On Nov. 1, all 47 million recipients of food stamps faced cuts to their assistance. For families of four, the loss will average $36 per month.
The cuts are a result of the expiration of the federal stimulus passed in 2009. In the severe economic crisis, the number of people on food stamps doubled, and the federal government increased payments by 13 percent. Now they are taking this increase away.
For the millions of families trying to figure out how to survive these cuts, the news gets even worse.
The Democrats and Republicans in Congress are currently debating how much food stamps should be additionally cut. The Republican-dominated House of Representatives passed a $4 billion annual cut, along with many new restrictions such as drug testing to reduce eligibility. The Democratic-controlled Senate passed a $400 million cut.
This follows a familiar “good cop-bad cop” pattern, in which Republicans demand enormous cuts to necessary social services, while the Democrats, posing as the friends of poor and working people, call for smaller cuts.
They portray themselves as the protectors of poor people, while in truth they are carrying out the same policy of class warfare on behalf of Wall Street.
Deeper than ‘partisanship’
Liberal media figures like Paul Krugman of The New York Times have used the food stamp debate to denounce Republican Party “partisanship” — their willingness to put their party’s interests over “sound policies.”
Of course, both parties will do anything to advance their narrow interests. But these complaints from Democratic Party circles ring hollow when you examine their own record of slashing the social “safety net.”
The Democratic Party is responsible for the most anti-working class “welfare reform” legislation in recent memory. Democratic President Bill Clinton waged his own offensive against welfare, most notably in the anti-poor 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. The bill severely reduced government assistance for the unemployed, underemployed and disabled and included provisions aimed at pushing welfare recipients into employment under some of the most exploitative conditions.
The Democrats’ welfare “reform” also helped push many people towards the prison system—along with a range of other policies that expanded mass incarceration.
What about the costs of war?
It is hard to believe that the same Congress that last month was considering war in Syria can now turn around and insist on “necessary” budget cuts.
The main point of disagreement for Congress over another costly, unpopular and illegal intervention in the Middle East was “how big” would the Pentagon operation be. The financial costs were considered irrelevant compared to the political needs of the Empire.
By contrast, Congress never opens up emergency sessions and rushes back to Washington to deal with growing hunger or mass poverty. The real national “security” question — how 47 million people can survive—is no
emergency to them.
In fact, a bill to cut the U.S. military budget — which accounts for nearly 40 percent of global military spending — and redistribute funds to provide for poor people would be considered “absurd.”
What can be done
Some liberals in Congress have declared their opposition to the coming cuts to food stamps. But they have no interest in a serious mobilization of poor and working people to turn this situation around. They do not dare take on the Democratic White House directly and fear a movement they cannot control.
This shows the true face of the Democratic Party — opposing anti-worker measures in words, but participating in them in deed.
Cuts to food stamps have already been implemented at the state level. Kansas and Oklahoma recently passed legislation cutting off benefits to many recipients if they cannot find work. This is the height of ruling-class cynicism. Politicians routinely give speeches about the jobs crisis but then turn around and blame the jobless for their unemployment.
According to a poll by Harvard University, 77 percent of people in the United States support maintaining or increasing funding for food stamps. This is not surprising, given that a near-record number of people now rely on these benefits—roughly 1 in 7 people in the country.
What is needed is to turn this mass sentiment into a fighting political force. Ultimately, this will remain an uphill battle until poor and working people take control and create a government that serves their interests. Only a government of, by and for workers can bring about the changes needed to overcome hunger and the many other injustices that needlessly affect tens of millions of people in the richest country in the world.
