Why doesn't the Federal government just take over SNAP food distribution?

[B2G]

Here in NC, you can only purchase liquor from the state ABC store. Why not the same thing for food?

Government run distribution centers (ala Aldi for example) where SNAP recipients shop using their EBT cards. It seems to me that food could be purchased in bulk by the government at much cheaper rates and pass that on to recipients, making their dollars go a lot farther. And it would create jobs, in every city. Centers could be strategically located based on city demographics to serve the populations in need most.

Totally non-profit, all savings by bulk purchases get passed on to the patrons and SNAP recipients are first on the list to be hired as clerks, stockers, etc.

ETA, and I'm not proposing normal grocery stores wouldn't accept EBT cards. This would be a low cost choice/alternative.

Thoughts?

[xfundy]

1. "That's Big Gummint."

I can imagine the cons targeting and screaming at shoppers going in there.

Bad idea, imo, because, for one thing, inevitably politicians & lobbyists would get involved, backroom deals would be made, lower quality stuff would be a result. Also, it's embarrassing enough to be on food stamps without everyone knowing about it. Current system sucks but could be much worse.

[yeoman6987]

26. They used too

Basically they gave a block of cheese and some other items. Not sure that's the answer.

[JimDandy]

33. The USDA cheese/milk program was in addition

to food stamps back in the day.

[yeoman6987]

34. Oh thanks. I did not know that.

[JimDandy]

49. I was a grateful recipient

who, as a full-time, single, college student with a baby, wasn't eligible for food stamps (I worked part-time), but was for the monthly cheese/milk. You just showed up, stood in line, and they took you on your word that you needed the assistance. The dry milk was a such needed windfall for the two of us.

[Downwinder]

2. SNAP or Food Stamps is a misnomer.

It is a farm subsidy program under the Dept. of Agriculture. Ask your grocer how much he makes off of SNAP or how much he will lose.

[B2G]

3. How much do they make?

[Codeine]

6. We make the same amount we would make if the product was purchased any other way.

Groceries cost the same amount no matter how you pay for them. I make the same margin on a box of raisin bran regardless of whether it is purchased with a food stamp card, a debit card, cash, or gold bars.

[B2G]

7. But the cost is different depending

On the store. How does Aldi offer such low prices?

[Codeine]

10. They buy in huge bulk.

Entire production runs, contracted with the manufacturers. That's why they often have strange gaps in their grocery line-up.

We pay our distribution warehouse the same price any store in the distribution network pays; they can get deals if they buy a lot, they'll get a discounted pallet price, but any retailer buying a case of say, Sriracha from Unified Western Grocers (our grocery disto) will pay the same price for that case.

[B2G]

12. That's my whole point

The government could do the same thing and offer the groceries at discount price.

[Codeine]

15. Centralized Food Committees? Five-Year Grocery Plans?

I kid, but seriously -- putting the government in charge of grocery stores (The Ministry of Noms?) seems silly. Kick down a few more bucks to recipients and you'll accomplish the same thing.

[B2G]

18. That's not at all what I'm saying. nt

[Downwinder]

8. Thank you Codeine.

One question. Do you have to pay a processing charge for EBT cards?

[Codeine]

11. I'm fairly certain it's the same as any other card, about a nickle a transaction.

Which bites for small purchases, btw. When somebody uses their bank card to buy a pack of gum or something really small like that I basically lose a penny or so. But that's not typical, so we don't sweat it. Some stores have minimum purchases for that reason.

[Downwinder]

13. I used to use cash for all transactions.

Then I switched to the debit card.Figured that the costs must be about the same or they would not do it.

[Codeine]

14. The convenience is fantastic.

We deal with less cash now -- fewer and smaller deposits, less purchasing of change, etc. There's also less handling of money at the register level, which decreases small errors that compound over the course of a day.

And people who use cards instead of cash spend more; abstract money spends more freely than the wad in your pocket that gets visibly smaller and more meager each time you peel off a few bills.

