Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

babylonsister

(170,963 posts)
Wed May 2, 2018, 04:56 PM May 2018

A 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 that’s 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 America’s 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 program’s 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 country’s “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 who’d meet SNAP’s 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 participate—or those who don’t 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 SNAP’s 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 issues—aging, incarceration, the grip of the opioid crisis, and increasing instability of agriculture—keep 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 Republicans—who passed this Farm Bill through committee with no Democratic votes—the 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.
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Republican Plan Could Worsen Rural America's Food Crisis (Original Post) babylonsister May 2018 OP
"I think the principles of food stamps and continual dependency is one that's worth fighting for," procon May 2018 #1
Don't worry NewJeffCT May 2018 #2
A country that chooses not to feed its own citizens - MAGA! gratuitous May 2018 #3
Earth to Republicans cojoel May 2018 #4

procon

(15,805 posts)
1. "I think the principles of food stamps and continual dependency is one that's worth fighting for,"
Wed May 2, 2018, 05:38 PM
May 2018

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.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
3. A country that chooses not to feed its own citizens - MAGA!
Wed May 2, 2018, 05:45 PM
May 2018

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)
4. Earth to Republicans
Wed May 2, 2018, 07:27 PM
May 2018

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!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Republican Plan Could W...