thing.
Ms. Adams. Yes. Go ahead.
Ms. Wilson. No, please, if you had another question, please
go ahead because I was----
Ms. Adams. Well, I just want to comment that what you said
in your testimony really did hit me hard, that throughout your
life SNAP has been the only reason that you and your children
have had the ability to eat like normal human beings should
eat. And of course, that is a message our Committee, and more
broadly, Congress needs to hear.
In my district here in Mecklenburg County, families utilize
SNAP each month to keep food on their tables, and I know how
critical that these programs are, and they are a lifeline to
families who are struggling. So, can you talk a little bit
about the importance of the program to your own family, and to
ensuring that you can put food on your table, and how has it
helped you get by during these difficult times?
Ms. Wilson. Absolutely. Growing up in poverty, SNAP has
been a huge lifeline for me, especially growing up as a child.
There are several times in my life that I have done productive
actions in my life, trying to make sure that my children grew
up in a different lifestyle. There are a lot of times that I
have needed SNAP benefits to help me get to where I am going in
life.
Before the pandemic, I did not need SNAP assistance because
SNAP had assisted me throughout my lifetime to get to a
position in my life where I can provide for my children.
Ms. Adams. Okay, thank you.
Dr. Whitford, in your testimony you imply that SNAP and
Federal assistance programs of charity have no place in
government. I respectfully wholly disagree. SNAP and our
Federal safety net programs are a hand-up, not a hand-out, and
many of us on this Committee once utilized the program.
So, do you believe that private charities and nonprofits
could immediately and effectively provide for the 42 million
Americans who are currently supported by SNAP?
Dr. Whitford. That is a great question.
[The information referred to is located on p. 69.]
The Chairwoman. Unfortunately, the time has expired for the
answer, but you can submit the question in writing so that you
can share your response for the gentlelady from North Carolina.
Ms. Adams. Great. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I yield
back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you. Thank you so much for your
testimony.
At this time, I call on the gentleman from Arkansas,
Representative Crawford. If you are----
Mr. Crawford. Yes, ma'am.
The Chairwoman. Oh, there you are. If you can unmute and
ask your questions.
Mr. Crawford. Thank you.
I think we can all agree that SNAP is a useful tool for
those in need. I would say, though, that if it were the be all,
end all of nutrition requirements, we probably wouldn't be
having this hearing today. I think that we wouldn't need food
banks if SNAP was performing at peak level and answering all
the nutrition needs of the food-insecure. And so, there are
some issues that I think are fair game and should be talked
about.
And we also know that the administration of SNAP benefits
oftentimes are not effective, and I will use that as a kind way
of saying that sometimes they are mismanaged.
But my point is this. I haven't heard a heck of a lot of
talk about the benefits of food banks and we are talking about
the need for nutrition in the context of healthy foods, fruits
and vegetables, fresh foods and things like that. In many cases
in food deserts, our constituents rely exclusively on
convenience stores where they are, by definition, consuming
almost exclusively processed foods. So, their nutrition is
compromised as a result, and it is because in those remote
areas like in the first district of Arkansas that I represent,
sometimes you just can't get a grocery store in some of these
smaller towns. It is just cost prohibitive.
I am just wondering if anybody wants to weigh in on how we
reach these remote areas, rural communities that don't have the
resources? How do we reach them with nutritious foods like
fresh fruits and vegetables and other proteins, in a meaningful
way that makes them less reliant on processed foods? That seems
to me to be a problem.
And then another question that has come up is this benefits
cliff that we talk about. I am still looking for someone to
help us figure out why we don't taper those benefits to match
your income? If you are in the situation where you rely on
benefits and you walk right up to the edge of that cliff on
your job, but you are afraid to go any further because you are
about to lose all those benefits, and so, that constrains you
from being able to advance in your career for fear that you are
going to lose any help that you might receive. I would think
that we would need to match benefits proportionately and
inversely proportionate to your income, so that you can make
your way off of that, taper those benefits down, and obviously
it is the end goal being that you don't need that, and now you
can allow others to come in and benefit from those programs and
repeat the process as it is necessary. I don't think we have
had meaningful conversations about how we taper those benefits
off, how we encourage and incentivize more consumption of fresh
fruit, vegetables, and other protein sources. What are we doing
to educate consumers about how to prepare more nutritious meals
so they can benefit--and these taxpayer resources that are
expended to help meet those nutritional requirements can then
be done in a more efficient and effective manner?
And so, in the last minute and a half that I have, anybody
wants to weigh in on that, I am going to stop and I am all
ears.
Dr. Bauer. So, just very quickly. In terms of rewarding
work through the SNAP Program, as I said, on your way to the
benefit cliff, actually work is quite rewarded and total
household resources increase as you take on extra hours, as you
get a raise, in fact, as you enter the workforce. It is better
to be on SNAP and working than it is to not.
In terms of tapering off the benefit cliff, broad-based
categorical eligibility is the primary mechanism that we do
that now, and that is the strategy going forward.
In terms of improving nutrition, all of our best research,
including federally and Congressionally mandated randomized
controlled trials so that increasing benefit adequacy is how
families purchase more dark leafy greens and fruits and
vegetables. Families know what they want to buy. They need the
resources to do it. And so, increasing benefit adequacy will
improve nutrition and diet quality.
Mr. Crawford. Well, I appreciate the input. I wish we had
more time. I have 10 seconds left, enough time to say thank
you, Madam Chairwoman, and I will yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mr. Crawford, and I am
encouraged by your testimony. It sounds like an area where we
can find some bipartisan collaboration, because the program is
already means tested. However, the benefits have been found to
be too small. So, we want to encourage work and want to support
people as they are stabilizing their families and getting back
to work. I look forward to having some productive discussions
on this Committee on that very topic.
With that, I will now recognize the gentleman from
Illinois. Mr. Rush, if you would unmute your microphone and
begin your testimony.
Mr. Rush. I want to thank you, Madam Chairwoman. This is
really an exceptional hearing, and at my church, Madam
Chairwoman, we have two sayings. ``You can't teach what you
don't know'' and ``You can't lead where you won't go.''
Your testimony this morning certainly was indicative of the
type of leadership for this Subcommittee that you want to
exhibit. I have always thought, if you want to be a shepherd,
then you have to smell like sheep. And so, Madam Chairwoman,
again, thank you.
Ms. Wilson, Ms. Davis, thank you for the courage of your
testimony. Your stories, in many ways, reminded me of my own
childhood, and the lengths that my mother went to on behalf of
me and my family. My mother taught school. My mother was a
beautician, a business owner, and she took college courses on
the side. My family was always on the edge financially, and at
times, we depended on government benefits, the AFDC, and
others. My mother worked hard to provide for her family, as do
both of you, and as do millions of other families and other
mothers on SNAP.
Food security is also personal to me for other reasons. In
the early 1970s, I helped create and administer the Free
Breakfast for Children Program in Chicago as a member of the
Black Panther Party. In 1972, throughout our nation, the Black
Panther Party was feeding 25,000 children free breakfast every
morning before they went to school. All that is to say that I
understand firsthand the importance of food security programs.
It is clear to me that we have much work to do. The
pandemic exacerbated already existing hunger issues. In
Illinois, 22 percent of kids in Cook County and 17 percent of
children in Will County faced food insecurity in 2020. That
number is far too high, and Madam Chairwoman, it goes without
saying that I stand ready to work with you to alleviate these
issues.
Dr. Bauer, it is disheartening for me to see the high
percentage of Black and Hispanic adults who responded that
sometime often the case that in the past week: ``the children
in my household were not eating enough because we just couldn't
afford enough food.'' I am working on programs to eliminate
that program by covering hot or prepared food. Can you describe
how this change will help reduce food insecurity?
Dr. Bauer. Sure. So, anything that is going to make food
more affordable helps benefits stretch more, but I think that
it is a combination of programs that is going to improve food
security among children over the coming year.
The devastation of school closures meant the loss of
prepared school meal programs and Congress, in its wisdom,
passed the Pandemic EBT Program. And my research found that
pandemic EBT reduced very-low-food security among children by
30 percent in the week that it went out. Its reauthorization,
and now it is really rolling out the door, and that is going to
do a tremendous amount.
It also makes sense that we always know that schools are
closed in the summer, and converting pandemic EBT into summer
EBT for this summer is well validated and research- and
evidence-based, and the combination of prepared meals and
additional EBT benefits targeted to kids----
Mr. Rush. Dr. Bauer, I have another question I need to ask
you, and my time is running out.
Ms. Wilson, Ms. Davis, in your testimony and in your
experience, does SNAP provide enough flexibility to provide
necessities for your families? Are there any changes in regards
to the flexibility of SNAP that you recommend?
Ms. Wilson. The only thing that I would recommend within
SNAP is that they work on a sliding scale fee so that I didn't
have to worry about a dollar amount that I made that would take
$500 a month away from my children. I budget my $500 a month
into 4 weeks, and I know how much of it I can spend every week
to make sure that the SNAP benefits provide for the entire
month. But if I make $1 more than the allotted amount of money,
they take $500 away from me. If it worked on a sliding scale
fee, then they took away 50 for every extra dollar that I
made, I would be able to more work myself off of SNAP benefits.
Mr. Rush. I yield back, Madam Chairwoman.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Representative Rush.
At this time, I would like to recognize the gentleman from
Tennessee, Mr. DesJarlais. If you would unmute your microphone
and please begin your questions for the witnesses.
Mr. DesJarlais. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
First, I want to thank all of our witnesses today for
taking time to share their stories with us. Your experience and
knowledge play an important role in helping this Committee do
its job, and I appreciate the chance to hear from all of you,
even if it is virtually.
I will say, it is a good day when we are finally having a
discussion about moving past the pandemic, and we are all ready
to get back to a sense of normalcy.
As we have these conversations today, the most frequent
complaint I am hearing from businesses and employers in my
district is the lack of applications and subsequent inability
to hire. This frustration spans across all industry, from steel
work [inaudible] and we have touched on that a bit today. We
have heard today in several testimonies that people don't want
to work for fear of losing benefits, because for many, this is
all they have ever known. But also, I agree with the sliding
scale approach as opposed to the cliff, because that does seem
punitive.
Dr. Whitford, you have firsthand experience at helping get
people back in to work. Could you share some of those thoughts
as we come out of COVID-19, and businesses are desperately in
need of workers, and what can this Committee do to encourage
people to seek out employment and take steps towards self-
sufficiency?
Dr. Whitford. Well, it really--for us, it is inspiration
and relationships. So, people come in our doors and we are
immediately recognizing every individual as a person made in
the image of God, and so, there is a natural tendency for all
of us to create and be productive. And so, what we found is
that it is best to just take a person up on that right as they
are coming in the doors and begin to have them helping with
whatever they can, and that is where our Worth Shop comes in.
And what we found is that out of our--just out of our emergency
shelter alone, typically we are able to see an employment rate
out of our shelter of about 60 percent, which is great when you
consider that people coming in don't have a job at all. And we
really do believe that that has to do with how we are engaging
the person as soon as we see them, and allowing them to begin
to earn things that they need.
A lot of people have not realized that they have the
ability that they have, and it requires relationship,
encouragement, and inspiration, all the things that the
private-sector is so good at doing when it comes to charity
work. And that is really the key to helping people get back
into work, but it has been a problem of late. It has been very
difficult, and again, it is one testimony after another that I
have of people who have felt like they are held back. They are
fearful, really. They are fearful. It is a true thing. I mean,
the welfare cliff is a fearful thing, and when you become
dependent upon it, it is really hard to break free from it. And
that is what we found.
So, I think that one thing that we could do, if you wanted
to help mission leaders like me who are trying to help people
get back to work, we really do need to regard this idea of
subsidiarity. It is this--from back in an encyclical written by
Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo anno, and he says: ``Just as it is
gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish
by their own initiative and industry and give it to the
community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a
grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a
greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate
organizations can do.'' In other words, there are concentric
circles of help that should exist, and when the Federal
Government is doing that work for my neighbor in need, it
disrupts things that are not going to allow us to build the
relationships that we need to, and inspire and encourage people
to get a job.
Mr. DesJarlais. I appreciate your testimony.
Madam Chairwoman, it looks like--okay, I see the clock is
moving. It looked like it got stuck. I got a little bit of time
left.
Dr. Whitford, you had mentioned in your testimony instances
of individuals selling their SNAP benefits for 50 on the
dollar as well as able-bodied individuals willing to work, but
only under the table so as not to interfere with their SNAP
eligibility.
It goes without saying, that is not how these benefits are
intended to function. Could you talk a little bit about that,
and specifically any changes that would help the program
function as intended as a temporary handout to those who need
it most with the end goal being self sufficiency and not a
lifetime of government dependency? I think you have about 45
seconds.
Dr. Whitford. Well, we have to get as close to the problem
as possible. Again, going back to this idea of a neighbor
knowing his neighbor best, we really do have to allow for--my
recommendation would be let's start with letting the states
actually administer these programs, and we would be able to
work--I would be able to work with my legislators in my state
to see if we could do some things that would actually improve
how the program is working and how we could actually help
people get where they want to be.
So, that is, again, we are just seeing a continuous problem
of people that are getting hung up. Much of it is a fear factor
and dependency.
Mr. DesJarlais. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much. As I am listening to the
testimony, I am reminded that the scripture also says: ``When I
was hungry, you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you
gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me
in, I needed clothes and you clothed me.'' So, that is also a
part of our responsibility.
With that, thank you so much for your testimony. I think
the next--is Mr. Sablan on? No, he is not.
