<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: food stamps</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'food stamps'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22food+stamps%22&t=%22food+stamps%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:54:40 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Spending: Ryan vs. Obama</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684277&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fjerptwu4EFo%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsHouse Budget Committee Chairman, Paul Ryan, introduced his budget resolution for fiscal 2012 and beyond today entitled “The Path to Prosperity.” The plan would cut some spending programs, reduce top income tax rates, and reform Medicare and Medicaid. The following two charts compare spending levels under Chairman Ryan’s plan and President Obama’s recent budget (as scored by the Congressional Budget Office).
Figure 1 shows that spending rises more slowly over the next decade under Ryan’s plan than Obama’s plan. But spending rises substantially under both plans—between 2012 and 2021, spending rises 34 percent under Ryan and 55 percent under Obama.

Figure 2 compares Ryan’s and Obama’s proposed spending levels at the end of the 10-year budget window in 2021. ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684277</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:54:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684277</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>USDA’s Budget Boom</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4570531&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBIcjiB8MLAc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenSpending at the U.S. Department of Agriculture will be an estimated inflation-adjusted 43 percent higher this year compared to just a decade ago. The following chart shows the dramatic rise in USDA spending from fiscal 1970 to the president’s projection for fiscal 2011:

Most folks probably think of farm subsidies when they think of the USDA. However, farm programs only account for 19 percent of total USDA outlays. The vast majority of USDA spending, 69 percent, goes to food subsidies: food stamps, school breakfast and lunch programs, and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). In fact, spending on food stamps alone this year will account for roughly half of total USDA spending.
Why aren’t these programs housed at the Department ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4570531</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:04:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4570531</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Spending Growth: Mandatory Programs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4549735&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXMbyjb3qMVo%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenWhile Congress haggles over Republican ambitions to trim $61 billion in funding for domestic discretionary programs, it’s important to remember that mandatory (or “entitlement”) spending is the main driver of recent and future budget growth.
The following chart compares fiscal 2007 spending to the president’s proposal for fiscal 2012 for the largest areas of overall federal spending:

Note that the area of spending that has increased the most dramatically is “other mandatory.” Major programs in this category range from food stamps to retirement and disability benefits for federal workers. The following chart shows the increase in spending for the largest of these programs:

