The day after Halloween, the federal government rolled back food stamp benefits for all 47.6 million people who receive them, officially ending one of the last remaining stimulus efforts left over from President Obama's first months in office — while also making it harder for millions of Americans to get enough to eat. The callousness displayed in cutting vital safety net benefits at a time when millions lack the resources to feed their families adequately has been much discussed. What has gotten less attention is that the cut in food stamps is not good economic policy either.

The 5.5% reduction in benefits will pull about $5 billion in federal spending out of the economy over the coming 10 months — $457 million in California alone. Those were borrowed dollars, so the savings bring Washington one small step closer to fiscal sustainability. Yet the federal government won't make it all the way there without faster economic growth, and putting less food on poor Americans' tables won't help.

Congress increased the maximum food stamp benefit by 13.6% in April 2009 as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a $787-billion effort to stimulate the economy. It wasn't a temporary increase; instead, it was meant to pay in advance the cost-of-living adjustments that the program was expected to receive over the subsequent five years. And because food stamp benefits are spent quickly, not saved, the increase was expected to help stimulate the moribund economy. By one estimate, every $1 in food stamps leads to $1.70 in economic activity.

Continue reading at:  http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-foodstamps-cut-budg...