By Emily Martin
The fate of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has been hanging in the balance after the House failed to a pass a new version of the Agriculture and Nutrition Act, known as the Farm Bill, before the Sept. 30 expiration date of the previous bill then adjourned for this session.
Legal experts and advocates in the field of public benefits say SNAP has continued to run under the system established by the previous bill in 2014, and it will until new legislation is passed. Melissa Jensen, an anti-hunger program associate at advocacy group D.C. Hunger Solutions, said in an interview that operating under the old bill is a “best case scenario” until a new bill, like the Senate’s version of the bill, is passed.
“The House version of the bill is getting, thankfully, a lot of that negative attention because it’s a terrible bill,” Jensen said. “The real question is, are Senators going to compromise on some of the worst areas of the House?”
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research institute that advocates for state and federal policies related to poverty, the House’s bill contains changes that would cause more than 1 million low-income households to lose or reduce their benefits. The bill would institute work requirements for SNAP participants aged 18 through 59 to work at least 20 hours a week, according to the Center, with exceptions for recipients who are disabled or have a child under the age of 6.
The stricter work requirements in the bill are not guaranteed to increase employment, however. Brian Campbell is a senior policy advisor at the Economic Security Administration, a branch of the D.C. Department of Human Services that determines eligibility for programs such as SNAP and Temporary Cash Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Campbell said in an interview that DHS has found that there is no direct correlation between removing benefits from a household and increased employment or work engagement.
“I think the question is … should SNAP or any entitlement program … be tied to engagement in a work activity,” Campbell said. “Or should it be designed for ensuring that there’s a minimum level of food security within a household, regardless of what is the engagement of parents or the adult.”
Campbell said that the new requirements may take away the benefits from some low-income households. Jennifer Mezey, a supervising attorney in the Public Benefits Unit at Legal Aid Society D.C., agreed. Mezey represented SNAP recipients in a lawsuit against DHS for its backlog on applications, according to Street Sense, and continues to help resolve what she called “challenging cases” that recipients send to a specially-designed email for Legal Aid Society.
“I suspect that we both would agree that it would be pretty disastrous,” Mezey said in an interview. “You would have to divert a whole lot of resources from efforts to make food stamps more available to fund efforts that would probably not help that many people, and would instead just put up additional barriers.”
Campbell said that DHS aims to balance encouraging work with recipients with ensuring food security in households because other issues are tied to food insecurity, resulting in what he called a “downward spiral.” Jensen also said that the work requirements would have a substantial impact on the population aged 50-69 who are retiring or ready to retire because they have become reliant on it with little to no source of income.
“In low-income neighborhoods, in Wards 7 and 8, I feel a lot of the time that SNAP is basically a part of retirement,” Jensen said. “If you’ve worked a low-income job your whole life, you don’t have substantial savings to retire on, and part of surviving is you leave your job and you apply for SNAP.”
Wards 7 and 8, the southernmost wards of the District, have the highest concentrations in the city of individuals on the SNAP program. The wards are almost even in population, according to Campbell, yet 29 percent of Ward 8 and 23 percent of Ward 7 are SNAP recipients, and the next highest concentration is 14 percent in Ward 5.
Allison Miles-Lee, a managing attorney of public benefits for Bread for the City, a nonprofit that provides food, medical care, legal services and more to reduce poverty, criticized DHS for its shortcomings in food insecurity in the District, especially in Wards 7 and 8. Miles-Lee is also part of the prosecution for the DHS lawsuit along with Mezey, and she said the lawsuit’s purpose is to get DHS to acknowledge the growing issue of wait times and to improve it.
“If DHS had to implement anything, forget it,” Miles-Lee said. “I do not have a lot of faith in DHS’s ability to make any changes. … If any directive comes down from the federal government and requires them to make some sort of changes in the that way they process and approve cases, I think that opens up the possibility of inadvertent errors happening.”
Miles-Lee also said that DHS terminated without notice recipients waiting for recertification in their system when they switched to new computers in fall 2016. She said the problem has been mostly resolved, but the original rollout of the computers was against the advice of experts.
Jensen, on the other hand, said that she thinks that DHS is taking critiques seriously and trying to improve. Mattie Harrison, a recipient of SNAP, said in an interview outside the Taylor Street Service Center that the department has been “pretty good” to her. She said she was at the center to ask for assistance after her water had been turned off the day before, but the center was unable to help. Marvin, another recipient who declined to give a last name, said in an interview outside the same service center it is easy to communicate with DHS.
Another man outside the Taylor Street Service Center identified himself as a recipient of “food stamp and medical” services from DHS, but declined to give his name.
“D.C. takes care of their citizens and that’s all I’m going to say. It’s a blessing what they do with their medical because I’m sick sick,” he said. “It’s a blessing.”
Harrison said that the new work requirements will help with employment, but Marvin said they could make it harder to receive SNAP benefits. Jensen echoed the sentiment that many recipients are satisfied with DHS’s services, but many still suggest possible improvements.
For now, the bill sits in waiting until after the congressional midterm elections in November, when Congress will return with newly-elected members. If it does pass, Mezey said that D.C. may still be able to offer a waiver for the new requirements to recipients, which they currently offer.
Jensen also said that D.C.’s food insecurity issue is discussed often and has a lot of momentum, which would be good for progress and improvements.
“These programs should just exist for people,” Jensen said. “They should be easy to use, they should be open to everyone and we should do everything we can to reduce the stigma around them because people should be able to eat, no one should judge anyone for being able to eat.”
Advanced Reporting Times 