[Downwinder]

20. It is more convenient for me.

I am through check out much faster. I won't self check-check out.

I have difficulty keeping track of cash and cannot keep track of more than two items simultaneously.

[jwirr]

58. From what I hear it is the banks that make the money off of the program.

[daredtowork]

73. The main problem with cash on EBT cards

In California there seems to be an agreement with a certain network of banks not to charge of fee. The problem is finding that specific ATM to avoid the fee - especially when there is no subsidized transportation. I assume the State pays to participate in this network.Many machines have a cap on withdrawal amount per day, which makes it difficult to get your rent money in one shot. I also feel its unsafe to have to personally extract all your resources for the month and walk it to another bank. I wish the EBT card could be used to deposit money directly in your own bank account. When I wrote about how scary this is on Daily Kos, I got trolled both by them and by Consumerist for expecting banks to cater to poor people.

General Assistance welfare was until very recently only paid directly to your landlord. My first post here related to the problems this could cause when payments were adjusted. Stores can also give you cash as change if you bought something with your EBT card. This is how the Youtube viral video of the woman buying the grape came about. That wasn't an illegit extration of money from the EBT card. The grape was a small card fee: the store was kind to make it so small. The "cash" award for people on welfare is very small, and in the case of General Assistance, its likely to go entirely toward rent. Now that the money goes to me rather than the landlord, I suppose I could run put and buy liquor. But it's only$336/month - my landlord isn't happy about that and won't accept a penny less. There may be safety mechanisms that kick in if I don'tuse the money to pay my rent.

Anyway, I have to get that money off the darned card, and I have to do it in a way that avoids fees. So if anyone puts their phonecam in my face because they caught me buying a grape in order to get change in cash (and I'd probably have to buy a bunch of grapes one at a time to get close to $366 in change), frak them and the Judge Judying horse they rode in on.

[Downwinder]

74. Probably. They get a piece of everything they touch.

SNAP goes through a lot of hands between the recipient and the farmer.

[Codeine]

5. SNAP is absolutely fantastic for my store.

We sell loads of groceries to people who otherwise would not have been able to buy them. How is that bad? Near the beginning of the month probably a third of our grocery category is food stamp purchases. When the recession was at it's worst food stamps helped keep my doors open.

I've heard of stores who make snarky comments about food stamp recipients -- we never do because they're our bread and butter, as well as our friends, acquaintances, and often family members.

[daredtowork]

72. This is the secret agenda of this thread

I've been scratching my head wondering what the "problem" is that needs to be "fixed" when EBT cards work great from the point of view of the human dignity of the poor.

Ah, I see it now.

The "problem" is taxpayer money is flowing through the poor to Big Agribusiness. This is the same complaint as when Obamacare pays money to Big Insurance. Neither is probkem when working people spend theor money on those options: that's the Market. But if the poor direct money that way, the ease in gaining Bipartisan support to punish the poor can be used to withhold money from Big Business...*but at the expense of the health, welfare, and dignity of the poor*.

Now that the real agenda is out in the open, let me poor'splain to you the real "fixes" to you phony "problem".

1) Enhance social service, bridges out of poverty, and pipelines to work. That way instead of withholding food from people who need it, you will cut off the flow of taxpayer funds to Big Agribusiness naturally by lowrring the number of people eligible for SNAP. Adam Smith suggested full employment would make employers compete for workers and keep wages high, too.

2) Expand SNAP so people can choose more local products and turn money away from Big Agribusiness as a matter of preference.

3) Celebrate how SNAP purchases support local smal businesses even if food happens to be supplied by Big Agribusiness.

Seriously, you are attacking the wrong end of the equation and it sucks that people always envision the poor taking the brunt of "fixing the problem".

THIS IS NOT EVEN A PROBLEM FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE POOR!!!

SNAP EBT cards are a feature of dignity and convenience, not a bug. It's hostile policy-makers who try to make problems where none exist.

