Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
Yesterday, I received a copy of the March 21, 2014 Memorandum from Ronald Ward, Andrea Gold, and Lizbeth Silbermann with the United States Department of Agriculture involving the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (food stamps).
Page six of that Memorandum discusses Section 4008 of The Agricultural Act of 2014 (the Act), P.L.113-79, which deals with denial of food stamps to certain individuals convicted of sex crimes, murder, and abuse. The Memorandum holds:
"This provision prohibits anyone convicted of aggravated sexual abuse, murder, sexual exploitation and abuse of children, sexual assault as defined in the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, or a similar State law, and who is also not in compliance with the terms of their sentence or a fleeing felon from receiving SNAP benefits. During the application process the individual will have to attest whether he or she, or any other member of the Household, has been convicted of such a crime. If such an individual is in an otherwise eligible household, the income and resources of the individual will be considered when determining eligibility. Convictions for conduct that occurred on or before the date of enactment do not apply."
I have never agreed with the political decision to deprive a person food because he or she is convicted of any criminal act because to me it is cruel and serves only to continue punishing the person well after he or she has paid the price for their convicted crime.
Page six of that Memorandum discusses Section 4008 of The Agricultural Act of 2014 (the Act), P.L.113-79, which deals with denial of food stamps to certain individuals convicted of sex crimes, murder, and abuse. The Memorandum holds:
"This provision prohibits anyone convicted of aggravated sexual abuse, murder, sexual exploitation and abuse of children, sexual assault as defined in the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, or a similar State law, and who is also not in compliance with the terms of their sentence or a fleeing felon from receiving SNAP benefits. During the application process the individual will have to attest whether he or she, or any other member of the Household, has been convicted of such a crime. If such an individual is in an otherwise eligible household, the income and resources of the individual will be considered when determining eligibility. Convictions for conduct that occurred on or before the date of enactment do not apply."
I have never agreed with the political decision to deprive a person food because he or she is convicted of any criminal act because to me it is cruel and serves only to continue punishing the person well after he or she has paid the price for their convicted crime.
Is it just me or does this read that IF you are convicted of that and are NOT complying with state law then you are denied? And they are going to have to be a little more specific about the laws - that broad definition can be a few crimes or encompass and sex offense - am I the only one that thinks it is ambiguous?
I know in Texas they are allowing those convicted of drug charges to get food stamps again.
I agree with Advocate, this constant assault on people who have convictions of any kind is getting ridiculous.
When a person is convicted of a crime and whether he or she serves time in jail or prison, the attitude within the courts and society is for the person to get over it and succeed in life. In other words we are very hard on any person who uses their criminal history as a reason for why they cannot get housing, a job, or whatnot on the argument that they are expected to move on, get over it, and find the success we demand they achieve. However, at the same time, we are very quick to hold their criminal history against them to deny them success in life, jobs, and housing, and now, food, because of their criminal history.
Such a law serves no substantial purpose other than to continue punishing the person for their entire life for their having been convicted of a crime. In doing so, we set them up to fail and, of course, we will most assuredly blame them for failing when they fail and they will fail.
Likewise, such a law only sets the stage where a person with a criminal history is lured back into such a life out of necessity -- stealing, robbing, or other such crimes become ones of necessity to survive rather than crimes of choice. And of course well will lash out and thrown the hammer at them when they commit a crime, say like shoplifting, without care or thought that they stole to have food to eat.
Indeed, we are a nation of hypocrites.
Unless any of you are fleeing prosecution or failing to register, then you have nothing to worry about.