So, we will move on to the next Member on this side. I now
recognize the gentleman from California. Mr. Carbajal, if you
will unmute your microphone and begin your questioning.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Let me just start by saying how I personally know how
critical food assistance can be for families. When I was young,
these programs actually helped reduce the financial barriers
for my parents who were struggling to get by, making minimum
wage working as farmworkers, my father was. They worked so hard
to give my siblings and I a better way of life. It wasn't for
the lack of not working. He was working 6, sometimes 7 days a
week, but it was difficult making ends meet.
I was fortunate to have had an opportunity to graduate from
a great university--first attend university, then graduate,
serve our country in the Marine Corps, serve my community in
local government, and now in Congress.
Ensuring that all children have consistent access to fresh
and nutritious food year-round is critical for our kids to be
able to grow up healthy and prepare for any career they might
choose, including maybe even serving in Congress.
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, how can the SNAP Program be enhanced
and modernized to incentivize families with children to
purchase and incorporate fresh and nutritious food consistently
in their diet?
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Thank you so much for your remarks and
for sharing your story, and the invitation to this question.
The work that I do with Vital Village Network really arises
from the question you shared. I am trained as a pediatrician. I
should be in a clinic right now, but you know what? We spent
$8.3 trillion on healthcare last year. The vast majority is
spent on treating chronic illnesses. There actually is strong
evidence to show that SNAP is a benefit that actually helps
prevent the development of metabolic syndromes in adulthood
which are associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease,
obesity, and overweight. So, there are tremendous benefits to
the early childhood investment. Investing in nutritious food,
reducing stress and distress experienced by parents, and really
calling hunger what it is.
I don't know of a single person who experienced chronic
food insecurity or hunger that doesn't remember what that felt
like. We actually can consider chronic food insecurity and
hunger an extremely adverse experience and potentially
traumatic experience.
So, it is really my belief that we need to work much more
collaboratively to build a more resilient food system, and SNAP
is a big piece of that. But also, really engaging parents and
members of the community in helping to modify the policies so
that it doesn't do the things that Ms. Wilson and Ms. Davis
have shared around creating higher degrees of stress, higher
degrees of anxiety by removing benefits as folks become
socially mobile and advance.
Thank you.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. I am just
trying to get a couple other questions in there, so thank you
very much.
Ms. Wilson, I really appreciate your courage to share your
personal story with us. Nobody wants to be dependent on public
assistance and I appreciate your sharing your story with us. I
also appreciate my colleague, Mr. Crawford's, comments about
how we can work to develop a better system where we don't
penalize people, because it would be foolish for somebody who
is going to be a few dollars away from being cut off to want to
give up that benefit when you really rely on that. I know that.
So, the question should be how do we help people transition
or enhance their quality of life without penalizing them? And,
we need to do better in that respect. So, I appreciate
Representative Crawford's comments, and I sure hope that I can
work--we can work together to address this issue as the
Chairwoman also said earlier.
One of the main ways we can make sure that SNAP fulfills
its mission to fight hunger is to ensure that the benefit is
adequate. Often, SNAP recipients still rely on food banks and
other supports to make ends meet for their families. Like much
of our country, rural areas in my district on the Central Coast
face specific challenges, such as cost to travel to get food or
other hardships.
Dr. Bauer, how can we make sure that SNAP allotments
reflect the time and financial costs families face to purchase
their groceries, and what other changes would you recommend to
make sure families have a benefit adequate to meet their needs
for food?
The Chairwoman. Thank you. I am sorry, Dr. Bauer, before
you begin to answer, the time has expired, so we will send that
question and you can submit a written answer for the record, if
you don't mind.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. You are right, I
am out of time. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you. Thank you so much.
I now recognize the gentlelady from Missouri, Mrs.
Hartzler. If you would unmute your microphone and begin your
questioning.
Mrs. Hartzler. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes, and thank you
for each of our witnesses here. I appreciate the insights and
the heart that you all have to try to make everyone have a good
life and have food.
Dr. Whitford, I appreciate your heart and your story of you
and your wife and the ministry that you started and dedicated
yourself to right here in Missouri. I know that a lot of
ministries and a lot of organizations are moving past just
providing food, and including moving on to the workforce
development and other things in order to help people succeed in
life. Could you expand a little bit on how you are helping
individuals in your ministry connect to work and to a better
life?
Dr. Whitford. Yes, absolutely. Thank you.
So, we have a program called Forge, it is a center for
virtue and work, and this is a long-term program that is
focused on character development and work readiness. It really
is a workforce development program.
So, we have different tracks. Maybe somebody who doesn't
have their GED begins to work on that. If not, they go toward a
national career readiness certification track, if they already
have their GED. They go through a lot of classes like
stewardship and economics, government and legal living, healthy
living, seven steps to Christian maturity, and the like, and
then they move more into their work ready phase, and that
includes things like doing functional capacity evaluations to
determine what a person is able to do. We go through
personality assessments. We do computer literacy training, mock
interviews, resume writing, and a lot of other things that go
along with that, getting ready to go into the workforce. And
then those individuals will bridge into our community of
partnerships really with local employers, and know that they go
through a season of coaching. It is an internship of sorts for
8 weeks, and many of them end up right there because as you
know, base employment is a great need these days, and a lot of
employers are just looking for folks who will show up to work
on time and be ready to go and be consistent and reliable. And
that is certainly one of the things that we are doing in our 12
to 15 month long-term program.
Mrs. Hartzler. That is wonderful. So, it sounds like a
workforce development program that you have established
yourself. Are you working with any government programs or are
these all just generated within your own organization?
Dr. Whitford. Well, certainly there are some clients that
we are engaging who are receiving some help from other
government organizations, but we really have decided we want to
try to do as much as we can from a voluntary basis from the
private-sector, engaging our local community to be involved on
a volunteer level. And so, we have developed a lot of things
that there might be analogous government counterparts, but I
just believe that the private-sector can do an incredible
amount if given the opportunity.
Mrs. Hartzler. There was a wonderful powerful scripture
shared a minute ago that I know all of us take to heart, but
can you just clarify when Jesus was talking about how we should
feed the hungry and clothe them and your brother in need. Was
he saying that the government should do that, or who was he
saying should do that?
Dr. Whitford. Well, no, he was talking to individuals and
that is the key point to be made. In fact, the name of our
ministry, Watered Gardens, comes out of Isaiah 58 where God is
speaking to his people to be really charitable, to feed and to
clothe and to shelter. But in Isaiah 58:10, God says ``If you
will extend your soul to the hungry.'' So, He wants us to do
more than feed. He really wants us to develop relationships
with people. ``If you will extend your soul to the hungry, . .
. You shall be like a watered garden, And like a spring of
water, whose waters do not fail.'' It is a beautiful passage.
Mrs. Hartzler. Absolutely.
Have you talked to any other entities across this country
about your program to replicate it? I know that you are serving
a four-state region, but we need to have programs like yours
all over.
Dr. Whitford. Yes, right now we are talking with leaders in
different communities around the nation to consider even our
Worth Shop model. Could that be something that as a
collaborative that could occur in a community where
organizations, churches, missions could refer people as a way
to restore dignity and give an opportunity for people to earn
what they need.
Mrs. Hartzler. Great. I appreciate your work and your
heart, and thank you very much.
I will yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mrs. Hartzler, and thank
you for that lesson in virtue, because again, I agree that
Jesus was talking to the people and we are a government of the
people, for the people, by the people who represent the people.
So, we are those people.
With that, I will now recognize the gentlelady from New
Hampshire. Ms. Kuster, if you will unmute your microphone and
begin your questions.
Ms. Kuster. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I am so grateful,
and while I appreciate the discussion on virtue, I do want to
reorient the Committee back to the task at hand, which is the
incredible opportunity, but also the obligation, to care for
those in need in our community. And in my case, that includes
this important government program to feed children, because of
a heartbreaking pandemic.
Food insecurity is plaguing my state, and while I
appreciate the role of the churches, I think that we as the
government certainly have an important role in this as well to
ensure equity and to make sure that everyone is kindly welcome
as we do in New Hampshire.
I want to take this opportunity to elevate SNAP, because
this program has never been more essential than it has been in
the past year. COVID-19 has exacerbated food insecurity. In my
district and across our state, approximately one in seven
people, including one in five children, have been struggling
with hunger during the pandemic. And thankfully, Federal
nutrition programs like SNAP have been providing critical
support to families, both during, prior to, and after COVID-19.
Let's remember that SNAP is not a luxurious program. In
2019, the average SNAP benefit for recipients in my state was
approximately $1.22 per meal, and I would certainly challenge
anyone on this Committee to make a meal, a nutritious meal, for
$1.22. But even that modest amount can make a difference when a
family has to pinch pennies to put food on the table every
night, and I appreciate our witnesses, and indeed, our Members
on the Committee talking about their own personal experience
with supplemental nutrition.
As the pandemic rocked our economy, many had to rely on
SNAP for the very first time, and I participated in food drives
and in the distribution of food during COVID, and met many
families who were in line to pick up food for the very first
time. To keep up with this need, I have been proud to champion
increases in food assistance programming in the COVID response
packages passed by Congress. We must also continue to
destigmatize participation in SNAP. Each SNAP participant has a
story, from serious health ailments to the lack of affordable,
accessible childcare, to the lack of jobs in an economically
hard-hit region, and all of these challenges, and many more,
represent broader problems that deserve the attention of
Congress.
But in the meantime, Americans still need to eat. Efforts
to cut or weaken SNAP, in my view, are simply cruel. No one
should have to go hungry in America. SNAP is a critical
lifeline to those who need modest support feeding themselves
and their families.
On that note, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, thank you for sharing
your knowledge and expertise with us today. I appreciated your
description of the multiple challenges that face low-income
mothers and children during the pandemic, and I am particularly
interested in your views of a trauma-informed approach. I am
the founder and co-chair of the bipartisan taskforce to end
sexual violence, and I spent years advocating for first
responders, courts, and other stakeholders to have a trauma-
informed approach to avoid re-traumatizing survivors.
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, can you elaborate about how your
trauma-informed approach works in relation to food insecurity
and Federal nutrition programs, and what your recommendations
are?
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Thank you for the question, and I am
honored to answer this question. It is critically important,
and it really begins with science. We understand that chronic
and cumulative adversities, particularly in early childhood,
have a critical impact on the developing bodies and brains of
children.
If we think about chronic food insecurity, which often is
associated with housing insecurity, inadequate or insufficient
or low-quality childcare, poverty, and a number of adversities,
we are actually--we also actually have evidence that investing
in mitigating and preventing those early childhood adversities
have numerous impacts on health, developmental, and life
course, so who people will become as adults. Will they go on to
higher education? What skills and capacities will they bring to
parents, and how will they engage in our economy in productive
ways in the future?
Frederick Douglass said it is easier to build strong
children than to repair broken men, and that is what we are
talking about. Why would we ever allow a child to go hungry or
to be denied a benefit? So, a trauma-informed approach really,
one, understands that neuroscience, and then says well, wow,
our food system is not resilient. It is insufficient----
The Chairwoman. All right, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, I have to
cut you off.
Ms. Kuster. Thank you, and I yield back. Thank you so much.
The Chairwoman. Thank you. I am sorry about that.
I now recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird, if
he is on.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. My camera should be
up, and so----
The Chairwoman. Your camera is not on, sir. You have to
turn on your camera first.
Mr. Baird. Okay.
The Chairwoman. There you go. Thank you. I now recognize
you to ask your questions.
Mr. Baird. So, my question really goes to----
The Chairwoman. Just a minute. Do we still have the timer?
Your camera just went off again. There you go. Okay. I now
recognize Mr. Baird.
Mr. Baird. Okay. So, what I really want to know, Dr.
Whitford, is a lot of programs start off with being food
distribution, and then later they move into other areas. How
have you been able to look for making access to other
supportive organizations with regard to helping [inaudible]?
Dr. Whitford. Representative Baird, I am so sorry. You will
have to re-ask the question. You were cutting in and out. I
just couldn't get it.
Mr. Baird. Okay. A lot of organizations start off
distributing food. Can you hear me now okay?
Dr. Whitford. Yes, I can.
Mr. Baird. Okay. They start off distributing food, and then
they move and evolve into additional identification and
assistance with helping those individuals on the SNAP Program
with other areas that are beneficial and helpful. So, would you
care to elaborate on how you have looked for ways to help
individuals, not only because of the SNAP and the food issue
which is extremely important, but then how to look for other
sources of benefit and help? Did that come through okay?
Dr. Whitford. Yes, I think so, and I hope I understand your
question correctly.
One of the things that we have really worked hard on is a
collaborative model in our community. So, many years ago, I
launched an online networking tool in our city that we actually
help other communities get connected with now too where
organizations are sharing information, not only just on
individuals that they are helping so that we can better
understand how to steward our resources more effectively and
target our charity more accurately, but it also allows us to
know what is being offered in the community and what would be
the next best source of help for an individual.
So, again, there is no one--I think we should get away
from, like, a one-stop shop idea. In this day and age, we don't
need to be thinking in centralization of services. I really
believe that we can connect together, using technology that is
available, and be able to operate more cohesively as a unit in
a community. Because although Watered Gardens, my ministry,
does a lot of different stuff, we don't cover every base. And
so, there is a need to collaborate with other organizations.
I hope that answers that question.
Mr. Baird. Yes, it does.
I guess I would like to move to Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson. I
really appreciated them sharing their stories. So, as a Member
of this Committee, I would like to have their perspective on
how we might improve the program.
Ms. Davis, if you want to start?
