Junk Legislation: Another (Bi-Partisan) Intrusion into the Lives of Poor Folks in Missouri
Incredibly, a bi-partisan effort in the Missouri state house of representatives proposes a bill to block SNAP recipients from purchasing energy drinks in Missouri House Bill 1283. Missouri State Rep and bill sponsor Keith English went further when he accused poor people of reselling the energy drinks in a KCTV5 news report.
Is there fraud in the food stamps business? Yes, people and small businesses are involved small-time abuse of food stamps, but fraud and corruption is much more costly in other government-regulated programs that favor large multi-national companies, like the $62 million settlement case against military contractor Northrup Grumman and $10.5 against Lockheed Martin and post-Katrina by government officials and charities.
Calls to control food items purchased with SNAP are widespread, like from Time's Christopher Matthews asks "Why would barring junk food be functionally different than barring alcohol?"
Many people commenting on the KCTV5 report agreed with blocking SNAP participants from purchasing junk food, like this one from Dick "I was a Walmart yesterday and watched two ladies spend $200 on junk food and energy drinks with our money. Purchases need to be limited to basis necessities for nutrition."
Comments seemed to be evenly divided between controlling food purchases with "our money" and those that advocate for letting poor people decide themselves what to purchase with the food assistance money, like this creative comment from Gail Smith:
You can improve the lives of low-income people by stopping another intrusion in their lives and invest Missouri tax money in public education, job and skills training and expanding Medicaid and health care.
Contact your Missouri representative and tell them to stop this "junk legislation."
Is there fraud in the food stamps business? Yes, people and small businesses are involved small-time abuse of food stamps, but fraud and corruption is much more costly in other government-regulated programs that favor large multi-national companies, like the $62 million settlement case against military contractor Northrup Grumman and $10.5 against Lockheed Martin and post-Katrina by government officials and charities.
Calls to control food items purchased with SNAP are widespread, like from Time's Christopher Matthews asks "Why would barring junk food be functionally different than barring alcohol?"
Many people commenting on the KCTV5 report agreed with blocking SNAP participants from purchasing junk food, like this one from Dick "I was a Walmart yesterday and watched two ladies spend $200 on junk food and energy drinks with our money. Purchases need to be limited to basis necessities for nutrition."
Comments seemed to be evenly divided between controlling food purchases with "our money" and those that advocate for letting poor people decide themselves what to purchase with the food assistance money, like this creative comment from Gail Smith:
I work. I get food assistance. I understand I should only be allowed to use my food assistance to buy what people who have never had to use it say I can buy. I don't deserve any comforts or treats, only the basic necessities. I'm glad you told me I am not entitled to anything more than what it takes to survive and what you consider healthy. I never would have known how to spend my benefits otherwise. Maybe you should just take my card and shop for me, so I don't get anything my kids and I like, only what you think we need.
You can improve the lives of low-income people by stopping another intrusion in their lives and invest Missouri tax money in public education, job and skills training and expanding Medicaid and health care.
Contact your Missouri representative and tell them to stop this "junk legislation."
Comments