[Codeine]

76. It really is bizarre.

Food stamps work. Putting them on a card works even better. To my mind it's probably the most successful program to assist the poor ever.

All of these schemes to change it are inexplicable to me -- if it ain't broke. . .

[daredtowork]

87. It makes sense to me now

Once people started talking about the money going to Big Agribusiness, I realized the problem in question isn't a problem of the poor or even helping the poor. It's a moral problem of people trying to avoid putting more dollars in the pocket of Big Business, but being willing to sacrifice the poor to do it. I'm sure (or at least I hope) the people posting here don't realize it, but that's the Tea Party position. And it is the same as hating Obamacare because it enriches Big Insurance. Sure, let let all those poor people die by the road side...as long as not one more of my hard earned tax dollars finds its way into the pocket of Big Insurance!

We're in the last stages of Monopoly Capitalism. At the end of the line of distributors, there is going to be a Big something. If it's not Big Government, it will be a Big Corporation trying to take advantage of economies of scale and muscling out the little guys.

If you want to play 11-dimensional chess to figure out how to suck those Monopoly Capitalists dry, please do not mistake those on welfare for your Welfare Queens to sacrifice in way-too-clever gambit moves. If you want to sacrifice someone, start with yourself.

[dflprincess]

78. Food programs never were altruistic, they were also a defense department program

Many, many years ago one of my Social Work professors explained to us that, during WWII, the military was horrified by the number of young men it had to reject for service because of problems that were the result of childhood nutrition deficiencies. One reason the government does food programs is to keep the cannon fodder healthy.

[Downwinder]

80. Nutrition, Health, and Education are all National Security issues.

[daredtowork]

4. Terrible idea

1) The "super poor" often don't get transportation subsidies. It's hard to get food "in bulK" to where they live. I don't get to use food banks because the major ones are too far away from me, and I can't get the food back home.

2) "Government" diets can't be tweaked for food allergies, medical conditions, and all the ways poor people have to creatively use food stamps to cover basic needs that aren't being covered because there is no direct cash welfare for single people. For instance, baking soda = tooth paste, cleaning product, draino. Many uses for vinegar and lemon juice as well.

3) Human beings can only mentally tolerate a "scarcity" diet of rice and beans for so long. Poverty really pounds down on you, and you need to intersperse that with variety. The sense of choice that comes from shopping at a grocery store is autonomy. Since poor people can't shop for anything else, this is the only place they are going to get that feeling of choice and self-directedness.

4) Poor people seriously do not have a lot of time. They are on the run a lot. They need to pack a lot of lunches. They don't have time to cook. If they are single, they need small convenient quick meals. The Taxpayer, who doesn't think to dictate to the Super Rich who take $6000/yr. from them, but do get a kick out of dictating every calorie a poor person even thinks about eating, seems to believe that Slaving in the Kitchen is an appropriate additional punishment for the poor. As a poor person, I will resist that imposed burden as much as I possibly can. Let me go to the grocery store and attempt to take advantage of sales and get 3 Lean Cuisines for the price of one if that's what I want to eat.

5) It's an interesting assumption that SNAP recipients are in the situation they are in because they have so few skills that they need to be rehabbed through a grocery store. Instead of lecturing this, I'll just advise you to do further research into who SNAP recipients really are.

5) Finding ways for SNAP to subsidize local Farmers Markets is a great idea - this helps me get my veggies and it supports local farmers.


By the way, why do people keep harping on SNAP? It is a drop in the bucket compared to how we fund our war machine? If I converted my medication list into cash, I could be living quite comfortably with no government benefits at all, so these programs don't lack funding - they are just always being pecked at by budget hawks.

What we need is a program in addition to SNAP and Housing programs to cover non-food basic necessities like transportation, hygiene products, cleaning products, stamps and papers for imposed government correspondence - a basic "household needs" budget to tide people over until they have a job. I'd be willing to trade a medication in for that.

