CHARLESTON, W. Va. - Lawmakers may tighten access to West Virginia safety-net programs but food banks in the state say that would only raise the pressure on already-stretched feeding programs.

Legislation would expand work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP, formerly food stamps, and add drug testing for some on Temporary Assistance To Needy Families (TANF).

Legislators have criticized what they describe as waste and abuse in the programs. But Cynthia Kirkhart, executive director with the Facing Hunger Food Bank in Huntington, says that badly underestimates the real level of hunger in the state.

"When benefits are reduced, the demand for food increases pretty dramatically," says Kirkhart.

According to the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, more than four out of five households receiving SNAP benefits in any given month have incomes below half the federal poverty line. Sean O'Leary, senior policy analyst with the center, says the folks on SNAP and TANF are generally the poorest of the poor.

"Low-income families with children, who are working as hard as they can, as much as they can," says O'Leary. "And those who are disabled or struggling to find work because of a lack of education or lack of skills."

According to O'Leary, the other states that have tried drug testing for assistance have found the rate of drug abuse in the programs is no higher than in the general population. He adds drug testing typically costs far more than it saves in reduced benefits. O'Leary says some of the changes being billed as "welfare reforms" could end up costing the state millions of dollars.

The benefits offered by the program are really minimal, according to Kirkhart. She points out the average TANF benefit is $340 a month for a household, and she says SNAP benefits are no more generous.

"It's basically $1.40 per person per meal," says Kirkhart. "So when you reduce it even further, the demand for more food just grows exponentially."

Supporters of the legislation say it will push more able-bodied adults into the workforce. Critics point out that most beneficiaries are unable to work, or can't find employment.


get more stories like this via email

A new bill in the U.S. House of Representatives could make it easier for people to get job training while they're receiving federal food assistance.

It's hopeful news for the more than 800,000 Virginians receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits.

The last Farm Bill made a change that allowed people getting SNAP benefits to pursue paid job training - but their wages for that training were counted against their monthly benefit amount, reducing or even ending their food assistance.

Leah Bacon, director of investment advocacy at the Center for Employment Opportunities, said this "unintended consequence" meant people had to choose between SNAP benefits and job training opportunities.

"For far too long, people have really had to make an impossible decision - to either put food on the table for themselves and their families, or invest in their future through workforce development," said Bacon. "That really can't be the status quo."

Supporters say the legislation would ensure people in temporary, paid job-training programs won't lose access to SNAP benefits. It has bipartisan support in Congress.

Bacon said the legislation could also affect people who've recently reentered society from prison.

An estimated 60% of people are unemployed for a year or more after their release - and they experience food insecurity at twice the rate of the general public.

"People need immediate stability, and by offering access to a paying job and food security - through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program," said Bacon, "these are really key ways in ensuring that people have the right tools as they transition back into society."

The bill was introduced in late April and is in the House Committee on Agriculture.




get more stories like this via email

Today is National Caregivers Day, recognizing those who help friends or family members who are living with an illness, injury or disability.

A 2024 report painted a picture of Montanans who rely on public assistance, a picture largely populated by caregivers.

The report, commissioned by the Headwaters Foundation, found about one in four Montana families, or 120,000, received income-based public assistance in a given year after Medicaid expansion. It noted most are working families with children, or family members who are older or disabled.

Bryce Ward, founder of ABMJ Consulting, compiled the report.

"It's not hard to imagine how they got into this situation," Ward pointed out. "They're just low-income workers or the people for whom it's hard to work. They're old or disabled, or they have kids or other caregiving responsibilities."

Medicaid expansion is getting a lot of attention in the current Montana Legislature. House Bill 245, which would continue the program beyond its original June sunset date, was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance and Claims yesterday after passing the House earlier this month.

A big takeaway from the report is there is no "typical" participant in public assistance and many who need it use it for brief time periods. Ward cautioned conversations in the policy and media spaces can have what he called a "dehumanizing element." He hopes the report will change it.

"These populations include all the different types of people in Montana," Ward stressed. "You probably know lots of people who have, or are on, income-based public assistance."

The median family of three with income around the poverty line receives about $400 a month in benefits, according to the report.


get more stories like this via email

South Dakotans passed Amendment F on Election Day, opening the door to impose work requirements on people who qualify for expanded Medicaid benefits.

Opponents said it could interrupt health treatment for those fighting cancer and other diseases. Any bill outlining work requirements for Medicaid would still need state passage and federal approval.

A report from the Congressional Budget Office on the effects of a similar rule finds it would reduce federal spending, decrease the number of people with health insurance and would not increase employment.

Ben Hanson, South Dakota government relations director for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said it would also cost the state.

"For the most part, state health departments will tell you, you're not going to save money by doing this," Hanson asserted. "You're going to wind up spending more to create a bureaucracy to oversee this new set of forms and paperwork they have to fill out, for an already qualifying population."

President-elect Donald Trump approved work requirements in 13 states during his last term, all of which were rescinded or withdrawn under President Joe Biden. South Dakota is one of nine states with pending programs or legislation to allow them.

Most adults with Medicaid benefits who are able to work are doing so. According to the health research organization KFF, of those under age 65 who do not have other state-sponsored care, 91% are either working, or not working because they are students, caregivers or are ill themselves. Hanson said, for instance, many people who go through cancer treatment miss work for several months because of its physical toll.

"This could take away your coverage for getting that treatment while you're trying to get better so you can go be an employee again," Hanson noted. "And more importantly, so you can survive your cancer diagnosis."

Hanson added work requirements might also prevent early cancer detection, which leads to more expensive treatment and worse outcomes.


get more stories like this via email