Why People Need SNAP: Countering Myths with Reality

by Sarah Terzo

—

Many people claim that public assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which assists people in buying food, allow lazy people to avoid working. They imagine a “welfare queen” who lives high on the hog on government benefits while refusing to work. They resent their tax dollars going to help such a person.

People aren’t eating lobster and steak on SNAP, though. The monthly SNAP benefit varies, but the average amount per person is under $200. Next time you go shopping, check your grocery bill to get an idea of how much that covers.

Also, only a tiny fraction of people on SNAP are non-disabled adults who aren’t working. Let’s look at some statistics.  

The Vast Majority of People on SNAP are Disabled, Elderly, or Children

Here are some numbers. The US Department of Agriculture reported that in Fiscal Year 2023 (October 2022-September 2023), nearly 40% of those receiving food stamps were children (with roughly 11% of these being children younger than five). People 60 or older made up about 19% of recipients.

Further, analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) indicates that roughly 28% of adults under age 60 who received SNAP in 2015 were disabled, meaning either they received disability-related benefits or reported health problems.

The Department of Agriculture statistics and those from the CBPP are not directly comparable, since they come from different sources and different years. Nevertheless, if most SNAP recipients are children or people 60 or older and a significant portion of working-age adults receiving SNAP are disabled, we can safely say that a significant majority of SNAP recipients are either children, elderly, or disabled.

In fact, the Department of Agriculture explicitly said that in Fiscal Year 2023 “four in five (79%) SNAP households included either a child, an elderly individual, or a nonelderly individual with a disability. These households contained 88% of all SNAP participants and received 83% of all SNAP benefits.”

Now, let’s look at households. According to the CBPP, in Fiscal Year 2024 (October 2023-September 2024), 37% of SNAP recipients were in families that contained at least one member who was older or disabled. In addition, 62% of recipients were in families with children in them.

Most Nondisabled Adults on SNAP Are Working Full-Time

According to the US Government Accountability Office, 51% of adults on SNAP (from the ages of 19 to 64) were working full-time in 2018. An additional 21% were working full-time part of the year (49 weeks or less). Thus, over 70% of people ages 19-64 on SNAP were working full-time for at least part of the year.

The remaining 30% would likely include at least some of the 28% of working-age people on SNAP who are disabled. Also, these numbers don’t include those working part-time.

Working people are on SNAP because wages are so low, and the cost of living is so high, that many people working full-time can’t afford food.

A friend who worked in a homeless shelter told me many people she worked with had full-time jobs but still couldn’t afford housing. They slept in their cars, showered at the shelter, then went to their jobs.

These were all single men trying to support only themselves. A single parent trying to raise kids would have an even harder time making ends meet.

It’s impossible to get an exact percentage for people on SNAP who aren’t disabled, are of working age, and aren’t working. Statistics are from different years, some disabled people work, and some people work part-time and aren’t included in any of these percentages.

However, if only a minority of people on SNAP are nondisabled adults of working age; and we know that over 70% of working-age people on SNAP are working full time at least part of the year; and at least some of the remaining people are working part-time, then we can safely guess that the percentage of able-bodied people on SNAP who aren’t working at all is very low.

We can surmise that the vast majority of people on SNAP are disabled, older, children, or working.

What About Those Who Aren’t Working? 

For the minority of non-disabled adult SNAP beneficiaries who aren’t working, and who will lose their benefits when the work requirements recently pushed through Congress go into effect, most have very good reasons for not working. 

Many are in the process of looking for jobs, but due to the area they live in or a lack of education, they can’t find a place to hire them. 

Many of those who aren’t legally “disabled” but on SNAP have chronic illnesses or health problems that don’t qualify them for disability (which is extremely hard to get) but interfere with their ability to find and hold a job. 

Others cannot work because they are caregivers to elderly or disabled relatives. Still others are homeless. 

Yet none of the people in these categories are exempt from the work requirements that will soon go into effect for SNAP. 

Caregivers will have to choose between abandoning their family members or having their family go hungry. Homeless people, who are sleeping on the street with no access to showers or clean clothing, must somehow find jobs. Those with chronic illnesses who are in the process of applying for disability (a process that can take years) or who so far have not been able to qualify, will simply go hungry. 

Most People Are on SNAP Only Temporarily

In contrast to the myth of the lazy person living on food stamps, most people are on SNAP only for a short time.

According to Census Bureau data from 2009-2012, over 30% of SNAP participants were off benefits within a year. Almost 50% were off them within two years. And over 60% were off within three years.

SNAP is often a temporary safety net utilized only until people or families get back on their feet.

SNAP and Abortion

Many pregnant people have abortions because they can’t provide for a child or another child. In a study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, 73% of people having abortions gave “can’t afford a baby now” as a reason for having an abortion.

Only about 16% of US women lived below the poverty line in 2014. Yet that year, women living below the poverty line accounted for 49% of women having abortions in the country. Thus, about half of all abortions are done on the country’s poorest women.  

Additionally, 26% of women having abortions were living at 100% to 199% of the poverty line. They are the second-poorest women in our country. A small minority of women, who are among the poorest in our society, account for the majority of women having abortions.

Having a child is something many poor people feel they cannot afford. Researcher Laura Hussey, in her book The Pro-Life Pregnancy Help Movement: Serving Women or Saving Babies? (Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2020), asked women who had abortions the following question:

Other countries provide a lot of assistance to women and their families that the government, employers, and schools in the US do not provide. These countries give women things like free childcare, free healthcare, money they can use to pay their family’s expenses, and the chance to take months or even years off of work with pay after giving birth.

Would you have made a different decision about your pregnancy if you could get that kind of help? (pp. 207-208)

Twenty-two percent of the women who responded said that if such programs had been available, they would have rejected abortion and had their babies. Another 34% said they were unsure. Only 44% of the women said they still would have aborted.

This indicates more than half of the people having abortions might have changed their minds if the United States had a better social safety net.  

Government programs to help the poor, then, could save the lives of between 22% and 56% of babies being aborted today.

Overturning Roe v. Wade didn’t do that. Abortions are more common now than they were before the Dobbs decision. The abortion rate has not gone down since Roe was overturned—it’s gone up, with more than 1 million abortions occurring in 2023.

For those of us who hoped overturning Roe would prevent most abortions, we have been sorely disappointed. When you factor in people who are ordering the abortion pill online (an unknown but likely high number), the situation is even more dire.

Twenty-two percent of one million abortions is 220,000. We pro-lifers could potentially save at least 220,000 babies a year just by creating a more robust social safety net.

And this is something we could easily do. Most pro-abortion people won’t fight us on it.

Cutting SNAP benefits could lead to more babies being aborted as parents struggle to put food on the table. It’s a step in the wrong direction.

Take a moment to tell Congress to undo the cuts to SNAP (https://action.momsrising.org/sign/undo-SNAP-cuts/). Please also donate to your local food bank; you can search for food banks through Feeding America (https://www.feedingamerica.org/find-your-local-foodbank).