[yeoman6987]

27. Why not implement Michelle Obama's food program

The schools have and made a huge difference. At the beginning of the month a list of meals arrives and a listing of ingrediences are processed throughout all stores. The recipient is given the money to pay for the items which is enough for 30 days 3 meals a day and done. I can't see a better program then that. The program is country wide so Governors couldn't take this and that away or cut funding. I think this would solve EVERYTHING!

[Codeine]

29. Mmmmm, government-mandated shopping lists

for poor people. That's not fucking paternalistic at all!

[yeoman6987]

30. Were discussing different ideas

Sorry you don't approve. I think it would be better then we have now. This is why it is difficult to change because bold ideas are crushed apon while the poor starve. Even if you don't like the entire thing there are possibly good ideas within it. Also you are saying Michelle Obama's lunch program is paternalistic? I would imagine she'd be shocked to hear that.

[Codeine]

31. It's a school lunch program.

It's for kids. It's normal for adults to make dietary decisions for kids. Even if it is paternalistic, it's appropriately so.

It's not normal to create a nationwide menu for poor adults.

[daredtowork]

40. Why is it better than what we have now?

What we have now would be fine if it wasn't constantly being threatened by cuts. The only people it's not fine with are Republicans who think it costs too much. But it doesn't cost too much. It's a drop in the bucket compared to the subsidies rich people get. The only way we need to "fix" SNAP is to increase it.

Where we need the "bold" ideas are in repairing Clinton's Welfare Reform As We Know It:
1) Emphasize housing stability first.
2) Subsidize transportation.
3) Recognize there are other basic necessities besides food and housing, and if a person is deprived of them, they will be reduced to an animal and won't be able to get "work ready" and pull themselves out of poverty. They will probably never recover from the stress and trauma of welfare, either. Be real about a living budget. If you want to make people work for that, fine - but not so much that they won't be able to look for a "non-welfare" job.
4) Don't put people through bureaucratic hell.

A lot of these posts feel like conservative ideas awkwardly disguised in a way to make them look like democrat ideas (like painting them as "big government"...?). The lack of respect for personal autonomy and dignity seems really off to me.

[daredtowork]

35. You want adults to eat like the school lunch program?

Michelle Obama interventions or no, that program regularly has to be investigated for cheap non-nutritional fillers which will probably be giving kids cancer decades from now.

I was eligible for free lunches when I was a child, but my parents ended up paying for bag lunches because I hated school lunches so much that I refused to eat at all. When people stop eating, they lose nutritional value - and strength and health - that way, too.

And why do I feel like it would be some Republican Big Contractor who would end up delivering the industrial meals?

[MaggieD]

81. See number 4 in the post above yours...

For one problem. I've never been on food stamps, but I've been poor. It's exhausting!!

It's multiple part time jobs at shitty pay. It's trying to get from one place to another in a beater car. It's buying gas 2 gallons at a time because you only have 6 bucks to your name. And on and on and on. I might have dropped dead if I also had to cook 3 meals a day. Ramen noodles or a peanut butter sandwich was all I had the energy to make.

And yeah it's insulting too. Everyone deserves dignity.

[yeoman6987]

82. Fair enough

It was an idea that I did not think out well enough. Hopefully at the very least adding a 100 dollars to everyone will happen. I do think being hungry in our country is ridiculous and totally unnecessary.

[MaggieD]

85. I agree - the poor need a raise

[merrily]

50. Govt funding the war machine, especially in these days of endless terror, is bipartisan and

therefore doable. Govt taking care of poor people who cannot take care of themselves is not bipartisan.

Unless and people start uniting around issues, regardless of Party, that will not change. Red states are poorer than blue states, so ability to do something exists. But, happily for the 1%, who donate to both parties, dividing and conquering the hoi polloi has always been a powerful tool. So, we sit here demonizing them every day and they do the same to us.

