Why SNAP benefits aren’t keeping up with the rising cost of food

Read the Full Transcript

• John Yang:

  The five-year farm bill is working its way through Congress. The one and a half trillion dollar measure covers a sweeping set of agricultural and food policies covering everything from crop insurance to conservation programs. As Ali Rogin reports one major sticking point this year is funding for the federal program that helps low income people buy food.

• Ali Rogin:

  The legislative package known as the Farm Bill is moving slowly through the house in part because of party line disagreement over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP formerly known as food stamps. It's a federal program that addresses hunger by helping people with low incomes buy food.

  But an analysis by the Urban Institute, a left leaning research organization found that SNAP benefits in 2023 did not cover the rising cost of groceries in 98% of us counties. Elaine Waxman is a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and is one of the report's authors.

  Elaine, thank you so much for being here. Tell us a little bit more about SNAP and how levels for it are set.

• Elaine Waxman, Urban Institute:

  Absolutely. So SNAP is really the first line of defense we have in federal nutrition programs to address food insecurity. And we have a solid evidence base that suggests that it not only improves food outcomes, but it reduces poverty. It provides economic benefits to the economy, it may even reduce healthcare expenditures. So it's really vital.

  It provides monthly benefits on an electronic card. Those benefits are set according to a market basket of goods that the government refers to as the Thrifty Food Plan. That food plan, the assumptions underneath it had not been updated for decades until 2021. There was some improvement in SNAP benefit adequacy, then, but we've lost that ground. And as you said, it does not cover the cost of a moderately priced meal in most U.S. counties.

• Ali Rogin:

  And how great was that disparity? You mentioned that the gap had gotten a lot smaller for a little while. But now its way back up to a very disproportionate level. How did it get there?

• Elaine Waxman:

  Sure. So after the adjustment in 2021, we actually saw that the benefits were adequate to the price of a moderate meal in all but about one in five counties in the US. So for short term, we had significant improvement. We've had a number of shifts, obviously, in terms of inflation. And even though SNAP is updated for inflation, it hasn't been sufficient, because the underlying benefit is really not adequate to purchase a meal that would be meaningful in terms of health and nutrition.

  So where we're at now, after a couple of cost of living increases is really just about back to where we started before that original update happened in 2021.

• Ali Rogin:

  And where are the parts of the country where these disparities are the greatest.

• Elaine Waxman:

  So some of the counties with the greatest disparities are would not be surprising to us, like in New York, or on the coasts, but in the top five counties with the largest gaps. Several of them are actually rural counties, for example, Lila Knox County, Michigan, Teton County, Idaho Nantucket County, Massachusetts. These are all places that are more rural and have higher transportation costs, but they also tend to be near first locations. And then tends to drive up prices.

• Ali Rogin:

  We mentioned earlier, the congressional debate that's underway. What are the main disagreements there? Walk us through that?

• Elaine Waxman:

  Sure. So I think the biggest point of debate around snap has been on a requirement that was actually put in place in 2018, by Congress in the last part of bill. And that requires the SNAP benefit to be updated or reviewed at least every five years.

  But people were not expecting the size of the update in 2021. And that's caused some conflict. And so the current house bill that was passed out of committee this week, calls for cost neutrality, that basically means that freeze on SNAP benefits going forward. So they will be updated for inflation.

  But we won't have the ability to act on any improvements in nutritional guidance, in the ways that people are purchasing and preparing food. And we started with an inadequate base. So as a result, the estimate is really that it reduces snap cost over time, and the adequacy problem will only get worse. What does that mean, it's already insufficient in the majority of counties, but that gap will get larger.

• Ali Rogin:

  In terms of the SNAP program more generally, there are studies that show that participation in the SNAP program is associated with lower nutritional quality of the food and household poor health in children. Is that an issue with snap? Or is that an issue with some of the other underlying factors that might indicate why a family why a household needs SNAP benefits?

• Elaine Waxman:

  That's a great question. The fact of the matter is, when we look at the patterns of purchases between people who are on SNAP, and people who have low incomes and are not on SNAP, then there are not very significant differences. The truth of the matter is, is as a country, we don't eat very well. And particularly if you're stretching a budget on a low income, you tend to go for those things that are cheap and calorie dense, as opposed to things that are perishable and better for us, but are a bigger risk in terms of purchases.

  So what we're seeing is choices that people have to make because they don't have sufficient funds for food. The other thing I think is worth noting is that we have an epidemic of diabetes and other diet sensitive conditions in this country. Those are not confined to people with low income or participating in snap that covers across the income continuum. And so that's a larger issue that we need to deal with as a community.

• Ali Rogin:

  Elaine Waxman, Senior Fellow at the Urban Institute, thank you so much for joining us.

• Elaine Waxman:

  Thanks for inviting me.