The money’s there.
Don’t be fooled by the Republican rhetoric about SNAP benefits. They will tell you that they have no choices, that it’s the Democrats who are to blame because they won’t sign onto plans to reopen the government, that their hands are tied and there’s no money to be found.
They’re lying.
From the White House to the governor’s mansion, they’re lying. All of them.
The truth is, even without reopening, there are funds available to pay for a program that feeds 15 percent of Alabamians – more than 750,000 people. There are actually multiple options at the state and federal levels to either fully or partially fund the program and ensure that poor people, including tens of thousands of children, aren’t going hungry.
They don’t want to.
Instead, they want to use the spectacle of starving children – in a country that’s about to have its first trillionaire, no less – as a bargaining chip. A bargaining chip in their quest to cut health care subsidies and kick some 4 million Americans off their health insurance plans in order to give the wealthiest people and companies huge tax breaks.
The reality, though, is that there is roughly $30 billion in federal contingency funds available to pay to keep the SNAP programing up and running. In Alabama, the Rainy Day funds, which were established to cover budget shortfalls, have about a billion dollars in them.
It would cost Alabama about $150 million to fully fund the program for a month.
We have the money.
Honestly, I’m not sure how we got to this point in American politics – where politicians sitting on piles of cash would, for political gain, refuse to fund programs that feed poor families. And simultaneously justify it by implying that many of the recipients are deadbeats who are scamming the system and that Dems are to blame anyway.
Just for the record, around half of the people who receive SNAP benefits do work. They earn so little that they, and their family members, require assistance to put food on the table. A significant portion of the recipients are children. Another significant percentage are elderly.
But what you’re really concerned about is how this affects you. And here’s the bottom line: The average American taxpayer spends $36 per year to support the SNAP program.
The average American taxpayer spends $670 per year on corporate subsidies.
This is how out of touch we’ve become. Right now, as you’re reading this, there’s a keyboard warrior hammering out a real scorcher of a post about the deadbeat men getting food stamps, while ignoring the multi-billion dollar corporation getting 20 times as much of your money.
Which is how we end up with out-of-touch, self-centered, elitist-serving, boot-licking lawmakers who can justify almost anything except addressing the needs of the masses.
You doubt this?
While state Republican leaders were quick to shoot down the notion of using reserve funds to keep Alabama’s SNAP program up and running, you know what they found a way to justify?
How about $400 million in COVID relief funds that were used for a mega prison?
Or $25 million in education funds that were proposed for a water park?
Or more than $500 million annually going from public schools to private businesses?
You see, it’s about priorities. It’s about the people you know. It’s about who you’re really serving while in office.
Look at Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin, for example.
His city has nowhere close to the resources of the state. And yet, somehow, Woodfin found a million dollars in the city reserve fund to prop up food assistance programs for those in his city who will be impacted by the SNAP stoppage. He’s also using city resources to allow the city to organize local food banks, shelters, churches and other charitable organizations so the city’s hungry will know where to go, and so no one gets left hungry.
Forget the R vs. D politics for a moment and ask yourself this question: Which one is right?
Don’t worry about the national spectacle. Don’t worry about who’s to blame for the shutdown. Don’t concern yourself with what’s most politically advantageous.
Consider the real world implications. Consider the hungry people, the suffering kids. The people who are going to have to make gut wrenching decisions because of a disagreement well above their station in life.
What would you do?
You know the answer. You know what’s right here.
And more importantly, you know who’s wrong here.
We have the money. Feed the people.