Ms. Davis. I would say to improve the program is the person
you are assigned to works more with their person. So, I was
assigned somebody, but I didn't really talk to them. It was
more transferring papers. I didn't know my food stamps were cut
off. I didn't get the letter until a month later, and I needed
my card. So, for them to ease the process of you slowly not
getting your food stamps, that communication, that is what I
would say needs to improve.
Mr. Baird. Fine-tuning the efficacy and the efficiency of
the delivery system, is that----
Ms. Davis. Right. So, we can adjust to get our minds
prepared to not have it anymore, because luckily I had support
to help me pay for stuff, but because I didn't know, I was
struggling and I was crying, and I had to decide, like, am I
going to keep going for my dream, or am I going to stop and try
to stay on it until I am still comfortable enough to go out
there again? And luckily, I had support to go ahead and
continue on what I was doing. So--but a lot of people are not
fortunate about that--with that.
Mr. Baird. Well, thank you for that information.
Madam Chairwoman, do I have time----
Ms. Wilson. If I may step in for a second? If I may step in
for 1 second, I think what Ms. Davis is trying to say is that a
taper off effect would be way more essential to the government
process than just a cut off.
If I may note, there are two chairmen on here who have now
noted that government assistance has put them where they are
today. Government assistance gave their families the ability to
support them and push them to be more productive members of
society, which puts them in the position that they are today.
But, what Ms. Davis was trying to say is a taper off effect
would be way more effective than just making a specific dollar
amount and being cut off from a several hundred-dollar amount
of providing food for her family.
Mr. Baird. A scalable situation is what you are really
suggesting, isn't it?
Ms. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Baird. To scale a dollar amount, yes.
Well, thank you. I appreciate all of the witnesses being
here, I appreciate the opportunity to serve on this Committee,
and I yield back, Madam Chairwoman.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Baird for your
thoughtful questions.
I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Panetta.
If you would unmute and ask your questions.
Mr. Panetta. Understood. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I
appreciate this opportunity. Let me thank all of the witnesses
for your time, for your preparation, for your willingness to
share not just your expertise, but your life experiences with
us today. So, thank you very much.
Once again, I am Jimmy Panetta. I represent the Central
Coast of California, just above my colleague, Salud Carbajal's,
district. In my district, we have a lot of bounty. Agriculture
is the number one industry. We have a lot of specialty crops, a
lot of fresh fruits and vegetables, and unfortunately,
technology hasn't caught up with the way of how you harvest
that, so we need a lot of people to do that.
However, we don't just have bounty here, we have a lot of
beauty, too. So, that makes it a little bit expensive--
actually, a lot expensive--to live here on the Central Coast.
And that is why a lot of the people that put food on our table
that are surrounded by fresh fruits and vegetables every day--
it doesn't necessarily mean that those people have access to
those same fresh fruits and vegetables.
Now, long before the pandemic, the very farmworkers that
put that food on our table provided us with that food security
throughout the pandemic, struggled disproportionately with
hunger in 2019. What I mean by that, nearly nine percent of my
constituents relied on SNAP. However, over the past year as we
have seen throughout the country, in my district, especially in
the Salinas Valley, one in four children were food-insecure.
And by the end of last year, household food insecurity spiked
to about 35 percent in certain parts of my district.
Now, I saw it firsthand when I would go out and volunteer
at the food banks and hand out the food, and seeing the growing
lines pretty much in all parts of the Central Coast. But what I
have realized and what I believe is that we couldn't food bank
our way out of the pandemic--and we cannot food bank our way
out of hunger.
And so, I am grateful that we have finally increased SNAP
benefits by 15 percent through the end of September, but we are
obviously going to have to work to do more to prevent a Federal
food cliff come that day.
Now, I believe we need to look to the future and to see how
we can improve SNAP, not just as a response to the pandemic,
but as a response to the new normal. And in doing that, I do
believe that flexibility is crucial, is critical.
So, let's take that look when we start developing the next
farm bill, let's work together so that we can ensure that this
lifeline program as we are hearing today, this lifeline program
better serves all of those who need it.
Now, I know many of the witnesses have been on for an hour
and a half, so I am just going to narrow it down. Dr. Bauer, I
am going to pick on you. The other witnesses can kind of zone
out for the remaining minutes that I have, to let you know.
Dr. Bauer, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued
a report that analyzed that more than two dozen studies among
food insecurity among college students, and took a look at
that. And it found that America's college campuses have
alarmingly high rates of hunger with 39 percent of all low-
income students experiencing food insecurity. Many low-income
students are also the parents of small children, and these
individuals work incredible hours to study, raise their
families, and pay their bills, as we heard from one of our
witnesses today. That is why earlier this year, Representatives
Gomez, Harder, and myself introduced H.R. 1919, Enhanced Access
to SNAP, or EATS Act, to make permanent changes to the rules
that have long denied SNAP to low-income Americans solely due
to their status as college students.
Dr. Bauer, can you elaborate on the ramifications of the
existing student rule, and how would amending the current law
to remove the burdensome work requirements improve student
access, particularly for first generation low-income students?
Dr. Bauer. Certainly, that is right. College students are
required to work in order to receive benefits, but what we
really have right now is a college completion crisis. We want
to do everything we can to ensure that once students enroll
they are able to complete, and part of that is having enough
food on the table.
And so, I certainly think that there is reform necessary,
including looking at the backgrounds of what students have. We
are not doing that currently when we are assessing whether
students are eligible for SNAP, including through the work
requirement, and so, there are a variety of ways that we can
better support first gen low-income students to get those
degrees, including for student parents.
Mr. Panetta. Great. Now also, I have introduced H.R. 2339,
Military and Hunger Prevention Act, which establishes basic
needs allowance to help low-income military families purchase
food. Can you elaborate on the impacts of counting the BAH as
income when determining servicemembers' SNAP eligibility?
Dr. Bauer. Certainly. What we don't want to do is punish
servicemembers for serving, and that is sort of how the formula
works right now. A basic needs allowance would allow us to
reward work, reward service by ensuring that low-income
servicemembers are eligible for SNAP when they should be.
Mr. Panetta. Great. Dr. Bauer, thank you.
My time is up. Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mr. Panetta.
I now recognize--is she on--the gentlelady from Florida,
Representative Cammack. If you will unmute your microphone and
begin to ask your questions.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate
everybody being on here today, and as my good friend and
colleague, Mr. Panetta, mentioned, the witnesses have been on
here for quite some time, and so, there may be a bit of some
repeat questions here. But the thing that I find encouraging is
that Republican, Democratic regardless, we all are looking to
get to the same end point, and we all have a little bit of a
different way of how we get there, but the fact that we all
have the same end goal is very encouraging.
I'm going to start with some prepared remarks and then jump
into a few questions, and again, apologies for some repeat
questions.
Since its inception, the goal of food assistance has always
been to provide temporary emergency relief to those most in
need, and the mix of an unprecedented pandemic in which
millions across the country found themselves suddenly out of
work, relief was expanded and waivers provided. New programs
were rolled out to both provide food for those in need, but
also provide America's producers with much-needed support in
the midst of a collapsing supply chain.
Now, like my friend and colleague Representative Panetta, I
represent a very rural district which is rich in agriculture
production, and so, we face some of the similar challenges.
One of these programs, Farmers to Families Food Box
Program, supplied these boxes of American grown produce to
families in need, and in Florida specifically, farmers and food
banks alike were very excited to participate in the Food Box
Program with farmers able to supply boxes of food to those who
needed it most, while much of their traditional customer base
stayed the same. And I know firsthand because I was part of the
some of the distribution work here, the food banks in my
district now first spoke to me about lines around the block to
receive these boxes of food with fresh, healthy, American grown
produce. I heard from several of our Florida growers and
producers about how the program was a lifeline during this
unprecedented time.
To that end, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, do you mind touching on
how now that the Food Box Program has ended, how we might be
able to look at ways that we can continue to promote healthy
food, support our producers, and meet the needs of our families
and individuals that are struggling, and what that might look
like, both under SNAP, but also how we can engage our community
partners alike in this?
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Oh, thank you so much for the
question, and you actually hit on what I think is the most
critical answer. I really do think it needs to be
collaboratively co-designed with community partners so that we
are utilizing all of the assets and existing resources within
communities most productively, and we are reaching the families
that are deepest in need. And when we think about it, we rarely
engage those who are most socially marginalized in these types
of decision making, in these types of policy strategies, but in
all of my work locally through Boston Medical Center Vital
Village, those are the best ideas. Those are the most effective
ideas.
Actually, throughout this pandemic, we have numerous
examples of ideas that actually originated from community
members and neighbors helping neighbors that could be scaled
and built into more formal policies and infrastructures.
What is most exciting around these direct partnerships
between producers and families is really the way the children
can become engaged. If you see a child that grows a cucumber
and tastes the cucumber they grew for the first time, it is
like nothing else, right? What better way to stimulate
nutrition and a sense of ownership and responsibility for
children? And as we have talked about many times, really honor
their dignity and shared humanity.
Thank you for the question.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, and you gave
me a perfect segue.
My next--probably last question since I am running short on
time is for Dr. Whitford. Your testimony is laced with
references to dignity, community, civility, relationships,
compassion, and as someone myself who was, not even actually 10
years ago almost, was homeless, I understand firsthand the
struggles that participants in this program go through.
But I would like to know, in an ideal world, when it comes
to those that you are trying to help and get back on their
feet, where do you see the sweet spot for government with
community organizations?
Dr. Whitford. Again, I want to go back to the idea of
subsidiarity and properly layering that. The research talks
about crowd out, the crowd out effect that occurs when
government is involved in helping local community people in
need. And so, in fact, we have even seen that depending on what
is going on [inaudible] government benefits, we will actually
see a drop in our mission market where we have a little grocery
store where people come through. They have healthy options to
choose from. We will see a drop in that.
I really believe that as government steps back a little
bit, you will see more of the private-sector that will step in,
and I think that is really one of the best things that
government could do. Just figure out how can we allow for the
private-sector to do what the private-sector does so well,
which is be charitable.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Cammack, for your
really thoughtful questions.
I now would recognize the gentleman from the Northern
Mariana Islands, Mr. Sablan, who has joined us. Thank you so
much. If you would unmute yourself and ask your questions.
Mr. Sablan. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and
congratulations on holding your first hearing.
I apologize for my tardiness. I am juggling between four
committees, and I just noted that I need to go start on Natural
Resources, but Madam Chairwoman and to the witnesses, I don't
have a question. I just have a short comment.
I have been working for 12 years now to bring SNAP to the
Northern Mariana Islands, because we, the Northern Mariana
Islands, my district is one of three in the United States that
are on block grant and it is just so difficult whenever there
is a disaster and we need additional funds, we have to go and
legislate the funds, and all different kinds of difficulties.
Sometimes Congress works amazingly and like a slow boat, it
just comes a little faster or a little slower.
But yeah, hunger is--yesterday I went around and I visited
the elderly at home. I went first to a place where they
congregate, and then I followed this vehicle that distributes
food to the homebound. I had some short conversations with
those who are homebound, and some of them lost their
qualification for food assistance because their income is $2
higher than the formula--I mean, the threshold. I mean not
some--one of them actually, $2 higher than the threshold, and
she lost something like $96 worth of food aid. That is what she
was getting a month. That is the enhanced one, because usually
you get $25 a month for a single--for an individual.
But just--I am working and I will continue to work hard,
and I ask the Chairwoman's assistance and cooperation, because
this is really--I wouldn't be working this hard and asking for
this if I didn't think it was necessary.
But I want to thank the witnesses for being here and
sharing their thoughts with the Committee. Madam Chairwoman,
thank you very much. With all due respect, I need to get back
to Natural Resources for the votes that have just been called.
Thank you very much.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mr. Sablan, and thank
you for joining us even briefly.
The next Republican witness that--I am sorry, Member that I
have is the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Cloud, but I don't see
him. Are you on?
Okay, that is fine. We will go to Mr. Lawson, the gentleman
from Florida. If you will unmute for your questioning and we
will go back to Mr. Cloud as soon as he is on the platform. Mr.
Lawson, if you want to unmute and begin your questions.
Mr. Lawson. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I want
to thank you and Ranking Member Bacon for this hearing. It is a
very important hearing.
To the witnesses, I want to welcome all of you to the
hearing today.
I represent the Fifth Congressional district which
stretches along in north Florida along the border of Alabama,
so to speak, and Georgia, and down to Jacksonville. About 200
miles or so in this district, and two major cities in between,
and most other areas are rural and farming community.
My district staff and I volunteer frequently to help with
food banks and farm share, and I was doing this even when I was
in the Florida Legislature, making sure that food banks and
farm share stuff was funded when I chaired the Agriculture
Committee in the House and in the Senate.
What I am really getting at--and this question is
probably--will go to Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson. Can you both
speak to how TEFAP programs play a role in making sure that our
families have nutritious food, nutrition in their food to eat
when SNAP just wasn't enough to help them make the entire month
of meals during this pandemic? I want to say this in
conjunction to that, we have a lot of hurricanes, and one of
the things I had to petition the government with is to allow
SNAP recipients to get hot meals for their families when they
have no place to cook and stuff of this nature. And that
probably needs to be a part of any legislation that we pass,
and I just want to see how you all respond to it.
Ms. Davis. I will go first.
It is good for them to have access to hot meals, because
I--those people that can't--don't have a stove, they can't--
they are not very skilled at cooking or know much about it. So,
if they could get access to somebody else making it for them
and still have that self-pride of still getting actual meals
and not have to always go to junk food. So, I think that is a
good idea.
