Bans for People with Prior Felony Drug Convictions

Economic outcomes for Black returning citizens are also particularly concerning.11 Formerly incarcerated Black women and men both have unemployment rates nearly double that of their white counterparts.12 Additionally, wages for formerly incarcerated Black people are lower when compared with their white counterparts.13 These already low wages may be reduced further by debt incurred because of incarceration, such as legal fees, child support, and fines.14 These economic barriers extend beyond the returning citizen to their family, which may include dependent children.

According to one report, one in nine Black children have a parent in jail or prison.15 Due to SNAP and TANF bans, low-income households receive less support overall. While a parent with a drug-related felony conviction can still receive assistance for dependent children, the parent’s ineligibility means the family receives significantly less benefit than if the parent were eligible. Lifting the drug felony ban could provide more resources to children with formerly incarcerated parents experiencing poverty. Although poverty can have long-term effects on children who experience it, even small cash benefits, like TANF, can have lasting positive effects on children’s health and outcomes.16

Further, research makes clear that the denial of food and cash benefits is likely to increase recidivism rather than reduce it.17 According to a 2017 Harvard Law School study, access to SNAP and TANF benefits reduced the risk of reincarceration by 10% within one year.18 Further, a study on SNAP bans in Florida concluded that people subjected to a ban were 9.5% more likely to commit a subsequent offense.19 As public assistance can be key to helping individuals and their families meet their basic needs, a full lift of SNAP and TANF bans can be necessary to support and develop healthy returning citizens, families, and communities.

Where Do the States Stand?

PRWORA grants states the option to remove or modify lifetime bans. This study sorts each state into one of three categories:

• Full Ban: State prohibits individuals with felony drug convictions from accessing public assistance under any circumstances and for a lifetime.

• Partial Ban: State allows individuals with felony drug convictions to access public assistance under certain conditions and requirements applied generally or on a caseby-case basis through court mandates and community supervision requirements. Such requirements might include drug testing, participation in drug treatment programs, and/or completion of probation and parole.

• No Ban: State has formally opted out of federal lifetime bans and does not prohibit individuals from accessing benefits solely based on felony drug convictions.

The number of states that have either ended their use of bans and/or have modified their bans has increased steadily since 1997. In 1997, more than half of states had full bans on TANF and SNAP for people with drug convictions.20 Today, only one state (South Carolina) has a full ban for SNAP, and seven (Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, and Georgia) have full bans on TANF. Some states (Nevada, Kentucky, and Illinois) have made such changes as recently as 2021. There are still presently more bans and partial bans on TANF than on SNAP (see Tables 1 & 2). This is likely because TANF involves general cash assistance whereas SNAP is limited to only food.

The largest shift, however, has been from states with full bans to partial/modified bans (see Table 3 & 4). States such as Indiana21 and Maryland22 still require TANF recipients convicted of a drug felony to be subject to tests for substance abuse. Colorado requires people convicted of a drug-related felony to take “meaningful steps toward rehabilitation” including drug treatment.23 Some states also require successful participation in or completion of probation or parole.24 While these partial bans are a positive alternative to full bans, they still impose restrictions on people accessing needed assistance and benefits.

CPAR | Perpetual Punishment: A State-by-State Analysis of Welfare Benefit Bans for People with Prior Felony Drug Convictions

Table 1: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

Table 2: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

As the above maps illustrate, ending SNAP and TANF bans for people with past drug felony convictions cuts across traditional party lines. States as politically diverse as New York, Rhode Island, Mississippi, and Oklahoma have ended SNAP and TANF bans. In the latter two states, Republicans have held the Governor’s seat and both chambers of legislative chambers since 1992.

CPAR | Perpetual Punishment: A State-by-State Analysis of Welfare Benefit Bans for People with Prior Felony Drug Convictions

Table 3: SNAP: Types of Modifications

REQUIRE DRUG TESTING REQUIRE COMPLETION/ PARTICIPATION IN DRUG TREATMENT

Alabama Arizona Connecticut* Kansas* Maryland Minnesota Missouri Pennsylvania Wisconsin Alabama Alaska Arizona California* Colorado* Connecticut* Florida Hawaii Kansas Maryland Montana* Nebraska Nevada North

REQUIRE SATISFACTORILY SERVING/ COMPLETION OF PROBATION/PAROLE

Pennsylvania* Tennessee* Alabama Alaska Arizona California Connecticut Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Maryland Minnesota Missouri Montana Oregon Pennsylvania Texas Arizona* Connecticut* Maryland North Carolina

*Applicable only at court/parole’s discretion

Table 4: TANF: Type of Modifications

REQUIRE DRUG TESTING

REQUIRE COMPLETION/ PARTICIPATION IN DRUG TREATMENT

Alaska Connecticut Hawaii Idaho Pennsylvania Tennessee

Alaska Maryland Pennsylvania

POST-CONVICTION/ RELEASE INELIGIBILITY PERIOD Alaska Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Indiana Montana Minnesota North Carolina Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah