Food Aid Should Be Linked to a Willingness to Work

James Whitford
Founder & CEO
Read more from James

Listen to this article:

In his 1935 State of the Union address, FDR made it clear that “The federal government must and shall quit this business of relief.”

At that time, no one foresaw that 90 years later, “quitting that relief” would come about through political gridlock resulting in what may become the longest federal government shutdown in history.

But here we are. Government relief — at least food relief — is grinding to a halt, eliciting a lot of panic. Another quip in FDR’s speech that day illuminates why: “To dole out relief is like a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.” Boy, did he nail it. The narcotic of government relief has not only persisted but its potency and quantity have increased by more than 10-fold both in the number of relief programs and dollars transferred to individuals since the New Deal. Thus, it shouldn’t surprise us that as federal food programs come to a halt next week, much of America fears food insecurity will be swallowed up by real hunger. But then again, prolonged dependence on a narcotic can make you believe you’ll die without it.

To assure you I’m not a heartless conservative who just wants everyone to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, you should know I’ve committed the last 25 years fighting poverty. Last year alone, our small mission in southwest Missouri provided 38,000 pounds of food for people. The difference is that most of it was earned by people who are able to do at least a little work for the food they need. Our clients — and those of our national network of like-minded missions and ministries — won’t experience the same kind of panic and withdrawal when the doors close on programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).

I’ve spent  decades watching the lure of federal relief draw able, capable people deeper into dependent poverty. Indeed, the subtly destructive narcotic of perpetual relief has done a lot of harm, not the least of which is the dismal, 70-year deterioration in male labor force participation.

Yet, I can’t help but see opportunity in this brief but historic moment. It’s a chance for the good work of civil society to restore dignity and agency to millions of people who may turn to other sources of help.

That said, here’s how we could miss it. As the panic elevates, calls for private philanthropy to fill the gap are coming in. But the gap we’re about to experience isn’t one that should be filled with the same simple relief that has failed miserably to deliver on the promise of “solving hunger” (as seen so frequently on food bank websites). Instead, civil society has the opportunity to lead our nation into a renewed era of charity focused less on endless crisis relief and more on rehabilitation and development — forms of charity that call for effort from their recipients, which has proven to help people escape the grip of poverty far more effectively.

Propping up SNAP and TEFAP through private dollars makes no sense as long as the receiving organizations continue to distribute under the same restrictive program policies. For example, TEFAP (which provides 20% of US government food relief), is distributed by food banks with rules that restrict distributors from establishing income thresholds below 185% of poverty. Sadly, it ends up a moot point, because the rule is rendered useless by self-attested eligibility policies like Oregon’s: “Recipient agencies must accept self-declaration.” No wonder so many of these foodbanks’ TEFAP days operate as drive-throughs full of long lines of idling vehicles. Quickly stuffing food in a trunk is the most efficient method when you can’t ask recipients any questions.

That inanity is compounded by TEFAP regulations that further limit distributors’ freedom to judge eligibility by forcing them to distribute food to recipients already receiving other food assistance. Where most of us would frown on that kind of “double-dipping,” TEFAP doubles down by tying eligibility to pre-existing dependency on other programs. It’s called categorical eligibility: a person already enrolled in SNAP, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or other food commodity programs  automatically qualifies for TEFAP.

As if that isn’t enough, the pinnacle of policy that advances the “subtle destruction of the human spirit” is regulation that perversely incentivizes idleness. Case in point: TEFAP food banks are barred from asking for proof recipients are looking for work. Even expectations of recipients to volunteer aren’t allowed.

Conversely, for two decades, I’ve seen the good of a different type of charity — one that calls for contribution from people who are poor but not powerless. One man, Joshua, turned down government handouts and decided to eat at our mission instead. He ate once with us, then earned his meals and clothing through work in our Worth Shop where he regained his dignity and sense of agency. He took initiative to apply to our long-term residential recovery program, completed work-training, landed a full-time job, and graduated with his own place to live. In short, we’re not a mission that simply replicates government relief; we offer something completely different.

Above the growing clamor of cries for food rescue, that’s my call to private philanthropy today: Offer something completely different. Don’t just step up and fill the gap of a government shutdown only to support what’s failed and broken. Demand outcomes. Ensure investigation. Promote effort. Fund the organizations willing to reckon with and acknowledge JD Rockefeller’s words: “Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient become independent of it.” Maybe you’ll play a pivotal role in leading America away from debilitating relief toward a new day in which millions of Americans awaken from a government-induced slumber to, instead, live out vibrant, flourishing lives.

James Whitford is co-founder and executive director of Watered Gardens Ministries in Joplin, Mo. and True Charity, which exists to champion the resurgence of civil society in the fight against poverty. He is also the author of “The Crisis of Dependency: How Our Efforts to Solve Poverty Are Trapping People in It and What We Can Do to Foster Freedom Instead.”

This article was originally written for InsideSources.com.