General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA Republican Plan Could Worsen Rural America's Food Crisis
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/05/the-future-hardships-of-rural-america/559343/A Republican Plan Could Worsen Rural America's Food Crisis
The draft Farm Bill in consideration in the House stands to exacerbate poverty, nutrition insecurity, and community collapse in the poorest areas of the country.
Vann R. Newkirk II 6:00 AM ET Politics
snip//
Many of the arguments in favor of work requirements in the Farm Bill currently cycling through Congress operate from the assumption that SNAP is too generous, and that food is generally accessible. I think the principles of food stamps and continual dependency is one thats worth fighting for, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said in April, in a statement of support for the Farm Bill. In his framing, the matter of work requirements in SNAP is one of individual dependency and industriousness, and not one of survival.
That framework clearly fails, though, in Americas rural areas, which rely on SNAP more heavily than cities, and where poor adults and children can suffer deep food instability and jobs are ever harder to come by. A map from the Food Research & Action Center illustrates the places in America with the greatest SNAP participation rates. With few exceptions, the counties with the highest percentage of SNAP recipients are rural, with a third or more of all the families in the poorest rural counties receiving assistance. In all, rural households are about 25 percent more likely to receive SNAP benefits than urban households are.
The increased reliance of rural households on SNAP means that, in many rural areas, SNAP keeps fragile nutrition networks afloat, and the programs meager average daily benefit is all that stands between recipients and hunger. It may seem counterintuitive, given the common association of rural areas with agriculture, but rural areas are home to most of the countrys food deserts, where fresh produce and healthy options are often out of reach. Long drives for food and groceries are common, which means that time and transportation costs are appended to food costs in family budgets. The number of rural grocery stores is declining precipitously nationwide, tightening the food supply and increasing costs.
snip//
Of course, savings will accrue most heavily in places with the highest SNAP participation rates, and also with the greatest impediments to finding jobs. That means the true impact of work requirements will be felt doubly hard in rural areas. Employment has long been depressed in rural areas, and the share of employed adults whod meet SNAPs 20-hour-a-week work requirements has been markedly lower in rural areas than in urban ones for at least a decade. The Great Recession destabilized labor markets in cities, suburbs, and rural counties alike, but the rebound in job growth has occurred almost exclusively in cities and suburbs.
Additionally, of the jobs that still exist in rural areas, farm and related work is often seasonal, meaning even the hardest workers in rural areas might face the loss of their benefits, with less of a grace period. While federally-funded work programs or some other service activities could theoretically be an alternative to meeting the requirements, so far federal work-support programs have struggled to meet the needs of an increasingly isolated rural America, and could themselves impose significant burdens on people struggling to travel to participateor those who dont have the broadband internet access required to complete online programs or job applications.
In all, applying stricter work requirements to more (and older) Americans would create a unique drain on rural communities. Food insecurity is already entrenched in rural America, in spite of the high SNAP participation rates. Grocery stores offering fresh produce are disappearing, and the remaining grocery stores owe much of their survival to SNAPs current caseload and meager benefits. Both obesity and malnutrition are most abundant in rural areas. In the poorest rural counties, somewhere between a third and half of all residents have to choose between eating and keeping the lights on. And a host of other related issuesaging, incarceration, the grip of the opioid crisis, and increasing instability of agriculturekeep the pressure on.
SNAP and its predecessors are remembered as the programs that eliminated the kinds of abject poverty and hunger that most believe simply are no longer possible in the United States. That perceived distance from the hookworms and bloated bellies of poverty in the developing world has allowed Republicanswho passed this Farm Bill through committee with no Democratic votesthe ability to credibly state that the current problem with food assistance is dependency. But, just like the hookworms, that kind of poverty still sticks around in some pockets of America, waiting for the safety net to thin.
procon
(15,805 posts)so says this overweight, well fed man, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, who has never had to struggle for food or gone hungry a single day in his life.
NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)they'll just blame it on Obama and Clinton.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Who knew that feeding our own people was holding America back from being great? Isn't it odd how the United States passes heavy judgments on other countries for things we ourselves do? "Syria's poisoning its own people!" Yeah, and how's the water supply in Flint? Still polluted? "North Korea is starving its own people!" At least they have the bad excuse of shamefully poor government; we starve our citizens by choice because we think wealthy people aren't wealthy enough. Nobody ever seems to worry about the wealthy getting too dependent on government handouts.
cojoel
(952 posts)Should it not be the case that those who are able to work and do work should be able to earn enough money to not even need food assistance? Try fixing the right problem!