Paul Krugman: Cutting Successful SNAP Program "An Awesome Combination of Ignorance And Cruelty"

[Igel]

3. The entire debate is simplistic.

It's billed as cutting money.

As far as I can tell the monetary cuts are projections based on the ability of current (and future) recipients to meet new eligibility requirements. Many of the new ones are actually just old ones restored, with waivers by the states to expand coverage ruled out. The reason given for relaxing the requirements was the economic downturn. As unemployment falls, either that reason stops being valid or the reason given is shown to be false. Or a different reason that didn't exist and is now important has to be produced.

Now, the debate seems to be "they're cutting this much" or "they're cutting that much," as though actual dollar amounts were specified. The debate should be on the continued need for the reduced/relaxed eligibility requirements, the populations affected, and the reasonableness of the work/volunteer or training requirements.