Jon Christian Ryter's Conservative World

Eagle

Internet Articles (2012)
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Remember Tupperware parties? Or
Sarah Coventry jewelry parties? Or
Amway? Now try a Food Stamp party
from the USDA's SNAP Program.
And you wondered why 47.76 million American families joined the "Gimme Stuff" crowd by allowing themselves to get addicted to food stamps? Because the USDA made it easy. They made it "okay." And, they made it fun. But what Uncle Sam can't do is make selling your pride for a stipend from the State palatable. If your family ethics is centered on working what you have, then the gratuities of the State that shackle you to Big Brother's feeding trough is more than a discomforting embarrassment. It makes you feel like an indentured servant of the State. Food Stamps But that's only because you become just that. On election day you discover the chain that shackles you to the feeding trough also chains you to the bureaucracy's voting booth as well and, too late, you discover the price you pay for the gratuities of the government is control over how you vote. The "free stuff" has a price tag. The price tag is liberty.

That's why the Obama Administration has engaged in food stamp trickery. It's critical to the agenda of the left. In a press release issued on Sept. 4, 2012, Obama Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the former Democratic governor of Iowa, said there are "...too many middle-class families who have fallen on hard times are still struggling. Our goal is to get these families the temporary assistance they need so they are able to get through these tough times and back on their feet as soon as possible."

And, that's why the US House of Representatives, in a 217-200 vote approved a bill containing $40 billion food stamp spending cuts on Sept. 19, 2012. As the measure was coming up for a vote, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [R-VA], who was the driving force behind the bill, told the members that it was "...wrong for working middle-class families to pay for the abuses in the program..." whose costs have skyrocketed in recent years as the left works hard to shackle even more Americans to the government feeding trough in an attempt to control their vote. Prior to the House vote, the Senate already passed a similar measure in May—only their proposed token cuts were around $4.5 billion (so they could claim, to the middle class voters back home) that they voted to cut welfare spending, and at the same time, campaign that they fought to rein in heartless Republican by minimizing the loss of benefit to those still signing up at Food Stamp parties all around the country.

Since 2009 the USDA has devoted considerable time dreaming up entire public relations promotional campaigns to entice potentially eligible Americans to participate in SNAP. Obama feels that the more people there are in the program, the less stigma there will be attached to it. You can't look down on your neighbor's using food stamps if you're using them, too.

Posted on the USDA website in September, 2012 was a phamplet (available at local SNAP offices) that encouraged SNAP officials to throw "food stamp parties" as a way to encourage seniors on fixed incomes to enroll in the program. Invitation The phamplet read: "Throw a Great Party. Host social events where people mix and mingle. Make it fun by having activities, games, food and entertainment, and provide information about SNAP. Putting SNAP information in a game format like BINGO, crossword puzzles, or even in a 'true/false' quiz is fun and helps get your message across in a memorable way."

The Daily Caller reported in June, 2012 that the USDA began running radio ads in March and continued them through June at a cost to taxpayers of between $2.5 to $3 million. CNN reported that the first time the USDA used that ploy (attempting to attract seniors into applying for food stamps) was in 2004 under President George W. Bush—who oversaw (CNN said, quoting the Obama Administration) a 63% increase in food stamp participation.

However, on Jan. 1, 2005, the highest food stamp usage in any State was 20.5%. While the Bush-43 increase may have been 63% over what the previous levels were, CNN stats implied that where 47% of the eligible population are currently on food stamps today, 63% of the eligible SNAP recipients were on food stamps under Bush-43—which appears to be something of a deliberate gross exaggeration.

If the amount of people on food stamps in 2004 before Bush-43 initiated what CNN implied was his "invitation to welfare" program (if he actually did) was, say, 10% of those potentially eligible, then a 63% increase would raise the number of participants to 16.3% If only 5% of the population was on food stamps, a 63% increase would raise the total percentage of food stamp recipients to about 13.2% CNN's social progressive vegans apparently can't tell the difference between apples and tomatoes, believing since both are red and both are technically fruit, they must both be apples.

After the House vote to cut $40 billion in food stamp spending, House and Senate Democrats got on the stump, arguing that the GOP bill was going to eliminate benefits to about 4 million of the neediest families in America. Senator Debbie Stabenow [D-MI], chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee said "...we have never before seen this kind of partisanship injected into a farm bill," adding the House bill was "...a monumental waste of time that will never become law." The White House, which wants even more people on welfare (and its job creation efforts support that theory) threatened, on Wednesday, Sept. 18, to veto to House measure to "...prevent damage to one of our nation's strongest defenses against hunger and poverty."

One-in-seven Americans now receive food stamp assistance. Many of those on welfare hold solid middle income jobs, The recipients are, in many cases, people who own their own homes, have least two family vehicles—and vacation somewhere other than in their back yard each year. Because recipients today receive debit cards that look like credit cards, they don't carry the "food stamp" stigma that many many needy Americans shun the program in the past out of the shame associated with paying for your groceries with USDA food coupons. Today, food stamps have become "free money." And the prevailing mood is that no one in their right mind turns down free money. Only, it's not free. It's paid for by your neighbors who ae struggling to make ends meet just like you. Well, forwhatever it's worth, once again, you have my two cents worth on this subject. Until next time...