Iowa Republicans want to ban SNAP recipients from buying meat, white bread, and American cheese

[Estrid]

• Iowa Republicans proposed a bill that would drastically limit what foods SNAP recipients can buy.
• People wouldn't be able to buy grocery staples like white bread, American cheese, fresh meat, and more.
• Critics argue the bill would further burden low-income people who are already food-insecure.

Iowa Republicans are proposing sweeping changes to the state's food assistance program — including banning beneficiaries from buying grocery staples like meat, American cheese, or flour.


A bill co-sponsored by 39 Republican state legislators would limit those getting Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to buying food on a more restrictive list from a separate program intended for pregnant women and children.

SNAP recipients wouldn't be able to buy a variety of foods, including white grain bread, buns with added nuts or seeds, white rice, pasta sauce, canned fruits or soups, baked beans, cheese slices, butter, or flour.

They would instead be limited to foods approved for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program.

The foods people can purchase in the WIC program are much more restrictive than those allowed in SNAP. That's because WIC is designed to complement SNAP, and is meant to provide necessary nutrition specifically for — as the name suggests — pregnant women, new mothers, and infants, according to Michelle Book, the president and CEO of Food Bank of Iowa.


Story continues @Link below.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/nutrition/iowa-republicans-want-to-ban-snap-recipients-from-buying-meat-white-bread-and-american-cheese

People would be more "food secure" if they
only bought foods such as whole wheat flour,
beans, potatoes, rice, vegetables-T bone steaks
use up the money early in the month.

 

[Estrid]

Only if it's whole wheat, apparently.

White bread is trash.

 

[rjs330]

Maybe they’re more people who are really, truly disabled in a way that they need these benefits than you’ll willing to think exist?
Are there “cheats?” Yup.
I’m willing to take that chance, because I believe that people are good and won’t want to be a bad citizen by relying on the government to “take care of them”, (when they don’t need that).

(Speaking of welfare, didn’t Elon get some government money?…I’ll just put those goalposts back, shall I?)

There are more bad people out there than you realize. I am VERY willing to help those is true need. It's what we SHOULD do as a society. There are far too many cheats. The government doesn't have the people to be able to catch them. The only way they get caught is if someone else reports them. And most people don't.

 

[seeking.IAM]

There are far too many cheats. The government doesn't have the people to be able to catch them. The only way they get caught is if someone else reports them.

In the earlier iteration SNAP, the Food Stamp program I was one of those government people (1973). In those days, recipients had to recertify eligibility every 30 days. In an arduous process they would report to our office at its 8:30 and take a ticket like one might get at a meat market to wait for their number to be called to be seen by one of 12 caseworkers serving hundreds of folks every day. They would bring their receipts, proof of income, layoff notices, etc. Some would wait hours to be seen resulting in a very irritable waiting room with occasional incidents. We actually had to do home visits periodically to recertify persons in their homes to ensure residency and that there were no other wage earners living in the household. I made several home visits to reported addresses that turned out to be vacant lots. Although there were cheaters they were a small minority. The vast majority were persons down on their luck due to illness, job loss, etc. I suspect such scrutiny was done away with because .gov finally figured out that catching the few that cheated cost more than allowing a few to slip through. Regardless, once one has been determined eligible for the benefit, I think .gov needs to step out of the way and let recipients spend their benefit on any edible product they wish. It is supposed to be a free country after all. Shouldn't we allow folks down on their luck freedom to choose what to eat when it doesn't cost .gov anymore and doesn't hurt anyone (but ourselves perhaps)?

 

[iluvatar5150]

In the earlier iteration SNAP, the Food Stamp program I was one of those government people (1973). In those days, recipients had to recertify eligibility every 30 days. In an arduous process they would report to our office at its 8:30 and take a ticket like one might get at a meat market to wait for their number to be called to be seen by one of 12 caseworkers serving hundreds of folks every day. They would bring their receipts, proof of income, layoff notices, etc. Some would wait hours to be seen resulting in a very irritable waiting room with occasional incidents. We actually had to do home visits periodically to recertify persons in their homes to ensure residency and that there were no other wage earners living in the household. I made several home visits to reported addresses that turned out to be vacant lots. Although there were cheaters they were a small minority. The vast majority were persons down on their luck due to illness, job loss, etc. I suspect such scrutiny was done away with because .gov finally figured out that catching the few that cheated cost more than allowing a few to slip through. Regardless, once one has been determined eligible for the benefit, I think .gov needs to step out of the way and let recipients spend their benefit on any edible product they wish. It is supposed to be a free country after all. Shouldn't we allow folks down on their luck freedom to choose what to eat when it doesn't cost .gov anymore and doesn't hurt anyone (but ourselves perhaps)?

