Stamping on Food Stamps

Sedrick A. Tydus, 23, a Stanford University student, pays most of his living and educational expenses with money from a fellowship and student loans. Yet by collecting federal food stamps, Tydus is able to treat himself to movies, weekend trips and an occasional night on the town. Though the stamps help, Tydus concedes that without them, "I wouldn't be on the bread line."

Dianne Taylor, 27, an assistant in a Palo Alto free medical clinic, earns $6,000 a year. As a single parent with a young daughter, she can buy $90 worth of food stamps for $70. Thanks to them, she can shop for a few little luxuries, "such as cookies."

The federal food-stamp program, first created in 1962 as a modest $14 million experiment to help low-income families buy a "nutritionally adequate diet," has been a lifesaver for millions of destitute Americans. But it has also helped the not so destitute. In recent years the program has grown to astonishing size, in part because its slack eligibility requirements enable even moderately well-off people to qualify and make policing difficult. The system now subsidizes 19 million people, one out of every eleven Americans. Working families receiving stamps outnumber welfare households 55% to 45%. Conservatives, with Treasury Secretary William Simon in the fore, have attacked the system as a welfare ripoff. Even liberals are disturbed by the rush to food stamps by college students and workers on strike.

Last week, with pressure for reform growing in Congress, the Ford Administration proposed sweeping changes. By eliminating food stamps for 3.4 million people and drastically reducing benefits for another 5.3 million, the Administration would cut the $6 billion program by $1.2 billion a year. The key proposals are:

1) Eligibility would be tied to clearly defined income levels. A family of four would qualify for stamps only if its annual net earnings did not exceed $6,550, after maximum deductions of $1,500. At present, families with incomes higher than $10,000 are allowed myriad deductions to get their incomes down low enough to qualify.

2) To get stamps, a family (or single person) would have to pay a uniform 30% of their net income minus a flat $100 monthly deduction. Example: a family with a monthly net income of $300 would take the deduction, leaving it with $200; of this, it would have to spend 30%--or $60 a month--on food stamps. At present, most recipients pay between 16% to 24% of their incomes for stamps on the basis of a complicated formula that allows deductions for family size and a wide range of expenses.

3) Income would be calculated on average earnings for the 90 days preceding the application for stamps. Currently, a family's estimate of earnings in the forthcoming month is what counts. The new requirement would mean that most workers losing their jobs would have to wait three months to apply for food coupons; now they can sign up immediately.

4) Student recipients would have to prove their parents are not claiming them as dependents on income tax returns. Striking workers would have to provide proof they have sought jobs.

Ford's plan is unlikely to pass Congress in its present form; Democrats led by Senator George McGovern immediately rejected the income limitations as too low. Critics also contend that the President's proposal would not only cut off the cheats but many needy low-income families as well. Yet there is a groundswell of support for some less stringent reform. Even Democrats commend the Administration's shrewdness in tackling the obviously flawed food-coupon system. Says Senate Democratic Whip Robert Byrd of West Virginia: "The food program is running wild. It's got to stop somewhere." Any revision in the system, however, will probably not reach the President's desk before early next year.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.