The President’s FY 2008 budget proposals fall far short of the investments required to meet the health, education and nutrition needs of America’s vulnerable families, children and elderly. Some of the Administration budget proposals actually would worsen the situation for hundreds of thousands. Particularly in this Farm Bill reauthorization year, our nation’s families deserve a more significant commitment to address the nutrition needs of 35 million people in U.S. households facing a constant struggle against hunger.

In the nutrition program area, proposed budget changes would have a net negative effect by:

• Reducing participation in the Food Stamp Program. While modest positive changes to Program rules would add 98,000 people to the Food Stamp Program, other changes mean that 329,000 people in working families with children which are low-income but not receiving cash assistance would lose eligibility;
• Weakening the WIC program by reducing access and quality of services to low-income mothers, infants, and children who are nutritionally at risk;
• Eliminating the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) that provides nutrition assistance to more than 485,000 low-income elderly, children and mothers; and
• Eliminating the Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP) that supports local efforts to help needy families obtain nutrition benefits.

Congress should reject the negative changes and instead make new investments in the nutrition title of the 2007 Farm Bill to improve Food Stamp Program access and benefit levels.

Food Stamps–Missed Farm Bill Opportunity and Net Negative Effect

The Administration’s 2007 Farm Bill proposals and FY 2008 Budget for the Food Stamp Program represent a net negative for participation and leave households’ allotments short of that needed to purchase a healthy diet. Missing from the Administration package are eligibility restorations for legal immigrants and jobless adults willing to work. Also missing are meaningful raises in food stamp allotment levels from the $1 dollar per person per meal average and decades-old $10 monthly minimum benefit.

Within the package, the President proposes modest positive changes to the Food Stamp Program: excluding from the resources tests retirement accounts and IRS-approved college savings plans; excluding from income combat-related military pay; eliminating the cap on the dependent care deduction; barring states from recouping overpayments from clients when due to a systemic agency error; piloting use of Food Stamp Employment and Training reimbursements for low-income workers on the job (not just prior to their obtaining jobs); providing $20 million per year in competitive grants to address obesity among the low-income population; and renaming the Food Stamp Program the “Food and Nutrition Program.”

At the same time, the President proposes to eliminate food stamps for approximately 329,000 people in low-income working families (when the cut is fully implemented). Under current federal law, states have the option to treat as categorically eligible for food stamps those families which are receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program services. Although the families may have modest savings or “gross income” that slightly exceeds the Food Stamp Program's regular rules, if the state takes this option they may receive benefits. Their net income after expenses are deducted still has to meet the regular (strict) income test, and they still must complete the food stamp application process. The President would make these families ineligible for food stamps. Households in about 40 states that have taken the categorical eligibility state option would be affected. Hardest hit would be Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.

In addition, by eliminating their food stamp eligibility, the proposal would raise school lunch fees or keep from eligibility for free school meals many needy children in those families whose food stamp status now results in direct certification for the school meals. This change will result in an $8 million reduction in School Lunch and Breakfast Program spending, which translates into a drop in participation by tens of thousands of low-income children. The last Congress twice rejected this proposal to change “categorical eligibility” rules.

At a time when more than 35 million people live in U.S. households that face a constant struggle against hunger, Congress should once again reject the Administration’s proposed food stamp cuts to working families with children and instead make significant new investments in the 2007 Farm Bill nutrition title to increase Food Stamp Program access and benefit levels.

Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)

The WIC funding ($5.387 billion in new budget authority) provided in the President's budget will not be enough to meet expected need because the proposal depends on savings from a proposed cut to nutrition education and WIC services funds. The proposed cap will cut $145 million by freezing the WIC nutrition education and WIC services funds at FY06 levels: $14.12 per person. Lowering the spending limit for WIC’s nutrition education and services funding will reduce access and quality of services to low-income mothers, infants, and children who are nutritionally at risk.

The Administration says its budget proposal is adequate to serve a monthly average of 8.3 million recipients, but that is true only if nutrition education and WIC services are reduced as it proposes, i.e., if recipients receive reduced services. Also, the Administration’s conservative growth projections for the WIC caseload are cutting it close. Congress and the Administration will need to monitor WIC food costs and participation to assure that all those eligible for WIC can participate.

