U.S. Rep. Castor Champions Nutrition for Children in Advance of U.S. House Vote

Press Release

U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Tampa/St. Petersburg, FL) was at Tampa Bay Boulevard Elementary today and spoke out in opposition to Congressional Republicans' plan this week to cut supplemental nutrition for nearly 2 million people, mostly working families with children and senior citizens.

The U.S. House "Farm Bill" scheduled for a vote this week proposes a $20.5 billion cut to the primary U.S. anti-hunger initiative -- known as SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) -- over the next decade. The extreme cuts would impact mostly families with children, many in the Tampa Bay area.

In Florida, 62 percent of all SNAP participants are in families with children, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Thirty-four percent of all SNAP participants are in working families, and 31 percent are in families with elderly or disabled members.

"We will have to wait until the decision is made in Congress, calculate how much our district will be cut … and at that point in time we will have to make some tough choices," said MaryEllen Elia, Superintendent of Hillsborough County Public Schools. More than 100,000 Hillsborough County Public Schools students receive free or reduced lunch.

Tampa Bay Boulevard Elementary Principal Glenda Rodriguez said 95 percent of her students receive reduced or free meals during the school year. Tampa Bay Boulevard is a Title I school, and these schools have the highest student concentrations of poverty and receive supplementary financial federal support to meet school education goals.

"Studies show that children who eat breakfast perform better in school," Rep. Castor said. "The extreme cuts that House Republicans are proposing for SNAP would reduce nutrition for children, hinder their learning and impact tomorrow's workforce."

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), children in low-income families whose eligibility for free school meals is tied to their receipt of SNAP would lose free school meals when their families lose SNAP benefits. In Hillsborough County, younger children would feel the brunt of cutbacks in free or reduced meals as 62 percent of Hillsborough County elementary schools and 57 percent of middle schools are Title I.

The Farm Bill's SNAP cuts would come on top of an across-the-board reduction in benefits that every SNAP recipient will experience starting Nov. 1. On that date, the increase in SNAP benefits established by the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) will end, resulting in a loss of approximately $25 in monthly SNAP benefits for a family of four. The House Republicans' Farm Bill goes further and deeper on top of these scheduled reductions and will likely to put substantial numbers of poor families at risk of food insecurity.

Contrary to proponents' claim that the bill's SNAP cuts are needed to rein in out-of-control program growth, CBO has found that SNAP's expansion in recent years is primarily due to the severe and prolonged economic downturn and that SNAP spending will fall significantly as the economy recovers. CBO projects that the share of the population that participates in SNAP will fall back to 2008 levels in coming years and that SNAP costs as a share of the economy will fall back to their 1995 level by 2019.

"The best way to balance the budget is through job creation and economic recovery, not by cutting nutrition for children. History shows that SNAP caseloads and expenditures fall after unemployment and poverty fall," Rep. Castor said.

Indeed, CBO recently stated, "the primary reason for the increase in the number of SNAP participants was the deep recession from December 2007 to June 2009 and the subsequent slow recovery; there were no significant legislative expansions of eligibility for the program during that time." The recession dramatically increased the number of low-income households that qualify and have applied for help from the program; SNAP expanded to meet the increased need. Without SNAP, poverty and hardship would have been significantly greater in the last few years as noted by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3965

Source