[daredtowork]

53. Do you think this thread is about gaining bipartisan support for helping the poor?

The person who started the OP might think they can bring everyone under the same tent if they just compromise on a plan that humiliates and demeans the poor, yet feeds them.

But after investing in this kind and generous system, what will everyone do if the poor rebel against it? I described elsewhere how I refused to eat my free lunches. Actually a guidance counselor tried to force me to eat one, and I threw up. Luckily my parents bought me food so I didn't starve, but this came out of their pocket, which they couldn't afford - that's why I was eligible for the free lunches.

I suspect something like this would happen if the Bipartisan Rich tried to force feed the poor - the stomachs of the poor will reject that food. It is human to strive for autonomy and dignity.

The way to get more "support" for real reforms to help the poor is for the poor to empower themselves through organizing and voting and getting legislation and policy done on their behalf. They need to demand the social justice and fairness that leads to full employment and the housing stability, food security, and financial freedoms that provides.

[merrily]

54. Three different issues

1. What I think this thread is about: the feds taking over distribution

2. What my Reply 50 to you was about: the reason I think there is not enough federal money going to help the poor.

3. Whether I agree that the poor empowering themselves is a good thing. Yes. I think a lot of your suggestions are good. I also think people who are not poor and governments could do more.

Does that address your question to me?

[daredtowork]

70. I think there's another agenda here

there's a reply above that tips the hand that the real concern is taxpayer money flowing through the poor to big agribusiness. IMHO, this"problem" is being framed by the same viewpoint that complains Obamcare is a giveaway to Big Insurance...but can only think of ways to "fix" the problem to hurt the poor.

btw, I didn't mean to sound like I was "SNAPping" at you. I like to use these type of threads to soapbox my points. I tried to do a column of sorts at Daily Kos, but I GBCWed and deleted it because A) it attracted rw trolls, and b) Kos actually lives in my political district - his local political action is Third Way, and I couldn't take the hypocrisy.

[merrily]

71. No worries, daredtowork.

[merrily]

55. PS You might consider blogging on this subject and/or creating an online community of poorer

people for both supporting each other and brainstorm ideas for activism.

[karadax]

9. Keep distribution as local as you can

People in different regions eat different kinds of food. If the federal government bought and distributed food it would end up sending spam and Mac and cheese to those that don't eat the stuff.

I'd rather see more incentives to bring more dairy and farm fresh foods to food banks and farmers markets. Also allow hunters to donate their surplus meat instead of allowing it to spoil.

[merrily]

51. I agree. One issue is geography and another is who is in charge.

The federal government can be in charge and distribution can be local. The question is, is that the best way to do it? I don't know the answer.

[hughee99]

16. So if I understand right, in addition to all the money for SNAP, the government

would now have to build, stock, staff and maintain thousands of stores throughout the country that can only sell to a specific portion of the population?

Wouldn't it be better to just skip the stores and give all the money to the recipients?

[Codeine]

17. Yeah, and you'd support a myriad of family-owned businesses.

More money for food stamps solves the issue.

[hughee99]

19. If they're going to spend that much money, it's better to spend it on better benefits than

a massive infrastructure.

[Downwinder]

21. Sort of like a PX.

and about as convenient.

[moondust]

22. Buy out Walmart.

Have the federal gov't run it like a military PX for the public. No wildly excessive executive salaries or shareholders demanding maximum ROI. Living wage for all employees. Made in USA whenever possible. Process SNAP transactions.

[B2G]

23. There ya go.

See? You get it. Lol.

[daredtowork]

36. Food from Walmart is massively unhealthy. nt

[Revanchist]

42. If that's true then food from ANY grocery store is massively unhealthy

Walmart stocks fresh fruit and vegetables just like everyone else. You may not be able to purchase locally produced artisanal cheese, but saying that it's unhealthy just because it's Walmart is false. Their new neighborhood markets are even better, they might not carry as many different brands as a traditional market but they still have an excellent selection and some of the best store-bought pico de gallo in my area

Marketside Spicy Pico De Gallo:
All natural
Hot
Naturally gluten free
Ingredients:
Roma Tomato, Yellow Onion, Jalapeno Pepper, Serrano Pepper, Cilantro, Garlic, Lime Juice Concentrate, Salt.



What's so massively unhealthy about this?

[daredtowork]

43. Not sure about that

I'm referring to the packaged foods that all drug-stores-cum-grocery-stores carry: hot pockets, tv dinners, pot pies, etc. It's not just the salt and preservatives - I think they tend to buy close to the "off" date to keep things cheap and/or it's not well refrigerated. I've never bought food from a drug-store-grocery-store that didn't make sick.

It's true that I live in an area of the country where I can be spoiled by fresh and healthy food from multiple grocery stores, though. The terms of comparison might be unfair.

[Revanchist]

44. Are you thinking of Walgreen's and not Walmart?

Except for the really expensive ones like Fresh Market, Whole Foods and Trader Joe's and the discount ones like Aldi or Save-a-Lot it is rare for a chain grocery store to not have a pharmacy on premises.

[daredtowork]

45. Yes I'm assuming Walmart is just like Walgreens and CVS

Are you saying Walmart is in a whole different league?

[Revanchist]

46. BIG difference!

Walmart Supercenters are hypermarkets with size varying from 98,000 to 261,000 square feet (9,104.5 to 24,247.7 m2), with an average of about 197,000 square feet (18,301.9 m2).[8] These stock everything a Walmart discount store does, but also include a full-service supermarket, including meat and poultry, baked goods, delicatessen, frozen foods, dairy products, garden produce, and fresh seafood. Many Walmart Supercenters also have a garden center, pet shop, pharmacy, Tire & Lube Express, optical center, one-hour photo processing lab, portrait studio, and numerous alcove shops, such as cellular phone stores, hair and nail salons, video rental stores, local bank branches (newer locations have Woodforest National Bank branches), and fast food outlets, usually Subway but sometimes Dunkin Donuts, McDonald's, Wendy's, Checker's, or Blimpie. Many often featured McDonald's stores, but in 2007, Walmart announced to stop opening McDonald's restaurants at most of their newer stores. Most locations that opened up after the announcement had Subway as their restaurant. Some McDonald's inside the Walmarts were even replaced with Subway.[71] Some also sell gasoline distributed by Murphy Oil Corporation (whose Walmart stations are branded as "Murphy USA&quot , Sunoco, Inc. ("Optima&quot , or Tesoro Corporation ("Mirastar&quot .[72]

Neighborhood market

[daredtowork]

52. I see bigger

I'll take you're word it's a regular grocery store then.

The surrounding food court of fast food restaurants is not exactly a confidence-builder, though...

[1939]

24. Used to do this

Here, 17 year old ghetto mother:

1 sack of flour, 1 sack of rice, 1 wheel of cheese, 1 box of beans, one large box of powdered milk, one gigantic tin of cheap ham.

Now you have enough calories to feed you and your kid for a week.

[Kalidurga]

28. What is a ghetto mother?

And what is the point of mentioning an age of this mother? It looks like an undertone of shaming a 16 year old for getting pregnant. Just to point out that 16 is not even consenting in certain situations like if the father is much older and in some states it's not a consenting age at all.

[1939]

47. Just to show

Just to illustrate an instance where a recipient might not be capable or experienced enough to get full nutritional value out of an issue of food rather than the choices of a card.

[jwirr]

63. That was me years ago. Poor 17 years old and a mother. The point is that the program was like

what the OP is suggesting. Government listed foods that a welfare family might need. It did not work then and would not work now.

[Kalidurga]

75. I think those programs are good if they are additional resources

but not as primary resources. My problem was with accessing anything like that was that I was always working or going to school and the hours never matched up with my schedule. I suspect that would happen with any government run px type thing.