This area of spending, and the programs that it consists of, are often forgotten in the deb...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4549735</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:54:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4549735</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Public Health Should Be Apolitical</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4077244&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fpublic-health-should-be-apolitical%2F2010.10.18</link>
            <description>You can be for freedom. You can be for smaller government that intrudes less. You can be for lower taxes. You can be for most anything, but if you&amp;#8217;re interested in improving the sagging health of American citizens, get on Michael Bloomberg&amp;#8217;s wheel.
As reported in the Wall Street Journal, NYC mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture to bar city residents from using food stamps to buy sugary soft drinks. It turns out that last year $135 million in food stamp money was used for the consumption of these obesity-fostering beverages in NYC alone.
Mr Bloomberg is morphing into a real-world public health super star. Previously, he was a pioneer in banning smoking in restaurants and bars. They said it could not be done, or that it wouldn&amp;#8217;t work. Well,...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4077244</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4077244</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Welfare and Fiscal Federalism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4031222&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgDCEfD3omyc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe Washington Post recently reported on the federal government’s cash-welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Despite the deep recession, the TANF welfare rolls haven’t seen a dramatic increase. Meanwhile, other federal anti-poverty programs have seen the sizable increases that are to be expected in a recession:
Nationwide, welfare cases grew by 11 percent from the start of the recession through March, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. In contrast, the number of families getting food stamps jumped by 50 percent and the number getting unemployment benefits more than doubled. Medicaid grew by more than 13 percent from late 2007 to late 2009, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
As I’ve noted before, TANF’s tighter work an...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4031222</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:15:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4031222</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rising Welfare Costs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3993870&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyTZ_Dn2_gaw%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe Government Accountability Office released Congressional testimony this week looking at Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. TANF, which replaced unrestricted welfare in 1996, has reduced welfare rolls and encouraged recipients to obtain work. Unfortunately, TANF’s goals have been undermined.
The GAO notes that “work participation rates … do not appear to be achieving the intended purpose of encouraging states to engage specified proportions of TANF adults in work activities.”
States are required to have at least 50 percent of eligible TANF recipients from single parent families participating in work activities. However, states are given various credits and exemptions that significantly reduce the number of recipients required to work. As a result, only about 3...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3993870</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:06:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3993870</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food Stamps Cut?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3880842&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLtfeF_I5PuQ%2F</link>
            <description>Prior to last week’s passage of another $26 billion in bailout money for state and local governments, I noted that the legislation wasn’t really offset:
Congressional Democrats say the measure is paid for with a combination of spending cuts elsewhere and tax increases. However, the new spending is front loaded and much of the spending cuts wouldn’t be realized until after 2013. For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s score of the legislation shows savings from the food stamps program of $12 billion from 2014-2018. Congress can come back any time before that and rescind the cuts.
It’s typical Beltway budgetary sleight-of-hand: increase spending up front and “cut” spending on the back-end to get a more deficit-friendly score from the CBO. Democrats don’t really intend ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3880842</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:24:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3880842</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food Stamps on Campus</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3424828&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTgeAM_HD3l8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenFood stamp usage is on an upsurge as a result of the economic downturn and liberalized eligibility. Thanks to some good journalistic work from Aleksandra Kulczuga of the Daily Caller, we’re getting a better picture of how government dependency is spreading to a new generation.
Kulczuga reports that college students are increasingly going on the dole thanks to encouragement from college officials and poverty organizations dedicated to fomenting government dependency.
From the article:
Adam Sylvain, a sophomore at Virginia’s George Mason University, recounted a recent conversation with friends in his dorm room. “My roommate told me he applied for food stamps, and they told him he qualified for $200 a month in benefits,” Sylvain said. “He’s here on scholarship and he...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3424828</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:08:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3424828</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food Stamp Price Tag Rising</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3275774&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ffouad1VBfWI%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenFood stamp usage is at record levels according to the New York Times, with one in eight Americans now receiving benefits. There are several reasons for the upswing, including expanded eligibility in the 2000s and the severe economic downturn. The following chart shows the dramatic rise in spending for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as the Food Stamp program until 2008 when Congress changed its name to sound more palatable.

