Food Stamps as Seen Through the Lens of Merging Knowledge

Today, on November 1st, cuts to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or Food Stamps) take effect.  Cuts totaling 5 billion$ will impact 48 million people, including 21 million children who rely on food stamps to survive.Our team in Boston, using the Merging Knowledge technique, has been working to bring together people with a lived experience of poverty and local emerging leaders in the business community to discuss issues related to benefits, including food stamps.  Below is a text they shared at the United Nations relating to the SNAP program on October 17th, World Day for Overcoming Poverty.--Hello, my name is Magalis Troncoso. I am here on behalf of the Center for Social Policy Constituent Advisory, the Emerging Leaders Program of the College of Management-  both at University of Massachusetts Boston and the ATD (All Together for Dignity) Fourth World Movement.For the past year we used the Merging Knowledge approach, developed by the Fourth World Movement to examine policies directed at people in poverty. Within this work, we then looked specifically at policies related to government assistance, what many know as Welfare and Food Stamps.Here are our general findings and recommendations:1)    We need true facts about fraud across the spectrum of income2)    Is there discrimination what are considered basic needs?3)    People in poverty have to be at the tables where policies are made and have a human right to be there4)    We believe it is important to create opportunities for open and honest conversation among people of different backgrounds#1- FRAUDMuch is said in some media and then adopted by general opinion about people who receive “welfare” benefits making fraudulent use of them. The public never gets a full picture. For example, in Massachusetts we might hear that people receiving food stamps sometimes trade them for cash with friends, or others. But does the public know that a family of three on “welfare” is expected to live on $7,166.40 a year in Massachusetts? This amount is for rent, utilities and clothing.  In addition, some households receive food stamps. The average monthly amount per household of three is $240.  This is such an insufficient amount that it forces people to be creative, for example, they may trade stamps for cash to pay a taxi to take a sick child to the hospital. Many would consider that survival, even if they admit that it goes against the regulations on the benefits. YET, to put this in perspective, the US Dept. of Agriculture national data shows that ‘fraud’ with food stamps is less than 1% of the cost of the food stamp program.Several states are now proposing that people applying for welfare benefits be required to undergo drug testing with the idea that they could be denied benefits if it is found that they have drugs in their system.When businesses receive benefits from the government, such as farm subsidies or tax breaks, or individuals receiving earned income credits are they forced to undergo drug testing or prohibited from spending on lavish meetings and parties? And what about the figures on tax evasion - isn’t that fraud?  If we are looking at fraud, shouldn’t we look at all fraud and not just target the poor?We feel that this lack of correct and complete information should be remedied because it leads to a negative view of people in poverty and to bad policies adversely affecting those meant to be helped. We all have a right to true statistics and information.#2 Who can decide for someone else what basic needs are?Even in our discussion among people in poverty there is no firm agreement on whether or not recipients should be able to purchase alcohol, lottery tickets and tobacco with their food stamps. When a mother buys potato chips to please a child because she can’t afford to buy more expensive things for him, we judge it as irresponsible. The people doing this work say: “restrictions on buying certain products cause shame,” and they ask, “can’t we use incentives instead of punishment.” The real issue when you are dependent on government aide because of poverty is not having choices.#3 People in poverty have to be at the tables when policies are being made have a human right to be thereWe support this because we believe that working in partnership lends itself to policy development that removes shame, and acts as a springboard to new opportunities and securities. People in poverty have a unique education based on the lived experience that can shed light on what is not working. When those concerned are present they help to transform the images and attitudes toward people in poverty, refocusing on policies to promote people rather than ones that control and denigrate them.#4 It is important to create opportunities and conditions for open and honest conversations.The lack of true knowledge of each other and of significant policies that affect our lives,  leads to “othering,” to alienation, and to stereotyping. We need to understand each other’s lives and where our thinking comes from. We need to know the reality in order to move forward in policies that are real springboards for the future.We will continue our work next year building conversations around policy issues that impact people in poverty. These conversations have the power to lead to personal and social transformations that are badly needed.