A farm-bill flap over the terms, and reach, of food assistance

The farm bill, a necessarily bipartisan exercise every four years or so, doesn’t usually set off major fireworks in Congress. Farm Belt Republicans team up with urban Democrats to push through legislation that includes subsidies for farmers and food assistance for poor people. But this year, House Republicans are championing major reforms for food stamps, and Democrats are boiling. The GOP concern is that spending on the program – officially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP – soared during the Great Recession and isn’t yet close to returning to pre-recession levels. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office thinks participation will fall over the next decade, but House Republicans want to reduce the ranks more quickly by tightening eligibility and putting 5 million or so able SNAP recipients into jobs or job training. That’s causing House Democrats to reject the package. Leaders of the Senate Agriculture Committee are less likely to push for major SNAP changes. So the final bill might be less radical than the current political conflagration might signal.

SOURCE:

American Farm Bureau Federation, US Department of Agriculture, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Congressional Budget Office

|
Jacob Turcotte/Staff

Why We Wrote This

A historically high number of Americans rely on federal food assistance. Supporters say food stamps offer compassion to the most needy. Critics say that with the US unemployment rate at its lowest level in 18 years, a higher form of compassion is a job.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to A farm-bill flap over the terms, and reach, of food assistance
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2018/0424/A-farm-bill-flap-over-the-terms-and-reach-of-food-assistance
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe