Hunger is still a public health emergency

This month, millions of California households on CalFresh will lose an average of $200 a month in government food assistance, even as food prices continue to rise.

CalFresh is California’s version of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, a federal program that helps more than 40 million low-income Americans buy groceries. While the federal government largely funds CalFresh and other SNAP programs, California oversees CalFresh’s administration and some aspects of eligibility. Benefits are loaded onto an Electronic Benefits Transfer card, which recipients can use to purchase food items at participating grocery stores. Prior to SNAP and EBT, food benefits were made possible through the Food Stamps Program and recipients would use physical stamps with monetary value. Since 2008, however, the government changed the name to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, in part to emphasize nutrition, but also to reduce the stigma against users of food stamps and welfare.

At the onset of the pandemic, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act temporarily expanded eligibility requirements and approved emergency supplementary benefits. Since March 2020, households on Calfresh have received at least $95 extra in emergency allotments. 

In 2023, however, Congress set emergency allotments for all states to end by March. The Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service website explained in its announcement that “SNAP emergency allotments were a temporary strategy authorized by Congress to help low-income individuals and families deal with the hardships of the [coronavirus] pandemic.” 

Yet, Americans are still experiencing the economic consequences of the pandemic. When the United States economy reopened early 2021, the balance of the supply-demand chain broke, fueling inflation further. Last year, inflation caused food prices to increase by 10.8% in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. While policymakers can’t control global economics such as the war in Ukraine and environmental factors, SNAP is something they can control.

This abrupt policy change will severely impact CalFresh households, which encompass families, seniors,and college students. A single-person household could experience a drop in monthly benefits from $281 to $23 by April, even as food prices continue to rise and wages remain stagnant. Food banks, pantries and distribution programs are already seeing heightened demand and remain anxious about the future of their services as benefits end this month.

Given the extent of income inequality, we should be well past the days of arguing that individuals must pull themselves up by their bootstraps instead of relying on government handouts; yet the government’s logic implies that since we are no longer directly in a public health emergency, there is no reason for Americans to receive additional support. Ignoring for a moment the economic strain brought on as a result of the pandemic, is hunger not already a public health emergency?

Conservative lawmakers especially may have you believe that users of welfare are stealing dollars from taxpayers, yet this narrative is deeply disconnected from reality. One in eight Americans are dependent on SNAP. Inflation has skyrocketed. The federal minimum wage, on the other hand, is still $7.25, as it has been since 2009, and while California’s minimum wage is much higher at $15.50, corporate profit has far outpaced those increases — even as economists find those profits to be the driving force behind inflation. 

Clearly, scarcity is not the issue here: inequality is. While we should never be quick to ignore moral imperatives in favor of economic arguments, it is also worth considering that SNAP programs have an undeniably positive impact on the economy. SNAP stabilizes the economy, generates income in food supply and production and frees up funds for people to spend in other areas that further stimulate business. In a time of food insecurity and economic disruption, why has Congress chosen this time to end emergency allotments?

While “emergency” measures are not meant to last forever, policymakers must recognize that a “return to normalcy” approach in the post-pandemic world will only worsen inequalities already exacerbated by the pandemic. Although addressing the systems responsible for such glaring inequalities and food insecurity will take much more comprehensive action, we must protect, rather than restrict, vital programs such as SNAP. 

Proposals to expand the program such as lengthening time limits for proof of eligibility, eliminating the 20-hour outside work requirement for college students not on work-study and ending the prohibition of purchasing prepared foods must be a priority in this year’s Farm Bill, a major piece of legislation Congress passes every five years. In addition to expanding access to SNAP, Congress must reconsider allocations and increase allotments to their previous level. The hunger caused by systemic inequality and compounded by poor decision-making is a burden that neither families nor food pantries should bear alone.