In an effort to stem the tide of millions of Americans using government handouts to put food on the table, major cuts to the nation’s food stamp program went into effect last week. Conservatives cheer it as a way to cut additional government waste, while liberals recall the days when millions of Americans lived in poverty, unable to feed their families.
An estimated 47.6 million Americans are on food stamps, and the cuts will reduce food stamps by $5 billion. In many cases, the reductions will drastically reduce struggling Americans’ ability to feed their families.
Many conservatives in this country have a strange and downright terrifying way of dealing with the plight of impoverished Americans: Cut government benefits and refuse to raise the minimum wage. Regardless of how you feel on each issue, it’s a double-edged sword, whether conservatives realize it.
If we cut food stamps, then we must raise the minimum wage to help lift the drastically underpaid out of poverty. If we don’t raise the minimum wage, we can’t cut food stamps; it’s that simple.
At this point, you might think I’m very wrong and that a strong capitalist society without government interference will pay workers what they’re worth. Tell that to McDonald’s, which pays its average employee less than $9 an hour and even has a telephone line to help employees sign up for food stamps and welfare programs.
We live in a country where we allow the wealthiest Americans to pay their employees like crap, while the American taxpayer subsidizes the wealthy by providing their employees with welfare programs.
American capitalism, baby! It’s awesome!
I’m not suggesting we increase the minimum wage to something unsustainable, but if we want to cut government programs like food stamps, then at the very least, businesses must pick up the slack.
Honestly, do you think companies like Wal-Mart and McDonald’s will really hurt if they start paying workers just a couple more dollars per hour? Sure, it adds up, but we’re talking about some of the wealthiest companies in the world that continue to abuse U.S. taxpayers by forcing them to pick up the slack.
Assistance programs help the poorest of Americans, but you can’t deny that it feels as if we’re actually assisting the companies who pay low wages to American workers. It’s a morally bankrupt system, and while the fat cats count their money and hope for bigger profits, members of Congress are trying to kill the very system low-wage employees count on to survive.
Those against programs like the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program argue we don’t need assistance programs because everyone is abusing the system. By that rationale, if someone cuts in line at Disney World, we should shut down the entire ride, right?
We can’t turn our backs on millions of struggling Americans just because of the cost or the rare abuse of the system.
In the 1960s, our leaders made it a point to find ways to lift millions of people out of poverty and hunger. They realized a country unwilling to help those less fortunate was no country at all. Countless people are alive today because at some point, government assistance was all they had.
We live in a time when millions of Americans are out of work or are working jobs that barely afford them enough to feed themselves, let alone their families or pay any other bills. You can cut food stamps and other assistance programs all you want, but it doesn’t get to the root of the problem.
Many Americans aren’t making enough to survive.
We live in a time when the cost of living is going up, yet wages, especially for the middle and lower class, remain woefully stagnant. If the government can’t help them, who will? Sadly, it feels as if many of our elected officials are conducting an experiment in social Darwinism using the American people as research subjects. Continue to cut government assistance and keep wages low, and once again, we will see millions living in poverty or worse.
What’s American about that? Nothing.
Joel Mendelson is a UF graduate student in political campaigning. His column runs on Mondays. A version of this column ran on page 7 on 11/4/2013 under the headline "Love them or hate them, food stamps are a necessity"
