In the latest move to tighten access to government assistance, new work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, have gone into effect across much of the United States. Under these rules, non-disabled adults up to age 65 must prove they are working or actively seeking work for at least 80 hours per month to continue receiving benefits. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 2.7 million people will lose their food aid as a result.
This approach is rooted in the longstanding belief that hunger is the best motivator for getting people to work. As House Speaker Mike Johnson put it, “When you make young men work, it’s good for them.” However, as journalist and professor Dana Simmons argues, this notion is a dangerous fiction that has been used to justify depriving the poor of essential resources for centuries.
Simmons traces this idea back to 18th-century thinkers like Joseph Townsend, who claimed that “hunger is the most natural motive to industry.” Similar philosophies were used to justify withholding food from Native Americans, freed slaves, and striking workers as a means of forcing them to comply. But modern psychology has debunked the link between hunger and motivation, showing that acute deprivation actually diminishes energy, focus, and the ability to work.
Furthermore, the majority of SNAP recipients who are able to work are already doing so. Their benefits often supplement starvation wages, as more than half of non-disabled adult recipients had a household member employed within the past two years. Hunger, it seems, is less a product of individual choices and more a result of broader economic and political forces beyond one’s control.
Simmons argues that SNAP work requirements are “wrong, punitive and cruel,” based on outdated moral judgments rather than empirical evidence. Where such rules have been implemented, they have done little to boost employment. Instead, they have created added bureaucratic hurdles that cause many recipients to lose their benefits through no fault of their own.
As the United States grapples with persistent poverty and food insecurity, policymakers would do well to move past the myth that hunger is an effective motivator. True solutions require addressing the systemic factors that deprive people of their basic needs – not punishing them for circumstances often beyond their control.
