Oh, SNAP!

EBT benefits may be delayed or halted

According to popular news outlets and politicians, the current federal government shutdown may cause a delay or complete halt of food stamp distribution to those receiving government assistance. According to NPR, the SNAP program will run out of funds on Nov. 1. Wide-spread panic and anger has ensued. Many have taken to social media to rant about how they will no longer be able to feed their families, or how horrible one political party or another is for allowing this to happen.

Many who do not purchase groceries at government expense are decrying the flaws in the system, how such a thing should never be able to happen, and that no one should have to go without food.

Interestingly enough, this crisis du jour has brought to light some rather troubling statistics. 42 million people are currently receiving food assistance from the public treasury. That is a whopping 12.3% of people in the country who get groceries at government expense.

But there is more lurking below the surface of that number, because not all 42 million beneficiaries of those benefits are even Americans. As a matter of fact, many of those foreign g(r)iftees aren’t even in the country legally.

Yes there are Americans on the roll as well, some truly struggling and some not. What are we as a country to do?

Many are saying we need better controls, checks to ensure those using the system have actual need of it, and that they are Americans. Some believe we just need to throw more money at it. I have a different opinion: end it. Yes, you read that correctly - end the program altogether, and no, do not replace it.

I’m heartless you say? I don’t care that people may go without? Hardly.

Prior to the Great Depression, the SNAP program didn’t exist. Since then, untold billions (trillions? More?) have been thrown at this program, yet the number of people receiving assistance seems never to go down, only up. As a matter of fact, government spending for EBT has more than doubled just since 2019!

The fact is, government shouldn’t be involved in such charitable work at all. To quote James Madison, father of the Constitution, “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of government. It would puzzle any gentleman to lay his finger on any part of the Constitution which would authorize the government to interpose in the relief of…sufferers.”

I can hear the retort, “well, that’s not very Christian of you.” Such sentiment comes from those reading the Gospel of Karl:

Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you had government give Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you had the government give Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you had the government invite Me in and give me housing; I was sick, and you had government give Me healthcare.

Such adherents give no thought to the fact that their position is coercing those who work and earn a living to support those who do not. Lost as well in their utopian altruism is that some of those whose hard-earned wages are being garnished to aid others are themselves struggling to put food on their own family’s dinner table.

This benighted beneficence could rightly be called pilferanthropy. Charity at gunpoint is not charity at all - it is robbery (in legal terms, “theft with violence or threat of violence involved”). This is the essence of using the government for charity.

“But Jesus, and Christianity…”

Contrary to the apocryphal Gospel of Karl mentioned above, that is not at all what Jesus said. Jesus would not have us use government to force those who have give to those who have not. Jesus was, in fact, not a socialist.

Let’s look at what Jesus actually taught:

Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in;…I was sick, and you visited Me…”

Mt. 25:34-36, emphases mine

Notice, Jesus spoke directly to the people saying it was “you” (not the government) who gave Him to eat, to drink, invited Him in… Government was not involved.

“But what shall we do for those in need?” Help them. Imagine if the multitude of people railing on social media about having to do something to feed those who don’t have would each just give a little. How about $100 per post? If there are a million people making such posts online, that would add up to $100 million dollars. And it could be given voluntarily rather than taken by force.

Aside from the already-stated fact that using government to fund such charitable endeavors amounts to little more than robbery, government is horribly inefficient (and inept) at administering such programs. A large percentage of any such monies collected is inevitably consumed by bureaucracy and administrative overhead.

When handled privately, whether directly by individuals, or through charitable or religious organizations, such expense is (usually) minimized, and the majority of donations goes to those in need.*

There is much more that can be said about dependence upon government to feed you (how then they can also starve you), or how such programs (dis)incentivize hard work when workers realize others reap the benefits of their labor (and those who don’t labor realize they can receive benefits without work), but perhaps Jefferson summed it up best:

Still one thing more, fellow citizens, a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government; and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.

It is incumbent upon the individual to seek his or her own “improvement” and welfare - not the government. It is immoral for government to “take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned,” especially when it is done in order to give that bread to others.

We really should return to this vision of the founders, and even more importantly, the perspective of Scripture, and restore the practice of helping your neighbor (and family) directly rather than at the barrel of a gun.

---

*That there are charities and other organizations that are corrupt and steal donations (and I wasn’t even thinking of the Clinton Foundation when I wrote this), as well as some who spend far more on salaries and administrivia than reaches the intended beneficiaries, for the most part, private organizations are far more efficient and effective at handling charitable pursuits than government can ever hope to be.