Ms. Wilson. So, I will follow up and say regarding hot
meals when it comes to natural disasters and hurricanes. When
the hurricanes do come around, we don't have electricity. We
don't have gas. The hot meals, because they are denied on EBT
SNAP, we can't--I mean, they have some supermarkets that do
provide cold meals that you can heat in a microwave; however,
it is really a heartbreaking experience to explain to your kids
yes, I have a box of chicken from Publix, but we can't eat it
hot because there is nothing to heat it up with. The kids
should not feel the pressure of that.
So, hot meals being denied on EBT SNAP is not the best
idea, but I understand why the idea is there. However, I
don't--what I don't understand is what the difference is
between having a hot meal and a cold meal, and taking it home
and warming it up.
Mr. Lawson. Okay.
Ms. Wilson. The only difference is 15 minutes and hoping
that you have a microwave that has power to it during a
hurricane--to warm it up for your children.
Mr. Lawson. Okay.
One of the things that is very prevalent, and I was
[inaudible], why is it that there is so much bad publicity
coming out of the people, in your opinion, on SNAP benefits
simply due to the fact that people see them in grocery stores
and so forth getting food, and they think its to a disadvantage
that they are getting each meal. They can't get alcohol and
cigarettes, all the things that people think they get.
How do you think the news gets out--and I know my time is
about to run out--that people feel that way about this?
Ms. Wilson. I don't think there is enough knowledge about
the SNAP Program. I will tell you now that there is absolutely
no availability to alcohol and tobacco, which you already know.
But I just believe that people have a really skewed approach to
EBT SNAP and government assistance, and they think that it is a
free ride for all.
I think getting the word out or making people more
knowledgeable about the fact that EBT SNAP is truly about just
minimum assistance and essential foods needs would probably be
a better approach to the situation.
The Chairwoman. Thank you.
Mr. Lawson. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, Mr. Lawson.
I still don't see the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Cloud, so I
will move on to the next witness on the Majority side. I now
recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. McGovern. If
you will unmute and ask your questions, please.
Mr. McGovern. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. I
appreciate it.
Let me just say that SNAP is perhaps the most important
anti-hunger program that we have, and charity can't do it
alone. And by the way, SNAP is not charity. The majority of
people who are on SNAP are children, are senior citizens. Of
those who are able to work, the majority work. They work, and
they earn so little they still qualify for the benefit.
My criticism of SNAP has been that the benefit has been too
small. I mean, on average, it is about $1.40 per person, per
meal. My Dunkin Donuts coffee this morning cost me more than
that. I mean, I am grateful that in the American Rescue Package
we upped it by 15 percent, but talk to food banks and they will
tell you that the people who are still coming to food banks
midway through the month because their benefits have run out.
So, this is not a charity. This is our moral obligation. We all
ought to be committed to making sure that nobody in this county
is food-insecure or goes hungry. Quite frankly, during the
pandemic we saw the numbers go up to like 45 million people who
were hungry. Before that it was 35 million. I mean, as a Member
of Congress, I am ashamed that so many people in this country
don't know where their next meal is going to come from. And the
people who are on the program defy stereotypes, and quite
frankly, to struggle in this country and to be poor in this
country is a lot of work. It is a full-time job.
I really appreciate the testimony of Ms. Wilson and Ms.
Davis. I mean, let me just ask you this. Can you both talk
about the importance of including people with lived experiences
in our conversations about social safety net programs like
SNAP? Because I have been on this Committee for a long time,
and as Chairman of the Rules Committee, we are doing a series
of hearings hopefully leading to a White House conference on
food, nutrition, health and hunger. But we have lots of experts
that come up and testify, but sometimes they miss things
because they, themselves, haven't struggled. They haven't gone
through what you have gone through.
Ms. Wilson. I will tell you, to hear you say right now that
you understand that we are not people that want to live on food
assistance is extremely emotional. For someone to actually
understand that we want to do better is extremely emotional.
This is not something that we want permanently. As parents, we
want to provide for our children but there are circumstances
that come into play that sometimes we have to set aside that
pride and do what it takes to make sure that our kids don't
feel it.
To hear just one person, just one person understand that
this isn't what we want, that we're not people who don't want
to work, that we're not people who refuse to work is such a
breath of fresh air.
I don't really have a whole lot to add to the conversation
other than that, but just because I want to validate everything
that you are saying. Everything that you are saying is
absolutely correct, absolutely correct.
Mr. McGovern. Ms. Davis?
Ms. Davis. Yes, I was just going to say I am glad you said
that, because I personally was brought up that if you go on
government assistance, that you feel like a failure. Like you
messed up that you have to go to the government for help. And
for me, I had to put my pride to the side to say I need help.
And during COVID, I did not have food stamps. I really, really
needed help. So, when that P-EBT card--when I found out that I
can use that to just pay my meals and stuff, that helped me and
relieved some stress so that I did not have to worry about what
my son was going to eat during this pandemic. Even though it
stopped in November, it still helped me and I knew when it was
going to stop. Then I did the food pantry, and the pantry
picked up where they left off.
When people say that, I--it's--no. Because I don't believe
on staying on government. I go when I need help, and I know
other people that go for help because they need it, not to just
be home and do nothing.
Mr. McGovern. and I appreciate you both saying that,
because far too often the commentary that comes out of
Washington, D.C. does more to stigmatize people than help
people get back on their feet.
And so, I appreciate both of you for your courage and for
coming and sharing your stories, and I look forward to
continuing to work with you and others on this panel.
Thank you very much. I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Mr. McGovern, and he has
been a champion on this issue. For anyone who has not already
seen it, you should check out the op-ed that he and I co-
authored that was released today on this very issue.
[The op-ed referred to is located on p. 63.]
The Chairwoman. I now recognize the gentlelady from
Louisiana for what is your inaugural hearing. Ms. Letlow,
please unmute your microphone and ask your questions.
Ms. Letlow. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes.
To all the witnesses, thank you for your time and
participation in this hearing. I join my colleagues in
extending my appreciation to Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson for
providing your testimony and sharing your stories before this
Subcommittee.
As the title of this hearing indicates, we are starting to
see the country take strides in moving past the pandemic, and
this is a timely conversation we are having here today.
My question is for Dr. Whitford. While I am one of the
newest Members of the House Committee on Agriculture, it is my
understanding that the previous testimony before this Committee
has revealed that some organizations expect historically high
levels of hunger well beyond this year. It is alarming to hear
that even the Federal Reserve is lowering expectations for
May's job growth, because companies cannot find individuals
able or willing to work. Do you think Congress is providing the
right balance of assistance, and what can we do to encourage
and help families return to work?
Dr. Whitford. We have to--thank you. We have to remember
that the only way out of poverty--and I mean, again, in 2
decades you have seen this. The only way out is through work.
It is through a job. That is absolutely vital, not only to the
dignity of the person--and I mean, we have even heard this just
from Ms. Davis and Ms. Wilson. I mean, they recognize that as
well. I think we all do. So, we have to be asking ourselves,
are we doing anything that is getting in the way of that or
not?
There has been talk today about how SNAP is a relief
program for emergency use, and that is exactly right. In fact,
it reminded me of a book called, When Helping Hurts: How to
Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor . . . and Yourself
and in When Helping Hurts, they describe three different types
of charity, really. There is relief, there is rehabilitation,
and there is development. And so many people today are really
in the rehabilitation and development side of that, which
requires some sort of effort or work to move forward. Relief
should be reserved for the emergency cases when there is no
other option. In fact, our community just recognized the 10th
anniversary from an F5 tornado that ripped through the center
of Joplin. It was of historic significance. It rendered 7,000
people homeless immediately, killed 161 people, and the relief
effort was amazing right then. In fact, by the time the Federal
Government got involved, we had already organized our community
together and we were moving forward.
So, that is relief, but most of the time when we get to
know people, they need rehabilitation or development, and it
requires effort. It requires work. One thing that we could do
what the government could do is just make sure that work
requirements are a part of that picture, because we are going
to be able to--in fact, in the State of Missouri, we saw 43,000
people who were unemployed and on SNAP benefits before work
requirements went back into place in 2016. That number dropped
by 85 percent afterwards, and incomes from those folks went up
70 percent. So, again, a job is the way out of poverty. There
is no way that we can provide enough aid to lift anybody out of
poverty. It will require a job, and the government has got to
make sure they are not stepping in the way of that for people
who are not in need of relief, real relief, but rehabilitation
and development.
Ms. Letlow. Thank you so much for your answer, Dr.
Whitford. I yield back my remaining time.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Ms. Letlow.
I now recognize the gentlelady from Virginia who is on the
full Committee, but has waived on to join us today. Welcome to
our Subcommittee, Ms. Spanberger. If you can unmute and ask
your questions, please.
Ms. Spanberger. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Hayes. I
appreciate you allowing me to waive on to the Subcommittee
today, and I am grateful for you holding this hearing on the
future of SNAP.
I represent Virginia, central Virginia 7th District, and in
Virginia, nearly 70 percent of SNAP recipients are families
with children. And for these families, SNAP has been a vital
source of support to put food on the table for their children
before and during a global pandemic.
Unfortunately, we have seen such a demand for food
assistance that SNAP benefits have been challenged. They are
not enough, and food banks across my district in central
Virginia have been working tirelessly to meet the needs of
hungry Virginians. I have heard from food banks, from state
officials, and from members of our community about the immense
relief that SNAP assistance can provide a family. And in
addition to helping families and children in central Virginia
and across the country, SNAP is vital to our nation's economic
recovery. As Dr. Bauer mentioned in her testimony, a $1
investment in SNAP benefits generates about $1.70 in economic
activity during an economic downturn, like the one that we find
ourselves in today. And that is why I was so appreciative of
our work to ensure that the American Rescue Plan extended
increased SNAP benefits through September, as well as the
pandemic EBT program.
But we all know that the rate of food insecurity is still
higher now than it was before COVID-19, and I am grateful for
each of you who are here today to speak with us, and I am so
grateful for the stories, the experience, and the expertise
that you have brought to Congress.
Dr. Bauer, I would like to begin with you. You mentioned
the SNAP Employment and Training Program, also known as SNAP
E&T, in your testimony package, and as you know, SNAP
participants have exclusive access to training and support
services to help them enter the workforce through the SNAP E&T
Program.
I was wondering if you could shed a little light on how
improving the SNAP E&T Program could potentially help SNAP
participants find regular employment?
Dr. Bauer. Certainly. So, I think that there is a lot we
can do to synchronize and cohere across the workforce
development programs that are supported by the Federal
Government, whether it is through SNAP E&T, through programs
that are run through the Department of Labor, through WIOA, and
certainly through the TANF Program.
There are a variety of ways to support work through the
SNAP Program, as I already said, through the earnings
disregard, and especially through increasing the EITC and
making that more generous more permanently for childless
workers because that is really where we are seeing declines and
low participation over the long-term.
In terms of E&T, certainly reforms and investments are
needed to bulk up the program, especially should work
requirements be reinstated at some point in the future when the
economy allows it. Even though I don't think that there is
evidence to support its continuation, it is certainly helpful
to able-bodied adults without dependents to have that E&T slot
to help them maintain access to the program, should there still
be local area circumstances that limit the number of jobs
available.
Ms. Spanberger. Thank you very much. Just one more follow
up. In your testimony, you mentioned several options for
strengthening SNAP as an automatic stabilizer. Could you
explain how automatically increasing benefit levels could help
ensure that people receive the help they need during a
recession while having the impact presumably of stabilizing our
economy?
Dr. Bauer. Absolutely.
So, it certainly relates to the point that you made that a
dollar of SNAP is a very special Federal dollar, because it
generates so much activity and because it is well targeted and
spent so quickly. And, when we know the economy is in a
recession, which we don't always know as quickly as we knew was
going to happen at the start of the pandemic, increasing SNAP
benefit levels and reducing barriers to entry to the program
will catch people as they fall and help slingshot not only the
economy into a self-sustaining recovery, but also help our most
vulnerable families when the macro economy is contracting.
Mr. Spanberger. Thank you.
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, from your experience, could you
comment on the impacts that multiple Federal nutrition programs
have on a family with SNAP, the School Lunch Program? How do
these programs work together to serve a family in need of
support?
Dr. Boynton-Jarrett. Excellent question, and thank you.
Children receive \2/3\ of their nutritional daily value
actually from the meals they receive at school or in early care
and education. So, it is really like the School Meal Program as
well as the Summer Meal Program, and those extensions are
vitally important for continuity of nutritional meals for
children. So, those are very complementary to the SNAP Program.
Moreover, the WIC Program, Women, Infants, and Children,
provides healthy nutrition for women who are expecting or who
are pregnant. This is critical as well because healthy
nutrition during pregnancy actually sets the foundation for a
healthy start in life. So, we actually know that adversities
that pregnant women face have a longstanding impact on the
health and development of children as well. And those studies
have actually shown that SNAP benefits and WIC benefits for
women who are expecting are associated with reduced risks for
metabolic conditions such as diabetes and chronic metabolic
conditions in children. So, we know that the earlier we can
provide consistency in access to consistent and healthy
nutritional foods, the better it is for a healthy development,
growth, and learning for children.
Ms. Spanberger. Dr. Boynton-Jarrett, thank you so much for
making that very clear acknowledgment that the support to
pregnant women is so vitally important to healthy babies and
supporting babies and young children as they ultimately grow
older into community members.
And Madam Chairwoman, thank you for indulging a couple
moments over, and I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you, and thank you so much for
joining us today. We were happy to have you.