Administrative burden is a real thing that incentivizes folks to not claim benefits to which they'd otherwise be entitled. Folks would do well to ask themselves whether their goal is really to help people and then take a look at what life is like trying to avail one's self of that help, and evaluate whether or not that "help" is doing what it's intended to do.

 

[rjs330]

In the earlier iteration SNAP, the Food Stamp program I was one of those government people (1973). In those days, recipients had to recertify eligibility every 30 days. In an arduous process they would report to our office at its 8:30 and take a ticket like one might get at a meat market to wait for their number to be called to be seen by one of 12 caseworkers serving hundreds of folks every day. They would bring their receipts, proof of income, layoff notices, etc. Some would wait hours to be seen resulting in a very irritable waiting room with occasional incidents. We actually had to do home visits periodically to recertify persons in their homes to ensure residency and that there were no other wage earners living in the household. I made several home visits to reported addresses that turned out to be vacant lots. Although there were cheaters they were a small minority. The vast majority were persons down on their luck due to illness, job loss, etc. I suspect such scrutiny was done away with because .gov finally figured out that catching the few that cheated cost more than allowing a few to slip through. Regardless, once one has been determined eligible for the benefit, I think .gov needs to step out of the way and let recipients spend their benefit on any edible product they wish. It is supposed to be a free country after all. Shouldn't we allow folks down on their luck freedom to choose what to eat when it doesn't cost .gov anymore and doesn't hurt anyone (but ourselves perhaps)?

It used to be the government was much more diligent in that aspect. But we've gone a long way from that these days. The accountability is gone. Now we just throw money at everything and pay for lots of administrators instead of upping the field workers to make sure the recipients are held accountable and are not cheating the system. I've worked with poor people for a very long time and I see the cheats and I wonder how it is you are getting all this help? You are not disabled mentally or physically.

However I don't think they should be able to buy whatever they want. If WE are paying their bill then WE should be able to tell them they have to eat healthy because WE are also going to pay their medical costs for being unhealthy.

However, that doesn't mean we can't allow them to buy flour. That's patently stupid and I do t understand it. But line I said, if you are going to depend on the government then expect government to limit you. That's what government does.

The I fortunate thing is the government is not limiting enough cheats. I think what they may be doing is t instead of eliminating cheats they are simply limiting food in hopes people will try and get it stay off.

 

[Pommer]

It used to be the government was much more diligent in that aspect. But we've gone a long way from that these days. The accountability is gone. Now we just throw money at everything and pay for lots of administrators instead of upping the field workers to make sure the recipients are held accountable and are not cheating the system. I've worked with poor people for a very long time and I see the cheats and I wonder how it is you are getting all this help? You are not disabled mentally or physically.

However I don't think they should be able to buy whatever they want. If WE are paying their bill then WE should be able to tell them they have to eat healthy because WE are also going to pay their medical costs for being unhealthy.

However, that doesn't mean we can't allow them to buy flour. That's patently stupid and I do t understand it. But line I said, if you are going to depend on the government then expect government to limit you. That's what government does.

The I fortunate thing is the government is not limiting enough cheats. I think what they may be doing is t instead of eliminating cheats they are simply limiting food in hopes people will try and get it stay off.

Are you defending using the power of the government to make utilizing the social safety-nets so arduous and difficult that only those who have no other choice will remain in the system?

 

[Estrid]

In the earlier iteration SNAP, the Food Stamp program I was one of those government people (1973). In those days, recipients had to recertify eligibility every 30 days. In an arduous process they would report to our office at its 8:30 and take a ticket like one might get at a meat market to wait for their number to be called to be seen by one of 12 caseworkers serving hundreds of folks every day. They would bring their receipts, proof of income, layoff notices, etc. Some would wait hours to be seen resulting in a very irritable waiting room with occasional incidents. We actually had to do home visits periodically to recertify persons in their homes to ensure residency and that there were no other wage earners living in the household. I made several home visits to reported addresses that turned out to be vacant lots. Although there were cheaters they were a small minority. The vast majority were persons down on their luck due to illness, job loss, etc. I suspect such scrutiny was done away with because .gov finally figured out that catching the few that cheated cost more than allowing a few to slip through. Regardless, once one has been determined eligible for the benefit, I think .gov needs to step out of the way and let recipients spend their benefit on any edible product they wish. It is supposed to be a free country after all. Shouldn't we allow folks down on their luck freedom to choose what to eat when it doesn't cost .gov anymore and doesn't hurt anyone (but ourselves perhaps)?

