Here we go again:
In a Post-Gazette story about Pennsylvania experiencing “record” participation in the SNAP program, erroneous – and no less onerous – claims are made by a key player.
We’ll get to those in just a second.
SNAP stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, what commonly once upon a time were known as “food stamps.”
“Since the pandemic, Pennsylvania expanded the [program’s] eligibility requirements, and the federal government beefed up payments,” the P-G reports. “Now, a record 2 million Pennsylvanians are enjoying those benefits.”
Additionally, the P-G report notes that “SNAP participation surged, despite flat population growth in the state and record-low unemployment nationwide.”
“Local advocates like Colleen Young, director of government affairs for the Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank, say food insecurity is still at crisis levels, and even recent program boosts aren’t doing enough.
“’We’re continuing to see those numbers go up and up,’ she told the P-G. ‘That just points to the fact that the amount of money that people are receiving through their benefits is not sufficient.’”
But Young then repeats two rank falsehoods. As the P-G tells it:
“Young notes that SNAP is 100 percent federally funded, so these are not dollars that are coming out of Pennsylvania’s pocket. In fact, it’s a local economic driver, she said.
“’For every dollar that’s spent with the SNAP program, it returns anywhere from $1.50 to $1.80 back into the community,’ she said. ‘It’s not just supporting households who are experiencing food insecurity, but because of the economic growth that these funds generate, it’s really benefiting the whole community.’”
Uhm, no and no.
First, where in the world does Young think the federal government derives “its” money? It’s from taxpayers in every state in the union. Last time we checked, that includes Pennsylvania.
But that’s a minor point compared to the far worse, major misrepresentation that SNAP somehow is an economic generator.
As Gary M. Galles, an economics professor at Pepperdine University (and a member of the faculty at the Foundation for Economic Freedom) reminded in 2021:
“For years, food stamps have been systematically promoted by reiterating multiple false and misleading claims about their effects on food consumption, nutrition, agriculture, income and job creation.
“[Their] promoters’ rhetoric far outstrips reality, and serial repetition does not change that.”
To wit, on just one of those misleading claims:
“The misrepresentation of economic stimulus effects is … exaggerated by using multiplier effects,” Galles explains. “It is true that when one person gets more money, they spend more, increasing demands and income elsewhere.
“But the same process occurs in the opposite direction, as those with reduced after-tax incomes from financing the benefits spend less, decreasing demands and income elsewhere. There is little net effect, but by ignoring adverse consequences, insignificant effects can be presented as major benefits.”
It’s long past time for the Colleen Youngs of the nation to put their gross SNAP misrepresentations out to pasture. Failure to do so is a continuing and serious pox on their credibility.
Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
