Tuesday, June 12, 2018

Fan Girl Folderol


        Stated succinctly, Ariana Cohen’s column of June 12 is almost slanderously inaccurate. It begins by citing (correctly) an increase in food stamp eligibility in the years 2008-2014. She then (incorrectly) implies that this is linked in a cause/effect causality to the election and policies of Barack Obama. By implication she also makes it seem as Obama policies allowed more previously ineligible persons to have access to food stamps by ‘loosening” requirements.

        Ms. Cohen is and has been for years, typical of those who sell fake “facts” while criticizing mainstream media. During the early Obama years, any Democrat who pointed out that all the precursor conditions and events resulting in the “housing bubble” collapse, Wall Street malfeasance, real estate market inversion and resulting recession/unemployment surge happened on George W. Bush’s watch was shouted down by Republicans, eager to avoid responsibility for the lack of financial market oversight which led to this debacle.

         Was it “W”’s fault? No, and the history of the various financial panics in America largely bears out the fact that Presidents truly have relatively minimal, if any, impact on many things for which blame or credit is allotted them. More recently, we had Michelle Bachmann promising 1$ per gallon gas if elected. Of course, in reality, the only “gas” involved with Ms. Bachmann was of another, nether, sort. In the same campaign cycle (2012) we had Newt Gingrich promising that if Obama was elected we’d see $10 per gallon gas. Didn’t happen, in fact we saw historic low gas prices, and that wasn’t to Obama’s credit either. It was, as Adam Smith would easily grasp, simple supply and demand market economics.  For two people (Bachmann, Gingrich) with University degrees to have so little real economic sense and yet want to be President is simply ludicrous. But I digress.

        Returning to Ms. Cohen’s screed, and her allegation that Trump’s economic genius is the reason fewer Americans are on food stamps today. It is noteworthy that there was zero Obama administration legislation enacted which in any manner changed SNAP eligibility as established in 2008 (who was POTUS?) by the 2008 farm bill (H.R. 2419, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of May 22, 2008). In the interest of full disclosure, it was passed over a Presidential veto.  That’s right, facing a deepening recession and rapidly escalating unemployment, “W” tried to limit availability of food stamps!

        The new law increased the commitment to Federal food assistance programs by more than $10 billion over the next 10 years. In efforts to fight stigma, the law changed the name of the Federal program to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as of Oct. 1, 2008 and changed the name of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 to the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. No legislation related to food stamp eligibility has been passed since. Trump has made it clear he’d like to tell people what they can buy, but that has gone nowhere as of yet.

        In truth, Cohen begins the period she cites with “W” still in the Oval Office (he was until early 2009), and compares the peak (depth?) of the recession with current conditions which have been on a steady rebound since 2014 (who was president?  Oh yeah, Barack Obama).   The number of people collecting benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps, has been declining since fiscal year 2014. Obama was in command through fiscal 2016, since the worst year of the Great Recession, as economists (real ones) are calling it and food stamp enrollment has tracked unemployment in the vast percentage of the US population with an essentially one to one correlation. 

       Consistent with that trend, average monthly SNAP (food stamp program) enrollment decreased by about 2 million from fiscal year 2016 to fiscal year 2017. What Ms. Cohen conveniently omits is that the decreasing trend was well under way during the second Obama term as unemployment decreased due to (slow) economic recovery.

        That decrease happened only partly on Donald Trump’s watch. Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2017, while the 2017 fiscal year ran from Oct. 1, 2016, to Sept. 30, 2017. So, about four months — a third of that fiscal year — were during Barack Obama’s presidency. Some, mainly White House affiliates or Faux News talking heads, have attributed the entire drop in enrollment last fiscal year to Trump’s policies after the Department of Agriculture released data for the last fiscal year on March 9.

        On “Fox & Friends” on March 17, Rachel Campos-Duffy said: “Two million Americans are off of food stamps. This is, like (sic) the opposite of what happened in the Obama administration, where we saw that number grow. In one year, it’s coming down.”  It’s true that the number of people enrolled in SNAP initially increased during the Obama administration — reaching a peak average monthly enrollment of 47.6 million in fiscal year 2013. That rise was a consequence of the deep recession that began in 2007, according to a 2012 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Assigning blame for the recession to Obama indicates first and foremost the lack of economic comprehension and the partisan zeal of the claimant. As the recession weakened, (while Obama was president) the economy recovered, and poverty and unemployment rates decreased. So did SNAP enrollment, according to the USDA’s Economic Research Service. Enrollment was down to 42.7 million in January 2017, when Obama left office. As recovery continues, unemployment has also decreased, not surprisingly, and more Americans are now earning at levels above SNAP eligibility threshold. Trump’s doing? Naah, as Bill Clinton would say, “It’s the economy, stupid!”

        So, why would Ariana Cohen fling such a load of garbage hoping some would stick? The answer to that lies in her well known support for a more muscular and confrontational state of Israel and for stronger US approval of it. Her fawning Trump fan girl reaction to the unnecessary relocation of the US Embassy to hotly contested Jerusalem from safe, secure Tel Aviv presaged this payback in print.

No comments:

Post a Comment