[jwirr]

83. On that I agree. Someone in the thread mentioned the cheese/milk give away and that is a help.

One thing that was very popular was the large box of cheese. Everyone loved it.

[Starry Messenger]

32. Sounds appalling.

What is a "ghetto mother?" In my world we just call them moms.

[dsc]

25. when I lived in MS in the mid 1990's I knew a teacher who qualified for WIC

the WIC items were distributed exactly as you suggest. There was a place that a recipient went once a month to get a month's supply of the things WIC provided. Those who couldn't drive for some reason, had the food delivered. I thought it was a very good idea since it avoided the huge mark ups at convience stores. I don't know if they still do it that way or not.

[daredtowork]

37. I believe WIC does

And food banks also provide items in bulk (though they don't deliver the items to you).

But keep in mind SNAP is not enough to keep a pregnant woman or a growing child healthy. WIC can provide basics, and then SNAP can be used to provide stuff with more variety and flavor.

[Recursion]

39. Don't most states do WIC as vouchers now?

But, vouchers with absurd byzantine requirements. You can get apple juice if they don't have tomato juice in stock, but if there's tomato juice in stock, that's what you have to get. Etc.

[daredtowork]

41. Honestly don't know about this

Just have a vague idea that WIC still provides food.

[dsc]

48. they do use vouchers in most states

have no idea of the rules for them.

[Sheldon Cooper]

56. Yes, they use vouchers now and yes, the rules are byzantine.

Although they are in effect to insure the healthiest possible choices, they are ridiculously complicated. And as someone who worked as a cashier in a supermarket, I can reliably state that making even one mistake on a WIC order was grounds for termination. I saw it happen, so I know it's true.

Here is a link to the guidelines in CA. They are pretty similar to the ones we use in PA.

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/wicworks/WIC%20Foods/WIC-AuthorizedFoods-WICAuthorizedFoodListShoppingGuideFAQs.pdf

Some of the highlights:

Why is it hard to find 16 oz 100% whole wheat bread at the store?
Stores are not required to carry the 16 oz 100% whole wheat bread as long as there
is another allowed whole grain in the required quantity of 16 ounces. It is important
for participants to tell their stores that they would purchase the 16 oz 100% whole
wheat bread if the stores stock it.

If a participant buys any whole grains in bulk and goes over 16 oz due to scale
differences, what are the options for the participant? Can she pay the
difference?
The vendor can adjust the quantity to 16 ounces because the WIC Program will not
pay for a quantity exceeding the specified quantity on the check (food instrument).
Participants are not allowed to pay the difference on any check except for the Fruit
and Vegetable check.

Why can’t participants buy stewed tomatoes, tomato sauce, pizza sauce,
spaghetti sauce, ketchup, salsa, and soup?
USDA does not allow tomato products with added sugar, fat, or oils. All of the listed
items typically contain at least one of these ingredients.


The WIC Authorized Food List Shopping Guide shows that participants can
purchase juice blends. Can a participant buy orange-tangerine juice?
No, participants can only buy juice blends, which are named as one or more of the
authorized flavors on the front label. For example, apple-grape blend is allowed
because apple and grape are both authorized flavors. Tangerine is not an authorized
flavor.

[Recursion]

38. We had a WIC co-op in MS in the 80s

Sounds kind of like the same thing. Decent food (MSU's extension program hooked us up with good dairy in season, so it wasn't always powdered milk).

[jwirr]

57. We already tried that. It is called the commodities program. Most counties had it after the Great

Depression. You would go to the courthouse on a certain day and they would distribute foods. Some of it was good some not so good. It was embarrassing and very public. My grandmother lived across from the courthouse and would watch the people come and go. This was the food stamp program of the day into the 60s.

Then in the late 60s early 70s we got food stamps - funny looking money that we could spend in a real store. Again very embarrassing and very public. Some areas like the reservation still gave you a choice between commodities and the funny money.

