By Parker Gilkesson

Health care, food, secure housing, and a livable wage are basic human needs. And seeking the help you need to succeed is a statement of human dignity and justice. However, coded language, dog-whistling, and racist stereotypes have reinforced the lie that folks receiving public benefits are exaggerating how poor they really are and that they are likely committing fraud. People experiencing poverty, particularly people of color, have routinely been profiled and policed, leading to higher rates of arrests and fines due to minor offenses. Over-policing and criminalization of people experiencing poverty and hunger also shows up in public benefit programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

At a minimum, those who receive public benefits are forced to endure intrusive questioning, public scrutiny of food choices, and even surprise visits to their homes. However, charges of fraud can lead to disqualification from public benefits and even jail time. This brief will explore the damage of criminalizing hunger through charging SNAP recipients with Intentional Program Violations (IPVs). The report concludes with a list of equitable, anti-racist solutions that shift the focus from fraud and program integrity to dismantling systemic, historical, and structural inequities that exacerbate hunger, while at the same time trusting SNAP recipients to know what’s best for their families.

Of course, no program can survive if it does not take abuses seriously. However, when actions taken in the name of improving program integrity have a strong negative and racially skewed impact on public perceptions of the program, policymakers have a moral obligation to first determine whether those actions achieve their stated goals and then look for less harmful ways to fight fraud. They also must repair the harm these actions have inflicted on innocent recipients’ dignity and trust in government.

Historically, anti-hunger advocates have been afraid to criticize the negative consequences of the focus on “program integrity” and its disproportionate impact on people of color for fear of being accused of defending fraud or legitimizing racist tropes. The reality is that we must properly discuss and address fraud, program integrity, and the over-policing of people experiencing poverty or “aporophobia” to achieve policies that reflect equity, trust, and truth instead of mistrust, mistreatment, and systemic oppression.

Washington DC: CLASP, 2022. 26p.

By Bryant-Bertail, Jessica; Congdon, Tara; Dunn, Kaitlin; Long, Drew; Sendejas, Ray; Sun, Roxanna T.

From the document: "The CARES [Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security] Act includes a provision for GAO [Government Accountability Office] to report regularly on the public health and economic effects of the pandemic and the federal response. We have issued 10 comprehensive reports examining the federal government's continued efforts to respond to, and recover from, the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we have issued over 200 standalone reports, testimonies, and science and technology spotlights focused on different aspects of the pandemic. This report includes several key data updates and five enclosures that summarize and highlight standalone reports issued from April 2022 (the date of our last comprehensive report) through April 2023 on the following topics: 'public health preparedness, improper payments and fraud, vulnerable populations, distribution of federal COVID-19 funding,' and 'COVID-19 and the economy.' This report is based on work we previously conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards or our quality assurance framework. More detailed information on our scope and methodology can be found in the reports cited in the enclosures."

United States. Government Accountability Office. 2023.

BY Roderic Broadhurst, John Bacon-Shone, Brigitte Bouhours, Thierry Bouhours.

The book analyses the results of a large scale victimisation survey that was conducted in 2005–06 with businesses in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Xi’an. It also provides comprehensive background materials on crime and the criminal justice system in China. The survey, which measured common and non-conventional crime such as fraud, IP theft and corruption, is important because few crime victim surveys have been conducted with Chinese populations and it provides an understanding of some dimensions of crime in non-western societies. In addition, China is one of the fastest-growing economies in the world and it attracts a great amount of foreign investment; however, corruption and economic crimes are perceived by some investors as significant obstacles to good business practices. Key policy implications of the survey are discussed.

Canberra: Australian National University Press, 2011. 314p.