Most Americans think that we should aid those in real need, but individuals should do so voluntarily without resorting to forced government transfers.
The Times gives three examples of people who recently started receiving food aid. Each offers some food for thought.
The first is a 45 year-old Harlem widow with an annual income of $15...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3275774</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 14:18:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3275774</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Federal Government Is Bribing States to Create More Welfare Dependency?!?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3266889&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fj5XsHa47BeU%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellIf you want to get depressed or angry, the New York Times has an article celebrating the effort by politicians at all levels of government to lure more people into the food stamp program. New York City is running ads in foreign languagues asking people to stick their snouts in the public trough. The City is even signing up prisoners when they get out of jail. The state of New York, meanwhile, actually set up quotas for enrolling new recipients. And on the federal level, there apparently is a program that gives states &amp;#8220;bonuses&amp;#8221; for putting more people on the dole. No wonder one out of every eight Americans is receiving food stamps. By the way, this is not just the fault of Democrats. The ranking Republican on the Agriculture Committee is a big defender of th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3266889</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:04:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3266889</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food Stamps = Economic Driver?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3216566&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEmoAYlv-QkA%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenIt’s become standard fare for senior government leaders to declare that any and all subsidies are good for economic growth. Two weeks ago it was the Economic Development Administration’s John Fernandez. This week it’s USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack in a speech to the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
From GovExec.com:
In his speech, Vilsack called the increase in supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits &amp;#8220;an economic driver&amp;#8221; that helps truckers, grocery stores and farmers. Those benefits, which used to be known as food stamps, have gotten the most funding of any USDA program.
Vilsack also cited increased funding to bring high-speed Internet service to rural America; accelerated implementation of the energy title of the farm bill; and USDA investments in small,...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3216566</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:48:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3216566</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Subsidy Programs Top 2,000!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3204837&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9iPcYt_91oc%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsJanuary 22, 2010 is a day that should live in infamy, at least among believers in limited government. On that day, the federal government added its 2,000th subsidy program for individuals, businesses, or state and local governments.
The number of federal subsidy programs soared 21 percent during the 1990s and 40 percent during the 2000s. The entire nation is jumping aboard Washington’s gravy train. My assistant, Amy Mandler, noticed the recent addition of two new Department of Justice programs, and that pushed us over the threshold to reach 2,001.
There is a federal subsidy program for every year that has passed since Emperor Augustus held sway in Rome. We’ve gone from bread and circuses to food stamps, the National Endowment for the Arts, and 1,999 other hand-out progr...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3204837</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:36:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3204837</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food Stamps vs. Cash Welfare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3100774&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FImJK73x8JXk%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenA couple of weeks ago I discussed a New York Times report on soaring food stamp use. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that cash welfare use in New York under the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program started to rise more recently. The Times calls this “something of a riddle” given that food stamp usage has been increasing throughout the recession.
But the Times solves the riddle when it acknowledges: “It is much simpler to receive food stamps than cash assistance.” The 1996 welfare reform that replaced the broken Aid for Families with Dependent Children with TANF imposed more stringent time limits and work requirements on recipients. By contrast, the 2002 farm bill expanded food stamp eligibility, increased benefits, and made it easier to claim...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3100774</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:57:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3100774</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food stamps &amp; unemployment go together (duh)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3071412&amp;cid=t_278349_131_f&amp;fid=34994&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gnxp.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F12%2Ffood-stamps-unemployment-go-together.php</link>
            <description>Derek Thompson at The Atlantic has a post Are America's Fattest States Also the Most Jobless?. The county-level data on unemployment only goes back to 2008 (at least that I can find online). But I do have data on obesity at the county-level too. What's the correlation? 0.32. Pretty modest. If I correlate for white obesity it goes down a little, 0.23 (though remember that I estimated white obesity, so be cautious about this). Since I also have food stamp utilization data I looked at that. Correlation is 0.56. If you think of this as r-squared, how much of variance of Y can be explained by X by squaring the correlation, it's a much stronger association. I constructed a quick regression where % unemployed on the county-level was the dependent variable, and % black, obese, median household inc...</description>
            <author>Gene Expression</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3071412</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:41:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3071412</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Are over-leveraged counties seeing an increase in food stamp usage?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3039950&amp;cid=t_278349_131_f&amp;fid=34994&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gnxp.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F11%2Fare-over-leveraged-counties-seeing.php</link>
            <description>Since The New York Times put up the csv file which they used to generate their maps of food stamp usage, I thought I'd look at the data a little closer. In particular, look at this graphic of change in food stamp usage by county (dark equals more usage): I was curious about this part from the story below::While use is greatest where poverty runs deep, the growth has been especially swift in once-prosperous places hit by the housing bust. There are about 50 small counties and a dozen sizable ones where the rolls have doubled in the last two years. In another 205 counties, they have risen by at least two-thirds. These places with soaring rolls include populous Riverside County, Calif., most of greater Phoenix and Las Vegas, a ring of affluent Atlanta suburbs, and a 150-mile stretch of southw...</description>
            <author>Gene Expression</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3039950</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:33:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3039950</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senator Harkin Laments Lack of Poverty</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2681873&amp;cid=t_278349_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqXYZkv_j5gA%2F</link>
            <description>An AP story today contains a quote that caught my eye, an indication that apparently jet-gate hasn&amp;#8217;t jaded me as much as I thought it had. In the context of rising enrollment in the federal food stamp program (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP) and private charity efforts to feed poorer Americans, Senate Agriculture Committee chairman Tom Harkin (D, IA) says this:
Ensuring that our kids have enough to eat during summer months is critically important, especially during these tough economic times&amp;#8230; Unfortunately, despite repeated efforts, the number of children participating in federally reimbursed summer nutrition programs in 2008 was the same as it was 15 years ago. (emphasis added)
At first I thought maybe he was saying how unfortunate it was ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2681873</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 14:38:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2681873</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