Now there is the EBT card that is very much like a credit card. Not so embarrassing or so public. The reservation still has its choice. And I can tell you that most people take the EBT card because they find that the food distributed as commodities are not what they need. Much of the food is for from scratch cooking and most of them are just like a lot of young people they do not cook that way.

I hear what you are suggesting and I like the idea of promoting low cost non-profit stores. Especially in food deserts. But I would also want my EBT card to shop in regular stores for those things I could not get there.

[B2G]

60. I agree and said in the OP

that nothing would change in grocery stores. They would still take EBT, but would give consumers a low cost alternative.

I'm really thinking about a real store with low cost products like Aldi. They have a great selection of items but they're off brands and so much cheaper than the big chains.

Again, it's an alternative to what's currently out there, not a replacement.

[jwirr]

68. Something like the COOP grocery store we used to have here in our town might work.

[Sunlei]

59. they should pull all the for profit middlemen out and just provide food like they used to.

but I think all the states who admin the federal funds, all the grocery stores and over-priced corner stores would scream bloody murder if they get cut off of the billions in Federal money.

[Codeine]

61. People need the autonomy to choose their own foods.

America's farming leftovers (the old government cheese, for example) aren't choice, they aren't a balanced diet, and they usually aren't particularly healthy eating. Give a dude living in his car with his wife and kid a bag of beans and a sack of rice and a block of cheese -- they can't do jack shit with that. An EBT can help feed them.

Just give people the benefits and let them spend them. People all through this thread are trying to create elaborate solutions to a problem the existence of which none of them have been able to articulate.

[B2G]

62. I agree with all of that

What I was proposing was a place where they could spend those benefits and get the maximum possible value for their money.

A big chain grocery store doesn't allow for that. It would be a new model completely. One that offers a wide choice of products, very low cost and no profit for those running it, along with preferential hiring practices for low income individuals.

[Codeine]

64. Why is such a system,

which if implemented nation-wide would be almost unimaginably vast and terrifically expensive (amazingly so) superior to just putting a couple hundred extra bucks on every EBT card out there?

The scope of such an undertaking is nearly unfathomable. The cost/benefit balance?

[XemaSab]

84. Also, grocery stores in the 'hood that are operating at a slender profit margin

would go out of business, making the problem worse than it was to begin with.

[Sunlei]

65. you're right of course. what perhaps would be good is use US post office mail to send some basics.

Not to people living in their cars. These days even a post office box use requires picture ID and place of residence proof.

[Codeine]

66. Why not just increase the existing benefits card allowance?

What does giving food away accomplish that increasing benefits would not?

[Sunlei]

67. That would have to be after control of the Federal money is removed from the 50 states control.

cut away all the administration costs from the 50 states and there could be much more Federal funds available for those in need. The Federal gov could always send out a cash card only good for food purchases.

[jwirr]

69. States do not control it - it is a federal program. States administer it. Counties take the

application and verify the answers. They then send it to the state which does the accounting - puts the money on the EBT card and takes the billings from the store. The feds pay the cost of the program but states pay for the application process.

The county cannot be cut out because this is a means tested program based on individual income, number in the household and exemptions such as rent etc. Some one has to take the info every 6 months or if there is a change. They also have to verify that you are the person on the application.

The state could be eliminated but that would add a huge accounting program to the federal level. I suspect the cost of either level would not be much different.

[MaggieD]

77. Because there is a lot of overhead to running grocery stores

Also, it would be difficult to serve rural areas. It would increase the cost substantially - far above any savings the government would realize purchasing in bulk. Groceries stores typically run at a very small profit margin, so the savings to the government wouldn't be that great on the food itself.

[Codeine]

79. +1

It's a naive and silly solution to a problem that doesn't exist, and has not in fact even been articulated.

[MaggieD]

86. Yes, that too!

Solution in search of a problem, for sure.