« Hey Prez Trump, how about honoring Independence Day by using your clemency power to give some more Americans more liberty? | Main | "Police, Race, and the Production of Capital Homicides" »
July 5, 2018
"Strong safety net is crucial to Americans in life after prison"
The title of this post is the headline of this recent commentary in The Hill authored by Bruce Western. Here are excerpts:
The House recently voted to significantly cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps, which helps fight hunger in America. New work requirements have gained the most attention, but the House bill also includes lifetime bans for people with prior convictions for several kinds of violent crimes. People with violent convictions keep their food stamp eligibility under the bipartisan Senate bill, setting up a showdown in the conference committee. Cutting benefits for people with criminal convictions is a particularly mean display of “tough on crime” credentials and makes little sense as public policy.
In a study I directed at Harvard, a research team followed 122 men and women from Boston over the year after their release from prison. Unlike many other states, Massachusetts allows people with criminal convictions to receive SNAP benefits. The study found this was essential for income support and social integration immediately after release from prison.
Income right after incarceration is very low. In the study, the median annual income was about $6,500. This is about half the federal poverty line for people living alone, an income level that researchers call deep poverty.... Our respondents usually contributed their SNAP benefits to the household food budget if they were living with family or were required to turn over their benefits to a common pool if they lived in a shelter or a sober house. Supporters of the House bill think people should work for SNAP benefits, but we found that the highest rates of SNAP enrollment were among those with disabilities that limited work. Respondents with histories of mental illness and drug addiction were also more likely to be receiving SNAP than others. Former prisoners who were older, over age 45, or suffered from chronic pain were also more likely to be receiving SNAP benefits.
We also found little evidence that SNAP benefits deterred from people from working. SNAP recipients were no more likely to be unemployed once age and health status were accounted for in the study. Massachusetts has relatively good safety net programs, and these made a significant difference for the men and women leaving prison in Boston.
Besides receiving SNAP benefits, nearly everyone we interviewed in the study was enrolled in Medicaid either just before they were released from prison or a few weeks later. Medicaid was critical for ensuring continuity of medical care for the many people leaving prison with chronic conditions in immediate need of medication.... A year after release from prison, the rate of SNAP enrollment in the study had fallen to 40 percent from its peak at two months of 70 percent. SNAP provided critical support that helped stabilize life after incarceration and allowed those who were able to move into the labor market to find work. The Massachusetts safety net was one of the real success stories of the study....
As Congress considers the final bill for SNAP funding, lawmakers should take account of the research evidence. A strong safety net is indispensable for helping people find their way back in life after incarceration and is one of the best reentry programs of all.
July 5, 2018 at 10:41 AM | Permalink
Comments
Society takes upon itself the right to inflict appalling punishment on the individual, but it also has the supreme vice of shallowness, and fails to realise what it has done. When the man’s punishment is over, it leaves him to himself; that is to say, it abandons him at the very moment when its highest duty towards him begins.
-Oscar Wilde, De Profundis
Posted by: Guy Hamilton-Smith | Jul 5, 2018 12:23:15 PM
What the study doesn't note (at least in that excerpt) is that current SNAP benefits do not cover a nutritionally sufficient diet in 99% of the counties in the USA. So as a practical matter even the "better" Senate bill functions as a cut to food support because food prices keep rising. In fact, if SNAP benefit had kept up with food price inflation there would be double to triple what they are now (depending on what estimates one believes). So not only is the Senate and House arguing over scraps, they are arguing over scraps that don't even accomplish the meager goal they were designed to meet.
Posted by: Daniel | Jul 5, 2018 2:52:37 PM
The safety net costs more than a stay in prison.
Posted by: David Behar | Jul 6, 2018 4:03:39 AM