Nevadans relying on food stamps more as jobs disappear
By Nevada News Bureau
Nevada experienced the greatest growth among the states in food stamp caseloads between 2007 and 2010 with an increase of 128 percent, according to a recent report from the Urban Institute.
The jump in caseloads is attributable to a nearly 250 percent increase in state unemployment between 2007 and 2010, the report says.
The Unemployment and Recovery Project report said caseload increases across the country are a reflection of high unemployment, as well as increased participation rates and program changes that make it easier for families to get benefits.
Nearly 45 million people currently receive help from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly called food stamps), an increase of about 69 percent since the recession began near the end of 2007.
A recent report said 329,105 Nevadans received assistance from SNAP in March, citing statistics obtained from the state Division of Welfare and Supportive Services.
Today, SNAP reaches about one in seven Americans.
* Over half of SNAP-supported households include children, and one in five include a disabled, non-elderly adult.
* About one in eight SNAP-supported households include elderly individuals.
* 96 percent are U.S. citizens, 1 percent are refugees, and 3 percent are documented non-citizens living in the U.S. long enough to qualify (aliens are not eligible for SNAP benefits).
* In 2009, about 29 percent of SNAP households had some earnings, 5 percent had some unemployment insurance, and many others reported disability or retirement income. Nearly one in five (18 percent) had no countable income.
The current debate over reducing the federal deficit has led some to propose scaling back federal program costs. The House Budget Committee passed a major restructuring that would block grant SNAP to the states with fixed federal resources.
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget plan would cut the SNAP program by $127 billion – almost 20 percent – over the next 10 years (2012-21).
In addition to possible cuts to SNAP, thousands of Nevada residents who rely on financial assistance to pay their power bills likely won’t get help this year because of federal funding cuts.
The Division of Welfare and Supportive Services recently said federal funding for Nevada’s Energy Assistance Program will amount to only $4 million this year, down from $15.8 million in the fiscal year that just ended June 30.
How’s that hope and change workin’ out for you?
Sure dogwoman, whatever you say.
Kind of funny how D.C.’s deregulation induced graft, and grand tax cuts for the well tended led to such a crash in 2007-08 after the initial injection faded — no actual trickle down in jobs accrued then or afterward (unless you count private mercenary forces and outsourcing overseas).
Nevada and Texas, the libertarian paradises to which disgruntled Californians supposedly flee – let’s see:
Nevada, ever since they lost their unnatural gambling monopoly, has struggled greatly with the aftermath of the housing bubble, lost jobs, and reliance on government funded programs like SNAP.
Texas, with its low wage “right to work” dead end jobs, poor education and healthcare services and $26 billion state deficit, plus heavy reliance on tax revenues on the oil deposits they’re lucky to have by accident of nature.
Yeah, let’s cut off the remaining survival lifeline for those tossed to the wolves by GWB, Phil Gramm, and Mitch McConnell’s America. That’s the ticket.
Thanks but no thanks.
The right approach is to put the hammer on the financial industry and large corporate America, and do everything we can to encourage growth and low taxation of small business, and cut our bloated military force and contractors.
Neither party is pairing this properly to assist in the revival of real industry and a viable balanced economy. Wall Street and big corporates own them. How many more synthetic CDO’s do we need?
Read further on this site (no affiliation of mine) for some serious and balanced analysis free of one sided political ideology:
http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2011/07/us-is-not-high-tax-corporate-country.html
Mr. Bear, you must be partisan against the right. First off, you assert that there was some sort of failure to create (or save, as it were) jobs during the Bush administration. Can you even remember back that far as to what the unemployment rate was under Bush? Let me remind you it averaged about 5% for 8 years. Some ECON 101 for you – 5% equals “full employment”.
Second, I lived in Texas for 5 years, and found it to be a pretty decent place. I attended 2 universities there, had a decent paying job, and even good health insurance. IMAGINE THAT!!! Your complaint about low paying jobs there is irrelevant. The cost of living is much lower, and consequently a person can survive on a lower income. Gas, groceries, and property cost more here in Nevada & Cali.
But I like the weather better out here.
People need to realize neither one of these parties care about you, for the most part. There are exceptions, but most of these guys would walk on your back when your down, rather than give you a hand. Their focus is to get reelected, and get as much money as possible bestowed on them, by any individual or company that will give it. They are petrified of having to find a real job, because they really have no skills, and can only offer connections at best.
Care- You are so correct. Politicians from both parties are so entrenched in the system of being re-elected. They can’t fathem losing their golden egg paid by the taxpayers. It is time to install term limits for all politicians and Supreme Court judges.
That’s true. 90% of the politicians only have their own interests at heart. So why do folks keep voting for politicians who say they’re going to GIVE US STUFF? In the first place, that isn’t the govt.’s job, and in the second place, the only way they can give you stuff is by taking it from somebody else. They don’t HAVE any of their own stuff. They have to steal it first.
So when you vote, you should vote for the least crooked guy, the one who makes the fewest promises that he will take care of you and all your problems forever. Okay?
Surely people aren’t attributing the rise in unemployment starting in 2007 to Obama…
Well, he DID say his stimulus plan would make things better.
Oops.
Use numbers to support your claim, for once.
Also take into consideration that this recession didn’t happen overnight, or in a year. Only a moron would expect the economy to turn around in 3 years.
Really, Bongo? Do you not listen to the news at all? How much deeper are we in debt than when Obama took office? How much higher (or lower) is the unemployment rate? How much better (or worse) is the real estate market?
Thanks again for the personal attack (moron) but he shouldn’t have made promises that things were going to be hunky dory and then turned around and screwed the middle class.
So just to clarify you have no numbers and believe that a recession that takes years to create should go away in 3 years. And you also do not think there is a lag time between policies and economic response.
HAHAHA
Obama screwed the middle class?
WOW. You have been very well programmed.
I never said I expected it to go away in three years. I said Obama promised it would. But I certainly hoped it wasn’t going to get worse. It did. Personally, I don’t believe in Keynesian economics.
And yes, Obama HAS screwed the middle class. Unless you are a wall street banker, a government employee, or a union worker, you are in worse financial shape now than you were three years ago.
cognitive dissonance…
Gee, Bongo, I’ve never heard that from you before. You usually use it to insult me instead of responding to the issue.
Dogwoman- It is amazing how right on you can be at times and then turn around and be so far off. I feel that the congress has created most of our financial issues. They are the ones who send the bills and laws to the president to sign into law. I have felt for a long time that the role of president is as meaningless as the role of “The Queen” in England. Congress and the Supreme Court are way more powerful than the president. It all boils down to the crooks we have entrusted to run this country and we need to remove all politicians who have been in office for over one term.
Did you know about the term cognitive dissonance before me? How about the term ‘confirmation bias’?
You need to be aware of those in your own life to be able to overcome them.
Corporation run this country, because they own the politicians. Bush isn’t really the one to blame for the recession. The corporations that run the military-industrial complex and the financial system are to blame. And they sold it to you as ‘protect our freedom and the free market’