TO THE EDITORS:

The Corbett administration's plan to reinstate an asset test in the food stamp program, as discussed in your Jan. 16 editorials, is foolish as well as heartless.

Along with staff from food pantries and food banks, I participated in the effort to improve access to food stamps (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). That endeavor, which culminated in the decision to drop the asset test, involved both the Ridge/Schweiker and Rendell administrations. What drove the discussion were concerns for the working poor and for reducing medical costs related to poor nutrition.

When food stamps began in the late '60s and early '70s, households with employed members were not perceived to need regular help with food. This has changed over the past 30 years as the purchasing power of wages eroded. Adding to the problem is the fact that both parents now work in most low-wage households. This has made it increasingly difficult for families to prepare inexpensive, healthy meals.

The food stamp program, with its emphasis on consistent and reliable access to nutritious food, has become a common-sense way to support low-wage households and promote health eating.

The asset test stood in the way because it fruitlessly complicated the application process. Working people — even those struggling to keep food on the table — often have bits of property, such as a disabled vehicle, a fractional interest in an old hunting cabin or tools and equipment from a failed business venture. With an asset test in place, each of these items must be appraised and documented. This adds significant expense and time to the application process.

The asset test also assumes that households should be virtually without property before receiving help. Yet, if the goal is for the household to move toward self-sufficiency, it is counterproductive to insist that it be nearly destitute. State government had adopted this common sense approach with regard to heating fuel and medical care, and in 2008 also adopted it with regard to nutrition.

Yes, I expect my tax dollars to be spent carefully and in cost-effective ways. That's why I am so disappointed in what the Corbett administration is planning. Under its plan, more money will be spent on paperwork and caseworkers and less by low-wage households buying food. Working families will be turned away until they hit rock bottom and will then be criticized if they don't quickly rebound. Nutrition will deteriorate in families that can least afford the consistent medical attention that poor nutrition often requires. Federal tax dollars currently being spent in local grocery stores will be sent back to Washington for who-knows-what.

That's a high price to pay so that Gov. Tom Corbett can brag about his frugality.

Berry Friesen
Manheim Township