,
10 tweets,
8 min read
Read on Twitter
If you have been paying attention to Trump's plan to change SNAP (food stamp) rules, you probably heard one statistic: 1.7M households (3.1M people) will lose benefits.
But that number is a huge underestimate, as @pamela_herd & I explain in @thehill. 1/ thehill.com/blogs/congress…
But that number is a huge underestimate, as @pamela_herd & I explain in @thehill. 1/ thehill.com/blogs/congress…
@pamela_herd @thehill The 1.7M households is the number of people who lose *eligibility.* But there are two other ways in which people will lose benefits that the Trump administration is cynically targeting. First, another 17.2M households will “undergo a more burdensome application process.” 2/
@pamela_herd @thehill A "more burdensome process" does not sound all that bad, and that is sort of the point. The effects of this policy change are opaque. But in some cases a more burdensome process means a 51 page form with extraordinary documentation requirements 3/
@pamela_herd @thehill Adding own forms, requiring more documentation: these are proven ways to reduce program participation. Little administrative burdens can cause big effects. We only need to look at the history of SNAP to understand how big. 4/
@pamela_herd @thehill Prior to the 1990s welfare reform, SNAP was tied to cash welfare payments. If you qualified for one, you got the other. Welfare reform separated the two. Learning costs and compliance costs increased. SNAP participation plummeted. 5/
@pamela_herd @thehill The Bush & Obama admins largely tried to reduce administrative burdens, including a categorical eligibility rule which allowed states to use data from other programs to enroll people in SNAP. Participation increased. Now the Trump admin wants to undo that progress. 6/
@pamela_herd @thehill So a large number of the 17.2M households subject to more burdensome processes will lose benefits. That is entirely predictable. Indeed, that is the point of the rule. So its not just 17M households who lose eligibility that will lose benefits. 7/ thehill.com/blogs/congress…
@pamela_herd @thehill The Trump admin is pointedly ignoring USDA researchers that have documented how the categorical eligibility rule enables food stamp access, and how SNAP creates health and economic benefits.
(And yes, these are the same researchers that are being sent to Kansas City.). 8/
(And yes, these are the same researchers that are being sent to Kansas City.). 8/
@pamela_herd @thehill The second way the Trump SNAP rule will hurt low-income Americans is that it will make it harder to get other safety net supports. If you are eligible for SNAP, you are often automatically eligible for other benefits, and can avoid the extra paperwork. 9/
@pamela_herd @thehill @stepville To sum up (and as we write about in our book), a many poor people lost benefits b/c the fed govt added administrative burdens.
The govt largely fixed this problem.
Now the Trump admin is saying: "uh, lets go back to the system that hurt poor people." 10/
amazon.com/Administrative…
The govt largely fixed this problem.
Now the Trump admin is saying: "uh, lets go back to the system that hurt poor people." 10/
amazon.com/Administrative…
