Unlocking Change: Why Incentives Are Key to Effective Food Stamp Reforms

Admin

Unlocking Change: Why Incentives Are Key to Effective Food Stamp Reforms

Nevada and other states are stepping up their efforts to eliminate food stamp fraud. This is a welcome change for taxpayers.

Last summer, President Donald Trump introduced a significant bill that revamped how the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) operates. This change aims to cut waste and ensure that help goes to those who truly need it.

For years, the federal government covered the costs of benefits, while states shared the administrative expenses. Many states, especially those with more liberal policies, relaxed eligibility rules, particularly during COVID-19, since they weren’t directly paying for benefits.

Paige Terryberry, a senior research fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability, highlighted some issues. She pointed out that states have allowed illegal immigrants to access food stamps while failing to remove ineligible individuals—like the deceased or lottery winners—from their rolls. The pandemic also gave states a two-year break from food-stamp reporting, which added to the problems.

Starting this October, states will now bear an extra 25% of administrative costs. Moreover, if states don’t keep errors to a minimum, they’ll end up responsible for some benefits costs as well. According to Terryberry, states with errors between 6% and 8% will face a 5% charge on their benefit costs. The more mistakes, the bigger the financial impact.

Nevada is performing relatively well with an error rate of 5.94% for fiscal 2024. In comparison, states like Alaska, Oregon, and New York have rates exceeding 15%, resulting in over $10 billion wasted annually, according to govern.com. This is far from acceptable.

State agencies are responding. The Pew Research Center indicated that reducing SNAP errors is now a top priority for many states. Nevada has even partnered with private firms to help confirm eligibility.

This legislation is achieving its goals. With financial incentives in place, states are more motivated to enforce—and not dilute—work requirements for able-bodied recipients. As Terryberry noted, work is a crucial way to minimize wasteful spending and add much-needed workers to the economy.

Spending on ineligible recipients not only diverts funds but also does a disservice to those in genuine need. The U.S. financial landscape is on an unsustainable path. The SNAP reforms, if executed well, strike a balance between fiscal responsibility and compassion.

For more information on SNAP and its implications, visit the [USDA website](https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program).



Source link