Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
5 Facts about food stamp programs
5 Facts about food stamp programs
Jan 1, 2026 4:15 PM

Last week the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed a measure it claims will close a loophole that allows states to make participants receiving minimal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits automatically eligible to participate in USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Acting Deputy Under Secretary Brandon Lipps said the proposed rule would result in saving an average of $2.5 billion per year.

Here are five facts you should know about food stamp programs like SNAP.

1. The first federal Food Stamp Program (FSP) began in 1930 and ended in 1943. The program allowed people on relief to buy orange stamps equal to their normal food expenditures. For every $1 worth of orange stamps purchased, 50 cents worth of blue stamps were received. Orange stamps could be used to buy any food while Blue stamps could only be used to buy food determined by the USDA to be surplus. Another pilot program ran from 1961 until 1964, when Congress passed the Food Stamp Act. The program grew from half a million participants in 1965 to a record high of 22.4 million people in 1981. (A new record high of 47.6 million people was reached in 2013.)

2. The FPS underwent numerous revisions throughout the 1970s and 1980s. One significant change was the Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT), a program first introduced in 1984, which provided benefits on a debit card rather than on paper stamps. EBT helped to reduce food stamp fraud by creating an electronic record of each food stamp transaction, making it easier to identify violations. The rate of food stamp fraud—primarily the exchange of food stamps for cash—dropped from nearly 4 percent in the 1990’s down to around 1 percent after EBT was fully implemented.

3. In efforts to counter the stigma attached to the term “food stamps,” Congress changed the name of the program in 2008 to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP, and changed the name of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 to the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. States were given flexibility to name the program on their own (at the time, 10 states already changed the names of their programs) but were encouraged to change the name to SNAP or another alternate name.

4. SNAP is the largest federal nutrition assistance program, in both participation and spending. Such programs are funded under the “Nutrition” section of the omnibus legislation passed every five years known as the farm bill (the latest bill was the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018). According to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) projected costs at the time of the 2018 law’s enactment, the Nutrition title makes up approximately 76 percent of farm bill spending, and SNAP is the vast majority of the Nutrition spending. Approximately 95 percent of SNAP spending is for the benefits themselves, which are 100 percent federally funded., while administrative costs of eligibility determination are shared between the states and the federal government. As of 2018, the program cost $64.9 million for 40.3 million participants.

5. SNAP is designed primarily to increase the food purchasing power of eligible e households to help them buy a nutritionally adequate low-cost diet as determined by USDA guidelines. SNAP benefits are available for households that meet federal financial eligibility tests for limited monthly e (at or below 130% of the federal poverty level) and liquid assets ($2,000 per household). These rules, however, can be bypassed through the use of “categorical eligibility” for SNAP. Categorical eligibility provides states with the ability to modify federal financial eligibility rules. As of February 2018, 42 states utilized broad-based categorical eligibility, although several do so with an added limit on liquid assets. To be eligible for SNAP, a household must also fulfill requirements related to work effort and must meet citizenship and legal permanent residence tests.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Taking His Name in Vain: What Would Jesus Cut?
Ray’s post pointed to something that’s been bugging me about Jim Wallis’ “What Would Jesus Cut?” campaign. As with the “What Would Jesus Drive?” campaign (“Transportation is a moral issue.” What isn’t these days?), Wallis’ campaign assumes the moral high ground by appropriating the Holy Name of Jesus Christ to advance his highly politicized, partisan advocacy. Jesus es an advertising slogan. And what is implicit here is that those who oppose Wallis are somehow at odds with the Gospel of...
Audio: Dr. Carl Trueman on Christians and Politics
If you weren’t able to make it to Derby Station on Wednesday for our latest Acton On Tap event, have no fear: we’re pleased to present the full recording of the evening’s festivities featuring Dr. Carl Trueman of Westminister Seminary via the audio player below. If you’re unfamiliar with Dr. Trueman or his work, check out Jordan Ballor’s introduction right here. Considering that the PowerBlog’s focus over the past few days has been on how Christians are approaching the debt...
Abortion and Intergenerational Justice
I’m not sure I have ever really encountered the term intergenerational justice before this discussion over “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” at least in any substantive way. This unfamiliarity is what lay behind my initial caveat regarding the term, my concern that it not be understood as “code for something else.” The Call itself provides a decent definition of the concept, or at least of its implications: “…that one generation must not benefit or suffer unfairly at the cost of...
Jesus as Budget Director?
My first reaction to “What Would Jesus Cut?” is that it tends to reduce Christ to a distributor of material goods through government programs. Jesus is not a budget overseer or a dispenser of government largesse. Sojourners founder Jim Wallis has already countered this accusation with his own post saying, “We haven’t been trying to get Jesus to be the head of any mittee, or think that he would ever want that job!” But still, to use Christ as an...
Call of the Entrepreneur Website Redesigned
Now is a great time to check out Acton’s first documentary, The Call of the Entrepreneur. Call of the Entrepreneur's new design. The website has pletely redesigned to be more user friendly and attractive. You will find links to social media forCall of the Entrepreneur as well as options to share the documentary with your friends at the bottom of the site. We’ve also added the high definition trailer to the site. The only trailer available on the previous website...
‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’ and the Question of Economic Growth
While there is much to applaud in the Center for Public Justice and Evangelicals for Social Action’s “A Call for Intergenerational Justice,” the lack of discussion of the problem of economic growth is troubling. I believe Don Peck is correct when he writes in The Atlantic: If it persists much longer, this era of high joblessness will likely change the life course and character of a generation of young adults—and quite possibly those of the children behind them as well....
A Response to ‘What Would Jesus Cut?’
Jim Wallis and a number of other Christians involved in politics are trying to gain attention for the question, “What would Jesus cut?” The answer to this question is supposed to be as obvious as it is in other moral contexts. For example, would Jesus lie about the useful life of a refrigerator he was selling for Best Buy? No way. Would he bully a kid into giving away his lunch money? Not a chance. Would you find him taking...
Opposing Views: America’s Debt Crisis and ‘A Call for Intergenerational Justice’
Last week’s issuance of “A Call for Intergenerational Justice: A Christian Proposal on the American Debt Crisis” has occasioned a good bit of discussion on the topic, both here at the PowerBlog and around various other blogs and social media sites. It has been interesting to see the reaction that ments about the Call have generated. Many have said that I simply misunderstood or misread the document. I have taken the time to reread the document and do some reassessment...
Archbishop Chaput: The American experience and global religious liberty
A brilliant assessment of where we are. (HT: American Orthodox Institute Observer). Subject to the governor of the universe: The American experience and global religious liberty March 1, 2011 – Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver, addressed the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs at Georgetown University. A friend once said – I think shrewdly — that if people want to understand the United States, they need to read two documents. Neither one is...
Unintended Consequences and Wind Turbines
With the surge in oil prices, there’s renewed interest in alternative energy options. Numerous countries have gradually taken steps to promoting renewable or clean energy technologies, and it seems the United States is drifting more towards favoring alternative energy options as the Obama Administration is looking at banning off shore drilling along the continental shelf until 2012 and beyond. However, before we move farther down this road, a critical analysis of the pros and cons is a must. A more...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved