The USFG should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty

The thesis of this case is that SNAP is an extremely successful program that provides food services for persons in poverty, but does not provide sufficient funds for them. Additional funds to SNAP will provide starving people in poverty with enough food to sustain themselves and be able to concentrate on finding jobs and eventually getting out of poverty. There are also not enough people receiving SNAP benefits and additional funds will solve this and therefore my partner and I affirm today's resolution: RESOLVED: The United States federal government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States. Observation I: Significance/Harms A. One-sixth of America, almost 50 million, lives in a food insecure home and the number is increasing FRAC 09 (Food Research and Action Center, Hunger and Food Insecurity Statistics) B. Families need more money for food as prices increase Milam 09 (writer for hungerreport.com) C. The number of people experiencing food insecurity has doubled since 2000. FRAC 09 (Food Research and Action Center, Hunger and Food Insecurity Statistics) Observation II: Inherency A. Needs increasing- Prior expansion not enough Britney, The New Hampshire: "Nationwide Food Stamp Increase Not Enough say Experts", 4-10-09 B. Food Stamps Need More Funding Frank 09, (Deborah A. Frank Founder and Principal Investigator Children's Sentinel Nutrition Assessment Program (C-SNAP), Committee on House Budget, CQ Congressional Testimony, February 12, 2009) To solve for the above mentioned harms my partner and I offer the following plan: Plank I: Funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program will be doubled to $100 billion Plank II: Funding will come from a .5% tax on all goods except food and medicine which will provide $50 billion Plank III: The affirmative reserves the right to legislative intent Plank IV: Enforcement will be the Department of Agriculture Observation III: Solvency A. Food Stamps target the poor and are empirically successful Center on budget and policy priorities 4-3-09 ("Policy Basics: Introduction to the Food Stamp Program," April 3, http://www.cbpp.org...) B. The food stamp program must be expanded- It is the most efficient program and only needs more funding RESULTS 2009 (RESULTS is a nonprofit grassroots advocacy organization focusing on hunger and poverty, "Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)," Date is Last Modified, June 4, http://www.results.org...) C. Food stamps efficiently solve hunger CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES 2009 ("Policy Basics: Introduction to Food Stamp Program," April 3, http://www.cbpp.org...) Observation IV: Advantages A. Food stamps help stimulate the economy FRAC 05 (Food Research and Action Center, "Why Food Stamps Matter: Talking Points," May 20, http://www.frac.org...) USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS) estimates that each $1 billion of retail demand by food stamps generates $340 million in farm production, $110 million in farm value-added, and 3,300 farm jobs; and each $5 of food stamps generates almost $10 in total economic activity. Changes in food stamp policy have significant impacts on economic activity and household income across the economy, according to an ERS study. Paired with unemployment insurance, food stamps are a vital part of America's front-line defense against recession. They help to prevent hunger in families with laid-off workers that fall into poverty, provide temporary support until these families can get back on their feet, and quickly get federal support into local communities when times are tough. --------- In summary, my plan increases funding to SNAP which is shown to be the best program we could use. The increase is nescesary because not enough funding goes toward it. This will come from a relatively small tax. My enforcer/AoA will be the department of agriculture. I look forward to my opponent's attacks, thank you.