Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson wrote the following op-ed which was published in Captiol Hill's newspaper
The Hill
Poverty and unemployment have risen sharply in our community, and most strikingly, so has hunger. People may not always have an accurate picture of who goes hungry in this country. By and large, the face of hunger is that of thousands and thousands of women and children. What is perhaps most shocking is that children represent almost half of the beneficiaries of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps.
Without SNAP, these children would go to bed hungry each night, seriously jeopardizing their ability to develop and thrive. I want to bring this critical issue to the attention of my constituents and those in the surrounding areas, and I want them to know that combating hunger is the utmost priority for me. The state of hunger that exists in the Dallas area is far too critical to ignore.
In a recent Gallup poll, 19 percent of metropolitan households said that there were times when they did not have enough money to buy all the food they needed. In my own district, that number was an overwhelming 29 percent. Many of these families received help from neighbors, local churches and charities like the North Texas Food Bank. Hunger is too great a problem for charity alone, which is why the federal government invests in SNAP.
SNAP is a program that works and is fiscally sustainable. Error rates and fraud are at historically low levels, and this program provides economic stimulus to communities throughout our country. Economists estimate that every dollar spent on SNAP benefits created a $1.79 ripple effect in our local economy during the recession. A recent report found that SNAP actually lifted 8 percent of families out of poverty during the worst of the economic downturn.
So why is Congress debating whether to sever this lifeline needed by so many in this country? The recently passed House budget proposal would slash SNAP funding by $133.5 billion, or 17 percent over ten years, as well as remove the program’s ability to respond to unforeseen need. This proposal is contrary to very values we hold as Americans, and how we treat those most in need.
Read the article here