The proposal includes an increase in the WIC contingency funds from $125 million to $200 million to cover unexpected increases in participation or food prices.

Once again, the President proposes to limit automatic WIC eligibility for Medicaid recipients by limiting it to those with income below 250 percent of the poverty level. This will have a negative impact on WIC participants in Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island.

Funding the WIC breast feeding support initiative ($15 million) and WIC infrastructure ($14 million) are continued in the budget. Funding for WIC computer systems (MIS) was not included.

The budget document promotes the value of the new WIC food package for WIC recipients.

The Administration wisely abandoned their plan to propose a State match for WIC in the budget.

The Commodity Supplemental Food Program

The President’s budget proposes to eliminate the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). This would cut off nutritious commodities to more than 485,000 low-income seniors (aged 60 and older), low-income mothers and children under six in an average month. The program currently operates in 32 states, the District of Columbia and two Indian reservations. The President’s proposal includes a temporary transitional food stamp benefit for seniors (60 years of age or older) losing CSFP. These benefits would equal $20 per month for the lesser of six months or until the recipient participates in the Food Stamp Program. This temporary benefit will not fill the nutrition gap that would be widened by CSFP’s elimination. Many vulnerable elderly need both food stamps and CSFP to put food on the table.

Annually, CSFP provides more than 5.8 million food packages for mothers, infants, children and seniors. Over 91 percent of CSFP recipients (approximately 442,000) are seniors. CSFP food packages provide a supplement which includes much needed sources of nutrients typically lacking in the diets of the target population. While CSFP participants can also receive food stamps, they cannot also receive WIC. The typical CSFP food package includes items such as canned tuna fish, meat and poultry, peanut butter, formula, milk, juice, oats, rice, beans, cheese, cereal, and canned fruits and vegetables. 

To be eligible, seniors must have income at or below 130 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. (currently about $12,744 a year for a single person and $17,160 for a couple). CSFP also provides food packages to low-income pregnant and post-partum women, infants, and children up to age six, generally up to 185 percent of the Federal poverty line. Some low-income post-partum mothers and six-year olds are eligible for CSFP but not for WIC.

In FY2007, the House responded to the President’s plan to eliminate CSFP funding by providing the program with one of its highest appropriations of $118 million. During the FY2007 budget cycle, 122 House Members signed a letter urging then House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Henry Bonilla (R-TX) to reject the President’s proposal and to continue to fund CSFP at adequate levels.

Many of the local agencies distributing CSFP products are grassroots community-based nonprofit organizations. In addition to food distribution, these agencies provide nutrition education and referrals for additional assistance such as food stamps, Medicaid, emergency food, low-income energy assistance and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The Administration proposal to lessen the negative impact of eliminating CSFP by providing transitional food stamps is not sufficient to safeguard the needs of CSFP’s vulnerable beneficiaries. First, under current law, elderly people are eligible for both programs, which recognizes that both are supplementary programs for low-income seniors. Second, the transitional benefit is lower than the value (in retail terms approximately $50) of the CSFP package to its recipients. Third, some of the CSFP clients will not be able to meet the regular food stamp rules. Unlike CSFP, which is based only on income, the Food Stamp Program applies resource tests for household eligibility. While the transitional benefit plan recognizes that eliminating CSFP will have consequences for its clients, it does not provide a long-term solution to the harm the cuts entail.

The Community Food and Nutrition Program

The President's FY2008 budget proposal would eliminate the Community Services Block Grant and the Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP). CFNP is one of the primary sources of federal support for anti-hunger and nutrition advocacy groups at the local, state and national level. This small program has provided critical seed money for a range of local and state projects to alleviate hunger and food insecurity. Funds coordinate existing private and public food assistance efforts; assist low-income communities in identifying and recruiting sponsors for programs; and develop innovative approaches to meet the nutritional needs of low-income families.

Historically, CFNP received funding over $7 million. During the FY2006 and FY2007 appropriations budget cycles CFNP funding was eliminated.