To say we're starved for cash would be an understatement. But in the worst recession in generations, should we be cutting $6.7 billion worth of food stamps? Ezra Klein of The Washington Post reports on how Democrats had to prioritize: do we cut teachers, Medicaid, or food stamps (now known as SNAP)? But food stamps may have been the best investment:
And here we are. Democrats needed to offset spending on two worthy, important programs. So they're cutting another important, worthy program. But you really can't think of a worse program to cut than SNAP. SNAP is an extraordinarily well-targeted stimulus. It goes to poor households, for something they need to buy. According to Mark Zandi's numbers, it's literally the most stimulative way to spend a dollar: Better than state and local aid, or unemployment insurance. You get more than $1.70 of economic activity for each buck you put in.
Read the full story at The Washington Post.