Choose sounds nice.
But it's limited by some rules.
Like no alcohol.

The q is what limits.
A humane policy, imo., is no food
like " wonder bread " that is just trash,
unhealthy.

 

[variant]

It might well be poorly designed. I doubt eliminating meat, white bread, and American cheese is the way to fix it.

One of the reasons it is so poorly designed is because some people hate it so much that they purposefully sabotage it at every opportunity.

This is one of those times.

 

[variant]

Are you defending using the power of the government to make utilizing the social safety-nets so arduous and difficult that only those who have no other choice will remain in the system?

The poor need to be miserable and taught to deal with senseless bureaucracy apparently.

That will teach them to not be poor.

 

[Estrid]

The poor need to be miserable and taught to deal with senseless bureaucracy apparently.

That will teach them to not be poor.

It should work.

Having everything I want taught
me what I like.

 

[variant]

It should work.

Having everything I want taught
me what I like.

What does preventing poor people from buying flour on government assistance accomplish?

I didn't think being against stupid/senseless laws was a partisan thing...

 

[seeking.IAM]

I wonder what these politicians ate at their last fund raising dinner?

 

[Neogaia777]

Some of the abuses sometimes involve selling drugs and being able to report zero income and therefore still get everything, etc...

I once knew someone who was able to report zero income, and get full SNAP benefits, and free zero cost on everything medical, and would go to doctors and get pills that sold for 30 dollars a pill on the street, and that's how they (she) got her income to keep a roof over her head and everything else, etc, luckily, doctors and pharmacies have started cracking down on some of those types of medications now, but some people can still find a way, as there is still always street drugs, etc, but, in my state now, they have legalized marajuana, and might start doing it with some other drugs soon, and believe it or not, it actually greatly reduces these kinds of abuses, because like, with marajuana now, it has become so cheap and easily available now, that no one buys or sells it on the street anymore, as there is no longer any profit for them to be made or had with it anymore, and it has actually reduced crime with it, etc, but people do still find ways, etc, because that's what these kinds of people do, etc. The reason I did not turn this person in when she was doing it at the time is because she was family, and I was trying to help her at the time, but she is not able to do what she used to do now anymore, thankfully, or thank God, etc...

This is probably not the majority of people on benefits by any means, and in fact, I think the amount or percentage of people who do actually abuse it like this is actually quite low, but a few bad eggs can ruin or spoil the whole bunch and ruin it for everybody else you know...

It is getting or becoming harder to do it I think, etc...

At least in states like mine now, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Estrid]

What does preventing poor people from buying flour on government assistance accomplish?

I didn't think being against stupid/senseless laws was a partisan thing...

I said white bread, like wonder bread.
So why turn it into something else?

Stupid laws allow abuses like wasted money
and bad nutrition.

 

[variant]

I said white bread, like wonder bread.
So why turn it into something else?

Stupid laws allow abuses like wasted money
and bad nutrition.

The law in question keeps people from buying flour on snap benefits.

 

[seeking.IAM]

After following this thread, now I can't get this old tune out of my head...

I don't eat white flour, white sugar makes you rot,​

Oh, white could be beautiful but mostly it's not.​

A little bit of whole meal, some raisins and cheese,​

But I don't eat animals and they don't eat me.​

Oh no, I don't eat animals 'cause I love them, you see,​

I don't eat animals, I want nothing dead in me.​

​

I Don't Eat Animals By Melanie (Melanie Sofka, 1970)​

 

[Estrid]

The law in question keeps people from buying flour on snap benefits.

I didnt suggest it but I'd support it.

They would feed such junk to zoo animals.

 

[variant]

I didnt suggest it but I'd support it.

They would feed such junk to zoo animals.

Flour? That's a weird opinion. You do know that we make a lot of different things out of flour right?

 

[Estrid]

Flour? That's a weird opinion. You do know that we make a lot of different things out of flour right?

It's not me who needs education.
Look up white flout nutrition