I think that concludes all of our Member questioning. Are
there any other Members who have not been heard? Okay.
So, before we adjourn, I invite the Ranking Member to share
any closing comments he may have.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much. I really appreciate the
thoughtful conversation. I really appreciate the panelists
today, especially those who have their personal stories to
share, and I thought it was just very well done.
I have to remember the SNAP Program is a supplementary
program, and it is serving well. So, I wanted to make that
point. I also realize in the last farm bill that we passed out
of the House, we did have some provisions that helped with the
cliff effect but it was taken out during conference. I just
think we see today from the testimony that we had that there is
a need for having an eye on this, and to look how we can
mitigate this cliff effect. We heard repeatedly where this has
had some impact. So, we have a task in front of us, and there
is some bipartisan support to do so.
Finally, just we do need to have an eye for coming out of
the pandemic. I know we are not quite there yet, but we are on
the tail side of this. We still see increases in poverty, but
it has gone down significantly since its peak. We have more
work to do.
But we do have to have an eye on the fact that 43 percent
of our employers are looking to hire, and they are having a
hard time of this. It is a fact that we have to deal with and
we have to ensure that government, not just in the SNAP
Program, but all the other areas that it has been involved with
over the last 6 months, it is not competing against those jobs.
Because in the end, getting people back to work is our goal.
So, with that, Madam Chairwoman, I appreciate your time and
I appreciate you organizing this today, and I yield back.
The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Representative Bacon.
Before we adjourn, I want to once again thank my colleagues
for their participation in today's hearing which will help us
to craft lasting, meaningful legislation on this Subcommittee.
I especially want to express my sincere thank you to today's
panel: both doctors who gave incredible testimony that was very
impactful and really shared with us the research, to Dr.
Whitford, your perspective and the information that you
provided, I promise we will get you those questions that you
were not able to answer. And to both Ms. Wilson and Ms. Davis.
As the Chairwoman of this Subcommittee, it was very important
to me that you tell your own stories, that we found people who
could to share your experiences and your perspective, and in
essence, rebut the faulty premise that people who can work
choose not to. You really have shed a tremendous light on this
issue, and really helped us to redefine the faces of the people
that we are helping.
I especially want to express my sincere thank you to this
panel. Your time and knowledge are extremely valuable, and we
appreciate the generosity that you have shown today.
One thing is clear from the testimony today. SNAP has
absolutely been an essential support throughout this pandemic,
and will continue to be crucial for economic recovery as we
climb our way out of it. The work Congress has done to bolster
the program and to support related nutrition programs has
provided a vital safety net for people who are working hard so
that they can support themselves and their family through this
extremely difficult time.
We heard from Representative Lawson about the student food
insecurity, and he and I just introduced a bill to address
that, H.R. 3100, which I look forward to elevating to this
Committee as well.
Ms. Wilson started with something very important, pictures
of her children. I remind you that many of the people that we
are talking about who participate in this program are children.
I was a classroom teacher for 15 years before I came to
Congress, and the image of children with their heads on the
desk who could not learn because they didn't have the energy
because they hadn't eaten is something that I wouldn't wish on
anyone, and it is something that you will not forget. Those
images, those children are the ones who drive my work here
today. We are still in a hunger crisis, and our communities
still need our help. We have a unique opportunity to take
action.
We have heard at times there were no hearings. There was no
collaboration on these types of issues. Mr. Bacon, I say to
you, we have the ability to change that. Let's work together.
Let's use the information that we gathered here today to help
get people fed before they have to show up at food banks.
Research has shown that for every one person who is fed by a
charitable organization, nine families are fed by SNAP. That is
important information for us to know. Let's feed people before
they have to stand in line and have the stress of food
insecurity.
Thank you again to my colleagues and to the witnesses today
for participating in this very important hearing.
I just have some housekeeping things that I have to read.
Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's hearing
will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive additional
material and supplementary written responses from the witnesses
to any questions posed by a Member.
This hearing of the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight,
and Department Operations is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:23 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Article by Hon. Jahana Hayes, a Representative in Congress
from Connecticut
[https://civileats.com/2021/05/26/op-ed-hunger-is-a-political-decision-
we-can-work-to-end-it/]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Civil Eats
Op-Ed: Hunger is a Political Decision. We Can Work to End It.
Members of the House Agriculture Committee call for a
substantive, policy-based conference focused on ending hunger
in the U.S. by 2030.
By James McGovern \1\ and Jahana Hayes \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://civileats.com/author/jmcgovern/.
\2\ https://civileats.com/author/jahanahayes/.
May 26, 2021
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
New data from the U.S. Census Bureau \3\ shows that while hunger in
America is still surging far above pre-pandemic levels, Congressional
aid is making a difference. This is welcome news for a country that has
seen lines at food banks stretching on for miles and too many families
going without food.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/number-of-
families-struggling-to-afford-food-rose-steeply-in-pandemic-and.
Editor's note: this article is also retained in Committee file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is also a reminder that hunger is not inevitable--it's a policy
choice.
Even before the pandemic, over 40 million Americans experienced
food insecurity. While Congress has made significant and important
progress to address hunger during the COVID pandemic through landmark
investments \4\ in nutrition programs, we believe it's time to take the
next step. That's why we are calling for the White House to hold a
substantive, policy-based conference focused on ending hunger
throughout the United States by 2030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://frac.org/covid19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The last and only White House conference on hunger was held in
1969--the same year we landed a man on the moon.
While far from perfect, the conference was responsible \5\ for the
creation and expansion of vital anti-hunger safety net programs like
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC),
and the National School Lunch Program (NSLP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://sites.tufts.edu/foodnutritionandhealth2019/1969-white-
house-conference/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More than 50 years later, we believe now is the time to think
holistically and improve our coordination across an array of social
service programs, bringing into focus both the successes and the
failures of Federal programs. Who is falling through the cracks? What
more needs to be done? These are questions we need to address with new
solutions.
The pandemic has made the need for Federal programs beyond food
assistance clearer than ever. Unemployment benefits, housing,
affordable childcare, healthcare, and tax credits are all critical
supports for families under stress. Together, these programs and
policies all help address hunger. The problem though, is that they span
across many programs, agencies, and levels of government.
Imagine the progress that could be achieved today if the heads of
food banks, hospitals, government agencies, nonprofits, educators, and
the faith-based community all came together at the same table, and
worked together with the White House to solve our hunger crisis in a
holistic way. They could develop a real plan with actionable benchmarks
to help us end the crisis by 2030, as the United Nations has called
for.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This conference should improve on the 1969 conference in one in a
key way: it should include a diverse group of Americans who have
experienced hunger firsthand. Such perspective is vital to ensuring our
policies are centered on the real experiences of everyday people, not
just numbers and statistics.
Congress has been doing its part to fight food insecurity. In March
2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 emergency response, it agreed to
increase SNAP benefits so families could stock up and prepare for
quarantine. Then, as the pandemic impact increased, Democrats were able
to secure an additional 15 percent monthly increase in SNAP benefits
for the duration of the pandemic.
Programs like Pandemic EBT, WIC, the Food Distribution Program on
Indian Reservations, and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program are
also helping many Americans. Recent legislation has also provided
additional funding and resources to these programs.
As chairs in the House, we have been working to make addressing
hunger a national priority.
The Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations
has been playing a vital role ensuring hunger is part of our ongoing
response to the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. It has advanced
investments in the SNAP program, spearheaded expansion of online food
purchasing, ensured food banks had the resources they needed to meet
increased demand, and provided oversight as the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) has implemented these historic undertakings.
The House Rules Committee has also begun a series of groundbreaking
anti-hunger hearings to learn from and uplift a diverse chorus of
voices so that when the Biden Administration is ready to hold a hunger
conference, they can hit the ground running to help shape the dialogue.
But Congress can not end hunger alone. We must bring the full
weight of the Federal Government to bear.
Every single person living in this country deserves to wake up each
day without having to worry about where their next meal will come from.
We have the food, the knowledge, and the resources to guarantee food
security for every person in America. A White House conference on
hunger would help us take a vital step forward in building the
political will to end this crisis once and for all.
______
Submitted Letter by Hon. Jahana Hayes, a Representative in Congress
from Connecticut; on Behalf of Hannah Walker, Vice President, Political
Affairs, FMI--The Food Industry Association
May 25, 2021
Hon. Jahana Hayes,
Chairwoman,
House Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
Operations,
Washington, D.C.;
Hon. Don Bacon,
Ranking Minority Member,
House Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
Operations
Washington, D.C.
Dear Chairwoman Hayes and Ranking Member Bacon:
FMI--The Food Industry Association respectfully requests to have
this letter included in the record for the hearing on May 26, 2021
entitled, ``The Future of SNAP: Moving Past the Pandemic.'' FMI and our
members, which include food retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers,
are committed to building upon the success of the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to ensure it continues to serve
families in need across our country.
As you know, the grocery industry is the private partner with the
Federal Government serving as the redemption point for SNAP
beneficiaries. The program was designed to be able to ramp up quickly
in times of need and cause almost no disruption in-store, allowing
families to redeem their benefits where they have traditionally shopped
for groceries regardless of how they pay. SNAP participation increased
by over 14%, or six million people, from February 2020 to February
2021. Congress and USDA took extraordinary efforts to increase and
maximize benefits for families, and the investment paid off. Of the $78
billion in SNAP spending last year, over 95% went directly to benefits.
The program proved to be flexible and extremely efficient even in the
most challenging of circumstances.
The work on SNAP did not end with increased participation and
benefits. The Agency and industry worked closely to improve access
along the way. Prior to last March, USDA was rolling out a SNAP online
pilot in a few states. By the end of 2020, 47 states and the District
of Columbia had enabled SNAP online. While this was great and shows
quick progress, much work remains on increasing authorized online SNAP
retailers. The process and technical requirements for a retailer to
become authorized to accept SNAP online is challenging and complex.
Retailers have been sharing best practices and lessons learned amongst
themselves, however, many challenges remain. FMI is looking forward to
USDA implementing the provisions from the recently signed into law
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which allocates resources for the
Agency to provide technical assistance to retailers.
Looking forward, the food industry is keenly focused on finding
additional opportunities to address hunger and nutrition here in the
U.S. all while maintaining the efficiencies and successes of SNAP. The
grocery industry prides itself on transparency and helping the consumer
make food selections reflective of their individual family needs. The
food industry provides these services to all their customers regardless
of how they pay, be it cash, check, SNAP or credit. Over the past
decade, grocers have hired dietitians, nutritionists, in-store chefs
and pharmacists to assist customers in making food selections. These
services are keenly important when a customer is newly diagnosed with
health conditions and diseases that may require changes to diet. As we
previously mentioned, SNAP allows the customer to continue shopping at
their neighborhood store and make choices on foods that meet their
specific needs.
Additionally, several FMI members are currently participating in
the GUSNIP, fruit and vegetable incentives program. GUSNIP is a
voluntary program that requires significant investment by the retailer
and is just one of many ways our members serve their customers every
day while surviving on less than a 3% average annual profit margin.
FMI firmly believes in finding ways to help all consumers eat well
and make appropriate choices for their families regardless of how they
pay. Unfortunately, efforts to further restrict items families can
purchase with SNAP will only increase retailers' cost to comply and
accept SNAP, with a possible chilling effect on some, particularly
smaller grocers' ability to participate in the program. Additionally,
it would complicate the shopping experience for customers without truly
addressing or changing eating habits.
Technology can both help customers in the actual shopping
experience, but also improve the checkout process. Today, we enjoy a
ubiquitous SNAP Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) system. Retailers
can accept a SNAP card issued in any state regardless of where they are
located. This efficiency of scale functions as originally designed
reflecting both the need for uniformity on behalf of the retailer, and
access for customers. Any attempt to remove that ubiquity will remove
all the efficiencies we have worked to gain over the past 3 decades,
increase the costs of the program and most concerning--threaten access
for the customer. Instead, FMI advocates for further building on the
success of the EBT system with a focus on reliability in the processor
space and innovation to allow for mobile checkout and future
developments in payments.
FMI commends the Subcommittee for its interest in and commitment to
SNAP. Working together, we will succeed in finding new opportunities to
build on the success of the program and make it stronger moving
forward.
Sincerely,
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Hannah Walker,
Vice President, Political Affairs,
FMI--The Food Industry Association.
______
Submitted Statement by Hon. Don Bacon, a Representative in Congress
from Nebraska; on Behalf of Inmar, Inc.
Introduction
Inmar is pleased to submit testimony for today's hearing on the
future of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (``SNAP'').
Inmar believes the challenges posed by the [COVID]-19 pandemic to
the nation's nutrition safety net have put into stark relief the need
to modernize the country's nutrition assistance programs as well as
modernize disaster relief benefit distribution. The current electronic
benefit transfer (``EBT'') system results in inefficiencies, greater
opportunities for fraud, and lost opportunities to enhance, and
stretch, program benefits. By incorporating and leveraging new
technologies, the programs could enhance efficiency and program
integrity, reduce fraud, and most importantly expand and maximize
program benefits for participants.
As Congress reviews nutrition assistance programs in preparation
for reauthorization of the next farm bill, we encourage policymakers to
consider the inclusion of legislative language that would facilitate
modernization of the programs through the adoption of these new
technologies. We further encourage policymakers to consider how to
eliminate barriers to enhanced utilization of technology, and barriers
to entry by host processors which have the technological capability to
bring improved program administration to the table. In particular, we
encourage consideration of four changes: (1) enable all participants in
the SNAP program to participate using digital platforms, (2) enable
digital delivery of disaster benefits, (3) eliminate rules, while well-
intentioned, that serve to limit the ability of technologically-capable
processors to enhance benefits and stretch SNAP dollars, and (4)
eliminate false barriers to entry for host processors which bring
innovative consumer and beneficiary-driven solutions to market.
