The U.S. food programs have gone through considerable changes over the last fifty years. Originally, the food stamp program and the school lunch program, which began in the 1930s, were intended to dispose of farm surplus (Paarlberg, p. 101). However, starting in the 1960s, a series of events significantly changed the nature and scope of the U.S. food programs. In the late 1960s, the hunger lobby, rallying various organizations motivated to help the poor, came into existence, resulting in an expansion of the domestic food assistance programs. Annual federal expenditures on U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) food programs rose over ninefold, to over $10 billion in the decade 1969-79, and reached $16 billion in 1981 (Longen). About 60% of these expenditures were for the food stamp program, the largest of the domestic food programs. Other current U.S. food programs include the school lunch program, the school breakfast program, the supplemental food program for women, infants, and children (WIC), and the food distribution programs.1 Each has its own eligibility criteria which target it toward a particular group of the population. For example, while the food stamp program's eligibility is based on general grounds, such as income and family size, and is not restricted to certain categories of the poor, the WIC program is precisely targeted toward those people determined by local health professionals to be at nutritional risk (pregnant women, infants, etc.). The food assistance programs are now aimed at improving the nutritional status of low income people and school children. For example, emphasis is given to providing balanced meals in many of the child nutrition programs. Other changes include the greatly expanded food stamp program which, through the use of vouchers or stamps, has become the national approach to general food assistance. Finally, as national standards replaced state and local regulations, uniform eligibility standards and benefits gave the food programs a national scope. However, the spiraling costs of the domestic food programs have led some to question their effectiveness. For example, Paarlberg (p. 109) has argued that the food stamp program has been expanded beyond its optimal point of providing food for those who are truly in need. A growing federal deficit, the New Federalism, and the current mood for fiscal restraint certainly indicate that the period of fast growth of the food programs is over. After the escalation of the 1970s, the 1980s likely will see a plateau in the total funding for domestic food programs. In this context, the issues of this decade will be to improve the effectiveness of the current food assistance programs. It will require a better assessment of what is the appropriate safety net and what are the most efficient ways for society to provide such a safety net. For domestic food policy, this indicates a careful evaluation of the kind and amount of assistance provided, e.g., in-kind versus cash transfers. It also raises the question of the proper target group and eligibility criteria for each food program. In this paper, some of the desirable characteristics of the food programs are examined. For example, it is argued that, as far as food policy is concerned, in-kind transfers to households are superior to cash transfers, implying that the food programs should not evolve toward direct cash assistance. Also, any program that has rather general eligibility The author is an associate professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin. The author wishes to acknowledge the comments and suggestions of Peter Helmberger and Richard Bishop. I See Longen and Allen for a more detailed description of each program, and Senauer for a discussion of some food policy issues. For example, Senauer has argued that modifications of the food program over the last twenty years have significantly weakened its ability to expand food consumption.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Open Access
Sep 8, 2015
Gawain Kripke 
