Food Stamp Facts; Something to Chew On

Newt Gingrich called President Barack Obama "the most successful food stamp president in American history." Presumably "the most successful Electronic Benefit Transfer president" wouldn't provoke the same "Welfare Queen" hysteria he was going for. EBTs, a dedicated debit-card system, replaced food stamps in the late 1990s.



Gingrich griped his accusation was unfairly characterized as racist. After all, he did stop a shade -- pun intended -- short of his idol Ronald Reagan's allusions to the "strapping young buck" who used food stamps to buy T-bone steaks. Be that as it may, it sure did light up the right-wing racist blogosphere which knows exactly what he was inferring.



This is Gingrich's tactic of choice whenever he requires attention like now as he tries to punch-up his already flailing presidential bid. Say something boorish, outlandish and borderline racist to rile-up the base and then go all cerebral and offended when he gets called out.



Food stamps, now the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), have been around since 1939 for a reason. Some people can't afford food. And guess what? During a recession even more can't. Right now that's close to 45 million people or 14.3 percent of the population, about the same number the CIA World Factbook states are living below the federal poverty line of $22,025 a year for a family of four. Imagine that! Poor people using EBTs.



Here are a few more facts as opposed to closet racist histrionics: Participants must be citizens or qualified aliens; 43 percent are white, 49 percent children, 9 percent seniors; 45 percent of adults have jobs; $31 million was spent at military commissaries last year; the average gross annual income per household is $8,076 supplemented by an average $290 per month in EBTs.



That's not indicative of 45 million slackers living off the system. That's indicative of something systemically wrong with the system.



Every economic indicator since Reaganomics took hold in the 1980s tells the same story: a declining middleclass, a loss of good-paying blue-collar jobs, falling median income and increasing poverty and debt, but somehow, according to Gingrich, those 45 million people are all Obama's fault.



So, what's Newt's solution? He wants to cut taxes on the rich to create jobs in order to wipeout food stamps. Since job growth actually declined following the Bush tax cuts even prior to the 2008 recession, where were all those rich people creating jobs then?



Conversely, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's has determined that EBTs have the highest estimated multiplier impact on the economy of 1.73 because people spend against them immediately. Making the Bush tax cuts permanent has the second lowest multiplier, 0.23.



Yes, people abuse the system, but you don't abandon it, you fix it. People also steal cable. You don't see Comcast shutting its doors.