Inmar Overview
Inmar is a leader in data-driven technology solutions and business
and government program enablement, bringing more than 35 years of
private industry solution experience to the public-sector. We develop
technology and use advanced data analytics to improve outcomes for
consumers and beneficiaries.
Beginning with our efforts in the private-sector to help businesses
operate more efficiently in serving customers, our time-proven
solutions help organizations of all kinds successfully address critical
financial, operational, and mission-centric challenges. Government
departments, agencies and services rely on Inmar to facilitate their
revenue recovery, inventory management, business analytics and
consumer-facing technology programs. Of note, this includes
demonstrably successful and replicable implementation of the SNAP
program in Louisiana.
Headquartered in the Wake Forest Innovation Quarter in Winston-
Salem, Inmar employs more than 4,500 associates in North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, Texas, California, Florida, Louisiana, and New York.
Benefits of a Digital Benefits Delivery Program for SNAP
Under existing law, the SNAP program functions effectively as an
EBT program, making the provision of vital benefits for millions of at-
risk Americans reliant on antiquated analogue technology. All SNAP
beneficiaries should have the option to receive benefits and
participate in the program through digital technology. This can take
the form of a phone app that beneficiaries could opt to use instead of
an analogue card. For those wishing to use them, cards would still be
honored throughout the program. We believe that use of secure digital
technology to deliver SNAP benefits provides Federal and state program
administrators with the means to extend program dollars for
participants, increase program access, raise nutritional awareness and
assist with the adoption of healthier eating lifestyles. At the same
time, it would also reduce fraud and abuse, enhance program integrity,
and reduce administrative costs. Modern technology also provides
critical interoperability across public programs that can be configured
to meet Protected Health Information (PHI) and data security standards.
Pursuant to proving out this enhanced approach to program
administration, we encourage Congress to fully fund, and for USDA to
move quickly to award, mobile technologies demonstration projects
authorized under Section 7(h)(14) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008
(7 U.S.C. 2016(h)(14)).
Central to the success of a digitally enabled benefit distribution
system would be the utilization of an e-wallet by program participants.
Beneficiaries would use their e-wallet to receive and access their
monthly benefit dollars, as well as have the option to opt-in to
receive digital coupons, offered as required under current law. Program
participants would access their e-wallets by login via PC or mobile
device, and have immediate access to their benefits balance as well as
any, and all, coupons available to them. These coupons would be offered
by a variety of sources including both retailers and manufacturers and,
potentially, participating states or other government entities.
Purchases made by SNAP shoppers would be validated against a cloud-
based list at checkout to determine each product's eligibility for
payment by SNAP. This UPC-level validation happens in real-time, is
executed in the Cloud, and would help mitigate fraud and reduce costly
retailer audits. This process, utilizing modern technology versus
antiquated EBT cards, would provide automatic 100% validation with
limited man-hours and diminished costs, in contrast to the more labor
and cost intensive current audit process that audits only a small
percentage of retailers, and almost certainly fails to fully identify
fraud and abuse in the program.
The ready availability of targeted relevant offers would help SNAP
shoppers stretch their benefit dollars to promote healthier food
choices moving them towards healthier lifestyles. To redeem these
coupons, SNAP shoppers would use a card or unique identifier linked to
their e-wallets at check out which would automatically apply discounts
to qualified purchases and would activate drawdown of SNAP benefits.
While healthier food choices are available to SNAP constituents, the
truth is they often cannot afford, nor are they effectively
incentivized, to purchase more nutritional food and beverages for
themselves and their families. At Inmar, we believe that, in order for
FNS to successfully address this two-fold challenge to better public
health and nutrition, it is essential that digital technology,
supported by data analytics and data-driven engagement strategies, be
deployed to motivate and enable SNAP participants in making healthier
shopping decisions while effectively providing them additional monthly
dollars beyond appropriated benefit budgets.
Appropriate deployment of these capabilities will help SNAP
recipients stretch their benefit dollars, increase their spending power
and empower them to make more nutritious food purchases while, at the
same time, improving the program's security for fraud prevention and
program efficiency. This enhanced operation would in turn, reduce
administrative costs at both the Federal and state levels.
We encourage policymakers to examine ways to modernize the SNAP
program to facilitate the adoption and leveraging of modern digital
technology for the benefit of recipients.
Benefits to USDA and FNS:
Full utilization of program dollars
More efficient validation and administration of programs
100% SNAP eligibility verification of transactions
100% fraud-free digital coupons automatically applied
to purchases
Ongoing retailer audits with reduced audit costs
Easier retailer validation/investigations to decrease
retail trafficking
Automated product eligibility confirmation eliminating
retailer error
Data delivery and analysis to assist USDA in realizing
healthier outcomes for program participants
Data Analytics to support evidence-based programs and data
transparency requirements
Greatly-enhanced prevention and detection of fraud and abuse
Cost savings and enhanced security associated with
electronic delivery of D-SNAP benefits
Benefits to SNAP Recipients:
Fast and easy benefits delivery to SNAP recipients via
mobile app
Secure benefits redemption for SNAP recipients without the
need for a card
Digital coupons help stretch monthly benefits with the
ability to apply savings to healthier food purchases
Additional cost-saving incentives for healthier purchases
No-cost digital account access for balance inquiries and
coupon acquisition
Greater nutrition awareness and guidance on healthier
purchases through access to engagement tools
Streamlined transactions saving time and effort while also
protecting participants' dignity at checkout
Ability to be used by all retail channels including
Farmers['] Markets
Relevant shopper engagement to increase SNAP benefit
utilization
Immediate access to D-SNAP benefits after disasters
eliminating delays associated with card distribution
Electronic Benefit Delivery for D-SNAP
America is facing a health and economic crisis with rising food
insecurity due to the pandemic. 43 million Americans are in need of
nutrition assistance--without a disaster. The number of people needing
assistance can soar when disaster hits. The pandemic has changed
behaviors and accelerated e-commerce and digital initiatives. The need
for this modernization and efficient delivery of benefits is all the
more urgent when disaster hits a community and state and local
governments are charged with supporting residents as they rebuild and
return to normal daily living.
D-SNAP, which provides temporary food assistance for households
affected by a natural disaster, is a critical part of a comprehensive
government response when disaster strikes. Currently, when confronting
disasters, typical practice is for states to issue plastic cards to
eligible individuals. Most states set up a remote site and distribute
cards (if an adequate inventory is available) in person. Depending on
the type of disaster, this may or may not be possible, and as [COVID]
has demonstrated, it is often challenging to establish or it might not
be practical if the disaster could be classified as a pandemic and
requires the avoidance or minimization of contact among individuals. In
this case, cards are typically mailed to constituents. This can be a
challenge for multiple reasons; access to residences may be impossible
due to damage to access roads, or damage to the facility that would
assist in the distribution may have been damaged, or roads may be
inaccessible and require time for clearing. Electronic delivery of
benefits could provide significant cost savings for site operations as
well as reduce safety concerns associated with in person registration
and distribution.
A digitally enabled D-SNAP benefit distribution system would allow
beneficiaries to receive and access their D-SNAP benefits without the
need of a physical card. Program participants would access their e-
wallets by login via PC or mobile device, and have immediate access to
their benefits balance, eliminating delays associated with EBT card
distribution as well as provide a direct channel of communication with
beneficiaries in a disaster situation. Additional benefits of a virtual
D-SNAP program would be realized with pre-registration of populations
by zip code. With pre-registration states could push out notifications
to constituents when disaster in pending. States can also use this
information to quickly estimate the number of impacted citizens to help
inform overall disaster recovery planning as well as estimate necessary
funding based upon a more reliable number of affected citizens. With
pre-registration, once the state identifies the eligible population, it
can disperse funds quicker than mail service making benefits available
immediately after a disaster has been declared. Information is critical
for effective disaster management. The utilization of electronic
benefit delivery could be vital for disaster relief and should be
examined by the funding of pilot programs.
Rules Inadvertently Limiting SNAP Program Enhancement
While we recognize and appreciate rules and regulations that serve
to protect SNAP beneficiaries from predatory practices, rules such as
those that limit coupon availability to beneficiaries need to be re-
examined. Such well-intentioned laws cannot be reconciled with the
inadvertent impact of preventing retailers and manufacturers and,
potentially, participating states or other government entities, from
offering further price reductions on products to beneficiaries in order
to stretch the SNAP dollar and enhance nutritional outcomes.
Additionally, current rules and regulations prevent processors and
other parties from analyzing data generated through administration of
the SNAP program. These restrictions are designed to protect
beneficiaries' personal information, which Inmar of course supports.
However, accessing and analyzing anonymized data would allow processors
to provide additional benefits to recipients. For example, many SNAP
recipients live in food deserts or food swamps where healthy and
affordable SNAP-eligible foods are often limited. A processor would be
able to inform a SNAP-recipient consumer what other stores may be
available for them to purchase the same items at better prices, or
where they might find affordable and healthier options. It would also
enable processors to leverage relationships with food manufacturers and
retailers to help meet unmet demand by SNAP recipients for certain
products, including affordable and healthier options. This would help
recipients stretch their SNAP dollar and potentially provide a greater
number of affordable and healthy food options.
While we appreciate the public policy underpinning these rules,
they should be re-examined to permit companies and other entities to
provide enhanced benefits to SNAP recipients through coupons and
offers, that serve to enhance the SNAP dollar. We also encourage the
re-examination of other restrictions and limitations that serve to
limit the ability to leverage modern and proven technology for the
benefit of recipients. We respectfully encourage Congress and USDA to
reconsider these restrictions.
Barriers to Entry in Host Processor Market
Currently, two companies dominate the host processor market. These
two companies serve as host processors for all but two of fifty states
(Louisiana, with Inmar serving as host contractor, being one of the two
exceptions). This lack of competition in the market results in fewer
options and higher fees for state agencies. It also serves to stifle
innovation. USDA, under the leadership of Secretary Vilsack, is on
record as being interested in identifying ways to stimulate increased
competition in the EBT marketplace and identify procurement or systems
features that are barriers to new entrants (see Notice; Request for
Information, 80 Fed. Reg. 35932 (June 23, 2015)).
With so few companies in the market, technological innovation is
limited and agencies lack options. As USDA has stated, healthy
competition in the host processor marketplace helps to control costs,
ensure a level playing field for businesses who are interested in
supporting benefit delivery processes, and encourage innovation. As
USDA further stated, limited competition within the marketplace
increases the risk for sustainability of the industry over time, and
limited competition could affect pricing. Inmar echoes those concerns,
but despite a general consensus that more host processors should be in
the market, two companies continue to dominate state agency contract
awards.
Inmar is confident that its successful and innovative
administration of the SNAP and TANF programs as host processor for the
State of Louisiana will further establish it as a market competitor.
However, companies such as Inmar that are able to bring greater
efficiencies, enhanced administration, and technological solutions that
can be leveraged to benefit program recipients are still at an
artificial market disadvantage. Many state agencies have stated and
unstated rules giving preference to legacy processors. We encourage
policymakers to consider whether there might be legislative solutions
to encourage new entrants to the marketplace. States need not require
new entrants to have 10 years of service in the analogue EBT program,
as that says little about their ability to execute in a modern
environment and provide the benefits of operating on a digital
platform. We therefore encourage policymakers to consider ways to
facilitate the elimination of false barriers, designed to protect
legacy processors, to new innovators and disrupters, who can leverage
proven technologies to enhance benefits and outcomes for a beneficiary-
focused solution.
Conclusion
Inmar appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony for today's
hearing on the future of the SNAP program and we look forward to
working with the Subcommittee to help effect improvements to USDA's
nutrition assistance programs. In the best of times, SNAP serves a
vital lifeline for millions of at-risk Americans. During an
unprecedented time like the COVID-19 crisis, the program has been a
vital lifeline connecting America's producers with America's most
vulnerable populations and leveraging America's unmatched food
production system to align with the needs of the most vulnerable
populations.
______
Supplementary Material Submitted by James Whitford, D.P.T., Co-Founder
and Executive Director, Watered Gardens Ministries
Insert
Ms. Adams. . . .
Dr. Whitford, in your testimony you imply that SNAP and
Federal assistance programs of charity have no place in
government. I respectfully wholly disagree. SNAP and our
Federal safety net programs are a hand-up, not a hand-out, and
many of us on this Committee once utilized the program.
So, do you believe that private charities and nonprofits
could immediately and effectively provide for the 42 million
Americans who are currently supported by SNAP?
Dr. Whitford. That is a great question.
June 4, 2021
To the Chair[woman] and Members of the Nutrition, Oversight, and
Department Operations Subcommittee:
Again, thank you for the opportunity to share my testimony at the
recent hearing on May 26, The Future of Snap: Moving Past the Pandemic.
I'm taking the opportunity to respond to Vice Chair Adams' question
in writing since her time had expired prior to my response. The
question was, ``Do you believe that private charities and nonprofits
could immediately and effectively provide for the 42 million Americans
who are currently supported by SNAP?''
Thank you for the question Vice Chair Adams and I'm sorry our time
didn't allow me to respond while we were together virtually.
In one regard, the question encourages me--if the number of
Americans dependent on SNAP were low enough, might you be favorable
toward such an idea?! If that is indeed the case, then it stands to
reason you may also be in favor of the program's privatization if there
were enough private nonprofits and churches who could do the job. We
should hope!
Even though I have no doubt of the private-sector's capacity to
feed the hungry in America, I certainly assert that ``immediately'' and
``effectively'' are mutually exclusive. We could do so ``immediately
and chaotically'' but a thoughtful and effective plan would require
time. That said, I am hopeful we can all agree that one American or 42
million Americans ``supported by SNAP'' is not optimal and that our
common ground upon which to rally together is to see as few people as
possible supported by the government. This reminds me of some words
written by one of my favorite Presidents, Democrat Grover Cleveland,
when he vetoed the Texas Seed Bill of 1887:
``A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of
this [government] power and duty should be steadfastly
resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly
enforced that, though the people support the Government, the
Government should not support the people.''
In further justifying his dissent, he pointed to the great strength
of American charity, demonstrating his remarkable and beautiful faith
in the generosity and neighborliness of American citizens. He also
commented on the risk ``Federal aid'' poses to the bonds between
people.
``The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always
be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune.
This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal
aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care
on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our
national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our
people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens
the bonds of a common brotherhood.''
There are other great thinkers who saw the danger of people
``supported'' by government programs. In Alexis de Tocqueville's
observations of American life in Democracy in America, he recorded his
amazement of Americans' tendencies to associate. He foresaw the growth
of government and the threat it would pose to those natural, communal
relationships, writing:
``The task of the governing power will therefore perpetually
increase, and its very efforts will extend it every day. The
more it stands in the place of associations, the more will
individuals, losing the notion of combining together, require
its assistance.''
My intent here is not a history lesson. I simply argue that
throughout American history, whether a Democrat President or a French
philosopher, leaders have realized that ``support'' on the Federal
Government has a myriad of disruptive effects that adversely impact the
natural affiliations within family and community.
To continue examining private-sector capacity, I am not able to
estimate the reduction of SNAP enrollees if effective and empowering
charity took over. Certainly, without the current and easy path to
liquidate and abuse the benefit, not to mention the attrition of able-
bodied adults who take advantage of the program unnecessarily, there
would be a significant reduction representing a more accurate and true
need for food.
One church in my city partnered with an organization called the
Pack Shack who facilitates ``funnel parties.'' The entire church
assembled on a Sunday and instead of a sermon, they packed 40,000 meals
during their normal two service times. These meals are dry-stored,
nutritious and they even taste good. I know--it's a drop in the bucket,
but it was one church on one Sunday. There are approximately 380,000
churches in the United States. If half of them did the same just twice
per year, it would provide a meal to each of those 42 million people
every day.
Even my small mission provides more than 60,000 hot meals each year
and nearly that in additional pounds of food for families in need. Our
mission is just one of more than 300 in the Citygate Network of
missions that prepare and serve more than 50 million meals annually.
I'm sure you're grateful for the hard work of these amazing
compassionate soldiers fighting for social justice. I also imagine you
would love to see people fed and cared for by their neighbors, local
churches and communities. If so, then you would naturally hope SNAP to
be merely ``supplemental'' to what's being provided by those more
meaningful sources. Unfortunately, it's not. An unemployed homeless man
yesterday shared a letter with me sent to him from our state's DSS
office regarding his SNAP benefits. It reads, ``The amount of benefits
you will continue to receive are: $234.00 thru 05/2022.'' Certainly,
you'd agree this amount is more than ``supplemental'' for a man who is
being fed by the mission where he currently resides. Certainly, this
indicates the number 42 million is woefully inflated compared to real
need.
No less important than my confidence in private charity to meet the
true need is the assumption I perceive behind the question you asked.
The use of that overwhelming number, 42 million, causes most minds to
quickly couple quantity with justification. However, the number of
people subscribing to any sort of thing does not necessitate its
justification, regardless of the quantity who subscribe. If it were not
so, then communism could be justified by the number of communists or
mob-rule by the quantity of the mob. If we so readily justify USDA's
SNAP program, we must also toss out, among many other things, those
valid and thoughtful arguments put forth by a few of our Founders in
the Federalist Papers as they argued for a Federal Government but
assured a newly liberated people that it would never grow beyond its
enumerated powers. In number 41, Madison reassures us:
For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers
be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included
in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor
common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain
and qualify it by a recital of particulars.
And in number 45:
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the
Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to
remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite.
As radical as it may seem to anyone in our culture today, I believe
more justified than any government program is the expectation that the
Federal Government should restrain itself to that list of ``few and
defined'' powers. It is not so much that I argue for diminishing
government as it is that I desire to magnify people. However, the more
power the government holds, the less the people are empowered.
Empowerment does not come by the simple transfer of wealth, but at the
moment a person realizes he or she can create it for himself. So, the
more the government grows in its unmerited transfer of wealth to the
poor, the less the poor person will find the flourishing life and
freedom for which he or she was created. Certainly, none of us should
embrace such a perversion of justice.
I am not asking you to close the SNAP program tomorrow. I only hope
you'll consider that the involvement of the Federal Government in
helping people in my community has also brought its share of hurt. At
least, I ask you to consider the following:
Do not expand the program as our economy regains its
footing.
Require work from able-bodied adults without dependents.
Seriously consider how the program could be turned over to
the states.
Last, please remember that the excellence of our nation stems in
great part from its establishment as a republic. We were never intended
to, nor should we be a nation ruled by mob nor by an elite aristocracy,
but by the people. In his letter to John Taylor in 1816, Thomas
Jefferson wrote;
``The further the departure from direct and constant control
by the citizens, the less has the government of the ingredient
of republicanism.''
Thank you for working with me to realize a grander America in which
we have rightfully returned to the citizenry's direct and constant
control that which it does best; love and care for neighbors in need.
______
Submitted Questions
Response from Lauren Lowenstein Bauer, Ph.D., Fellow in Economic
Studies, The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution
Question Submitted by Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, a Delegate
in Congress from Northern Mariana Islands
Question. In your testimony you recommend automatically increasing
SNAP benefit levels and ensuring the program expands during a recession
to reduce food insecurity. What are your thoughts on the benefits of
applying these reforms to the capped nutrition block grant to the
Marianas by transitioning into SNAP like the fifty states, Guam and the
Virgin Islands? Shouldn't the same safety net protections be available
for people in the Marianas as other Americans, including in Guam and
the Virgin Islands?
Answer. Current Block Grant Nutrition Assistance Programs (NAP) do
not expand with changes in the number of households that are eligible.
Generally, NAP does not allow for expansions or restrictions to
nutrition assistance because it is not an entitlement program and is
subject to a yearly budget constraint. Furthermore, any nutrition
disaster relief response in the U.S. territories must be completed
through acts of Congress, leading to delays in emergency nutrition
assistance.
The responsiveness to changing conditions on the ground is
important not only for recessions, but in cases when Disaster-SNAP may
be operative. NAP prevents the necessary quick response to natural
disaster nutrition assistance that SNAP adequately provides. According
to a report by the Food and Nutrition Service following Hurricanes Irma
and Maria in Puerto Rico, ``FNS and the Puerto Rican Government was not
able to distribute essential disaster nutrition grant funding to
survivors in Puerto Rico until 6 months after the hurricanes'' (USDA
2019).\1\ Meanwhile, ``the Virgin Islands, which participates in SNAP
and can provide assistance through the Disaster SNAP program, was able
to provide assistance . . . only 47 days after Hurricane Maria'' (CBPP
2020).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://bvirtualogp.pr.gov/ogp/Bvirtual/reogGubernamental/PDF/
Informes y Estudios/277002.pdf.
Editor's note: citations annotated with are retained in Committee
file.
\2\ https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/how-does-
household-food-assistance-in-puerto-rico-compare-to-the-rest-of.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAP covers a much smaller share of eligible households than in the
fifty states and the District of Columbia and the amount of assistance
that households receive is also typically smaller in order to stretch
the budgeted resources. The block grant structure is inadequate to meet
need at every point in the business cycle. I believe the evidence
supports transitioning those places currently covered by NAP to SNAP.
Question Submitted by Hon. Salud O. Carbajal, a Representative in
Congress from California
Question. One of the main ways we can make sure SNAP fulfills its
mission to fight hunger is ensure that the benefit is adequate.
Often, SNAP recipients still rely on food banks and other supports
to make ends meet for their families.
Like much of our country, rural areas of my Central Coast District
face specific challenges such as costs to travel to get food, or other
hardships.
Dr. Bauer, how can we make sure that the SNAP allotment reflects
the time and financial costs families face to purchase their groceries,
and what other changes would you recommend to make sure families have a
benefit adequate to meet their need for food?
Answer. The goals of safety net programs are to provide insurance
protection to those who are experiencing poor economic outcomes and to
support those who are trying to improve their situation. SNAP ensures
that eligible participants and families have access to food when they
have no- or low-income. The value of the SNAP benefits that a household
receives is a function of three factors: how much USDA determines it
minimally costs to achieve a healthy diet, how much money a household
has available to purchase groceries, and what share of that available
money the government expects a household to spend on groceries. The
maximum SNAP allotment is based on the Thrifty Food Plan (the Thrifty),
a minimal-cost model food plan for a healthy diet that is based on the
cost of purchasing foods consumed by the ``reference family,'' a male
and female aged 19-50, a child aged 6-8, and a child aged 9-11. The
maximum benefits can be dialed up and down for different household
sizes. While the lower 48 states have the same maximum benefit, Alaska,
Hawaii, and the territories that participate in SNAP have different
maximums. Households with positive net income are expected to
contribute 30 percent of that income toward groceries. Households that
have no net income receive the maximum benefit for their household's
size.
Because households that have no resources to contribute to the
purchase of groceries receive the maximum benefit, the maximum benefit,
i.e., the Thrifty, has to be sufficient to meet their food needs. While
there is evidence that SNAP is effective across many dimensions--
lifting millions out of poverty, supporting work, economic security,
and self-sufficiency, reducing food insecurity, and improving health
and education outcomes--the value of the SNAP maximum benefit is not
sufficient to provide adequate nutrition assistance for eligible
households.
The 2018 Farm Bill states that the Thrifty should be ``based on
current food prices, food composition data, consumption patterns, and
dietary guidance.'' It also newly requires a recalculation every 5
years, adding additional weight to the Congressional prerogative that
the Thrifty be regularly updated in order to incorporate ``current''
inputs.
The Congressional mandate regarding ``current'' inputs is in
conflict with an arbitrary administrative rule, the constant cost
constraint (i.e., the maximum cost allotment for age-gender groups).
The constant cost constraint distorts the formula in contravention to
the Congressionally-mandated ``current'' inputs and is not required in
law as part of the construction of the Thrifty.
According to the constant cost constraint, the total cost of an
age-gender market basket must remain constant to the original value of
the emergency use only Economy Plan and can only be adjusted for
inflation. Because the constant cost constraint holds the total value
of The Thrifty constant in real terms, the market baskets are forced to
skew away from actual consumption patterns to simulated consumption
patterns far outside norms, making it less likely that participants
have sufficient resources to purchase and consume a healthy diet.
Figure 1 illustrates how the constant constraint works. The
constant cost constraint causes significant and self-evident deviation
from actual consumption patterns toward the unrealistic consumption of
particular raw ingredients. In order to satisfy the constant cost
constraint, the Thrifty requires the consumption of more than 20 pounds
of orange juice (plus an additional 5 pounds of oranges), 12 pounds of
potatoes, 28 pounds of milk, and so forth. Models that loosen the
constant cost constraint reduce these disparities.[ii]
Through the review process, the U.S. Department of Agriculture in
partnership with the Office of Management and Budget may eliminate (or
relax) the constant cost constraint. Doing so would allow the
Congressionally-mandated inputs to update to ``current'' the total
value of the Thrifty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[ii]\ Wilde, P.E. and Llobera, J. (2009), Using the Thrifty Food
Plan to Assess the Cost of a Nutritious Diet. Journal of Consumer
Affairs, 43: 274-304.
Editor's note: the response from Dr. Bauer did not include the
reference [i], it has been reproduced herein as submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1
Average Household Consumption vs. Thrifty Shopping Plan
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: USDA 2000a, 2000b.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Editor's note: the graphic comes from the Hamilton Project's
Policy Brief 2016-06, which is derived from Policy Proposal 2016-06,
Modernizing SNAP Benefits, by James P. Ziliak, dated May 2016. The
sources listed are not listed in Dr. Bauer's response to Mr. Carbajal's
question. However, the sources referenced are listed herein for
completeness of the record, the policy proposal is retained in
Committee file, and is available at https://www.hamiltonproject.org/
assets/files/ziliak_modernizing_snap_benefits.pdf:
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2000a. ``Loss-Adjusted Food
Availability Data.'' Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
______2000b. ``Recipes and Tips for Healthy, Thrifty Meals.'' CNPP-
11. Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: All estimates are based on a household of four with two
children. Average household consumption is based on the loss-
adjusted food availability data series, which is derived from
food availability data from USDA's Economic Research Service by
adjusting for food spoilage, plate waste, and other losses, to
more closely approximate actual intake. The Thrifty Shopping
Plan represents Week 1 of the USDA's recipes for the 1999
Thrifty Food Plan. One gallon of milk equals 8.6 pounds and 1
gallon of orange juice equals 8 pounds.
A second place where the construction of the Thrifty can be
improved in a variety of ways is through the ``consumption patterns''
input. The last time that the Thrifty was constructed, USDA employed
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and Nielsen
data: average daily consumption of thousands of food items are
deconstructed and then reconstituted into more than four dozen food
categories (and then prices are applied).
There are numerous reasons to change how this input is measured.
NHANES data lacks external validity and identifies SNAP
participation through self-report.[iii] Only food
consumption pattern data from low-income households, or households with
before-tax incomes at or below 130 percent of the U.S. poverty
threshold, were used in the last calculation of the Thrifty. This
choice is problematic because lower income `food insufficient'
households' consumption patterns are proscribed by the resources
available to them.[iv] In other words, the choice to match
on consumption patterns of lower-income individuals (including a
disproportionate number of people with outlier consumption patterns at
the very lowest incomes) rather than the SNAP population prejudices the
calculation away from the actual consumption patterns of SNAP
households and even farther away from the consumption patterns of food-
secure SNAP households.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[iii]\ Caswell, J.A., Yaktine, A.L. and National Research Council,
2013. History, background, and goals of the supplemental nutrition
assistance program. Supplemental nutrition assistance program:
Examining the evidence to define benefit adequacy.
\[iv]\ Dixon, L., Winkleby, M., & Radimer, K. 2001 ``Dietary
Intakes and Serum Nutrients Differ between Adults from Food-
Insufficient and Food-Sufficient Families: Third National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994.'' The Journal of Nutrition,
Volume 131, Issue 4, Pages 1232-1246. Leung, C., Ding, E., Catalano,
P., Villamor, E., Rimm, E., Willett, W. 2012. ``Dietary intake and
dietary quality of low-income adults in the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program.'' The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
Volume 96, Issue 5, November 2012, Pages 977-988.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are several ways to improve the construction of the
consumption patterns input:
Within NHANES, selecting a population sample that that
reflects food-secure SNAP households;
Incorporate time use data from the American Time Use Survey
using the same population sample in NHANES as part of the
consumption patterns calculation to account for the cost of
food preparation time; and/or,
Use the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase
Survey (FoodAPS) data in addition to or in place of Nielsen
data.
These changes would go a long way in ensuring that SNAP households
receive adequate benefits.
Response from Odessa Davis; on behalf of No Kid Hungry Campaign, Share
our Strength
Question Submitted by Hon. Salud O. Carbajal, a Representative in
Congress from California
Question. One of the most crucial changes to SNAP during the
pandemic was the temporary expansions for college students, allowing
students who are eligible for work study or have no Expected Family
Contribution to apply for SNAP if they need help with their groceries.
The expansion is tied to the public health emergency, but we know
that students will need help with food so they can learn & complete
their degrees long after COVID.
Ms. Davis, what can we do to ensure the SNAP is there to serve low-
income college students?
Answer. Getting a college education is really important. It is also
really hard to stay in school when you are juggling working and raising
a child at the same time and trying to figure out how to pay all your
bills. Congress can help make it easier for people like me and my
fellow student parents to graduate by making sure SNAP is available to
us.
One way to increase access to SNAP among college students who are
struggling financially is to continue the eligibility expansions put in
place during COVID. That would allow students who are eligible for work
study or whose families don't have resources to help receive SNAP.
SNAP can be really confusing to figure out. Having colleges hire
people to help eligible students apply for SNAP and WIC could make a
big difference.
Finally, SNAP benefits are really low and it's hard to afford
healthy food. Increasing the amount of benefits would help everyone on
SNAP, including college students.
Response from Renee, Boynton-Jarrett, M.D., Sc.D., Associate Professor
of Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine;
Pediatrician, Boston Medical Center; Founder and Executive
Director, Vital Village Networks
Question Submitted by Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, a Delegate
in Congress from Northern Mariana Islands
Question. In your testimony you note that when children lack access
to necessities like nutritious food, even for a brief period of time--
their health is jeopardized. Last year, our governor removed families
from nutrition assistance due to lack of funds from the block grant.
From a health standpoint, would you agree that children in these
families would be best served under SNAP, where funding isn't capped,
than the block grant model?
Answer. I would agree that children are best served under SNAP as
an entitlement program, where funding is not capped as it would be in a
block grant.
Research has consistently shown that household food insecurity has
a significant and enduring impact on child health and
development.[16] Children in food-insecure households are
more likely to be in poor health, be hospitalized, at-risk of
developmental delays, and experiencing difficulties learning in
school.[16-18] Household food insecurity, even if at
marginal levels, is associated with adverse childhood developmental and
behavioral outcomes such as impaired cognitive development, socio-
emotional skills, and poor academic performance.[19, 20]
Food insecurity during key developmental periods, such as the first 5
years of life, can impact child health by disrupting brain growth and
development, harming physical development and negatively influencing
parental well-being.[20]
SNAP is associated with decreased food insecurity and improved
health outcomes among children.[21, 22] After receiving SNAP
benefits for 6 months food insecurity has been shown to fall by \1/3\
in children.[23] Infants, toddlers and preschoolers were
less likely to be hospitalized, underweight or at risk for
developmental delays when in families enrolled in SNAP in comparison to
those in likely eligible families that did not receive
SNAP.[24]
Rather than guaranteeing that SNAP can meet the needs of all who
become eligible, a block grant to SNAP sets funding at a fixed amount
and gives states authority to take actions that may divert funding for
the original purpose. During times when demand for SNAP is high, such
as a recession or natural disaster, there would be insufficient funds
to meet the needs of all experiencing hunger. Funding from the block
grant could be diverted to fill other budgetary needs. If SNAP funding
is capped in a block grant, benefits could be reduced or families
eliminated from the program, as you described, and leave families
without the nutrition they need to thrive and can have enduring
consequences on child health and development. Participation in SNAP
reduces hunger and leads to healthier and more academically successful
children.
Question Submitted by Hon. Salud O. Carbajal, a Representative in
Congress from California
Question. Nutrition security is critical at all stages of a child's
development. The patchwork of Federal nutrition programs seeks to
address childhood malnutrition, yet the prevalence of obesity, a form
of malnutrition resulting from food insecurity continues to rise, even
during the pandemic.
What are some of the barriers families experience in accessing WIC,
SNAP, free and reduced prices lunches to ensure their children have
consistent access to balanced nutritious diets?
Answer. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions
significantly disrupted daily routines for children, typical modalities
for receiving and accessing food, and combined with social and
environmental stressors related to the pandemic led to changes in
eating behaviors, physical activity, and stress regulation thereby
elevating obesity risk.[5, 6] Research has demonstrated that
access to SNAP during the prenatal period and in childhood is
associated with lower rates of obesity and metabolic syndrome in
adulthood.[7] Improvements in the nutritional content of the
WIC package have been associated with improvements in dietary quality
and nutrient intake during pregnancy [8] and improved
distributions of birth weight.[9] SNAP participation has
been associated with reduced childhood obesity.[10]
In the absence of a resilient and secure food system we cannot
ensure the nutritional needs of children and families are consistently
met. Research has shown that families that had abrupt reductions or
elimination of SNAP benefits resulting from increased income experience
increased household and child food insecurity.[11] SNAP
benefits are too low for families to afford a healthy
diet.[12] Expansions in SNAP and the Pandemic Electronic
Benefit Transfer (P-EBT) program passed in relief packages by Congress
helped elevate the benefits to a level nearing USDA estimates for a
nutritious diet.
Barriers to SNAP participation include misinformation regarding
eligibility criteria and fears regarding repercussions (child removal,
penalties, payback obligations), particularly among immigrant
households as public charge criteria changed.[13]
Facilitators of SNAP participation include the treatment of recipients
with dignity and autonomy to make purchasing decisions consistent with
household needs.[14] Further, addressing barriers that
farmers experience to accepting SNAP, such as internet access
challenges,[15] would help increase the availability of
healthy food options for SNAP recipients.
Question Submitted by Hon. Jimmy Panetta, a Representative in Congress
from California
Question. SNAP does not currently allow program participants to use
their benefits to purchase home-delivered meals that are tailored to
health care needs and chronic conditions, which can help so many people
stay healthy at home. Given the health benefits of these types of
meals, in your view, should the SNAP Online Purchasing Pilot Program be
expanded to include smaller, independent retail partners, including
organizations that provide medically-tailored meals delivered directly
to the homes of low-income vulnerable populations, like seniors,
nationwide?
Answer. The ability to engage organizations that provide medically-
tailored meals and independent retail partners that can deliver food to
homes would provide a needed health benefit to an underserved
population: children and adults with chronic and medically complex
health conditions who are recipients of SNAP. The delivery of medically
tailored meals to medically and socially complex adults has been
associated with reduced hospital and nursing facility
admissions.[1] The delivery of medically-tailored meals can
also promote family meals which are associated with healthy nutritional
outcomes for children and address challenges to meal
preparation.[2]
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the potential value of online
purchasing options. State policymakers should evaluate the benefits of
online purchasing pilot and other innovative delivery methods. Delivery
systems should reduce stigma and maximize participation of diverse
retailers that offer high quality of nutritional foods.[3]
Presently there are a limited number of online retailers available in
the SNAP Online Purchasing Pilot Program. Next, efforts are needed to
ensure equity for online purchasing, including broadband internet
access and delivery access. Finally, meaningful engagement of SNAP
recipients and research is needed to better understand barriers and
motivators for online food shopping.[4]
References
[1] Berkowitz, S.A., et al., Association between receipt of a
medically tailored meal program and health care use. * JAMA Internal
Medicine, 2019. 179(6): p. 786-793.
* Editor's note: entries annotated with are retained in Committee
file.
[2] Dwyer, L., et al., Promoting family meals: a review of existing
interventions and opportunities for future research. Adolesc. Health
Med. Ther., 2015. 6: p. 115-31.
[3] Paysour, M., Expansion of SNAP Online Purchasing Pilot to local
food systems: An equity-focused policy brief. 2020.
[4] Martinez, O., et al., EBT Payment for Online Grocery Orders: a
Mixed-Methods Study to Understand Its Uptake among SNAP Recipients and
the Barriers to and Motivators for Its Use. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav.,
2018. 50(4): p. 396-402.e1.
[5] Stavridou, A., et al., Obesity in Children and Adolescents
during COVID-19 Pandemic. Children, 2021. 8(2): p. 135.
[6] Browne, N.T., et al., When pandemics collide: the impact of
COVID-19 on childhood obesity. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 2021. 56:
p. 90.
[7] Hoynes, H., D.W. Schanzenbach, and D. Almond, Long-run impacts
of childhood access to the safety net. American Economic Review, 2016.
106(4): p. 903-34.
[8] Hamad, R., et al., The Impact of the Revised WIC Food Package
on Maternal Nutrition During Pregnancy and Postpartum. Am. J.
Epidemiol., 2019. 188(8): p. 1493-1502.
[9] Hamad, R., et al., Association of Revised WIC Food Package With
Perinatal and Birth Outcomes: A Quasi-Experimental Study. JAMA
Pediatr., 2019. 173(9): p. 845-852.
[10] Burgstahler, R., C. Gundersen, and S. Garasky, The supplemental
nutrition assistance program, financial stress, and childhood obesity.
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 2012. 41(1): p. 29-42.
[11] Ettinger de Cuba, S., et al., Loss Of SNAP Is Associated With
Food Insecurity And Poor Health In Working Families With Young
Children. Health Aff. (Millwood), 2019. 38(5): p. 765-773.
[12] Council, N.R., Supplemental nutrition assistance program:
examining the evidence to define benefit adequacy. 2013.
[13] Pelto, D.J., et al., The Nutrition Benefits Participation Gap:
Barriers to Uptake of SNAP and WIC Among Latinx American Immigrant
Families. Journal of Community Health, 2020. 45(3): p. 488-491.
[14] Gundersen, C., Ensuring the dignity and autonomy of SNAP
recipients. Physiology & Behavior, 2020. 221: p. 112909.
[15] Kellegrew, K., et al., Evaluating barriers to SNAP/EBT
acceptance in farmers markets: A survey of farmers. Journal of
Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 2018. 8(1): p.
133-146.
[16] de Oliveira, K.H.D., et al., Household food insecurity and
early childhood development: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Matern. Child Nutr., 2020. 16(3): p. e12967.
[17] Pai, S. and K. Bahadur, The Impact of Food Insecurity on Child
Health. Pediatr. Clin. North Am., 2020. 67(2): p. 387-396.
[18] Drennen, C.R., et al., Food Insecurity, Health, and Development
in Children Under Age Four Years. Pediatrics, 2019. 144(4): p.
e20190824.
[19] Shankar, P., R. Chung, and D.A. Frank, Association of Food
Insecurity with Children's Behavioral, Emotional, and Academic
Outcomes: A Systematic Review. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr., 2017. 38(2):
p. 135-150.
[20] Johnson, A.D. and A.J. Markowitz, Associations Between
Household Food Insecurity in Early Childhood and Children's
Kindergarten Skills. Child Dev., 2018. 89(2): p. e1-e17.
[21] Mabli, J. and J. Ohls, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program participation is associated with an increase in household food
security in a national evaluation. The Journal of Nutrition, 2015.
145(2): p. 344-351.
[22] Mabli, J. and J. Worthington, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program participation and child food security. Pediatrics, 2014.
133(4): p. 610-619.
[23] White House Council of Economic Advisers, ``Long-Term Benefits
of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,'' 2015.
[24] Schmidt, L., L. Shore-Sheppard, and T. Watson, The effect of
safety-net programs on food insecurity. Journal of Human Resources,
2016. 51(3): p. 589-614.
[all]
File and source
- File
- CHRG_chrg-117hhrg45583_chrg-117hhrg45583.htm
- Size
- 296,048 bytes
- SHA-256
- 6f0efa31fe7ee372656e1f79c188bdc563d80ae83bb081e14d60451e21c29e0f
- Original
- No public link identified.