It didn’t generate many headlines, but last week, the Biden administration released a common-sense proposal to simplify one of our country’s most convoluted, overregulated safety net programs. Specifically, the administration proposed removing food purchases from the In-Kind Support and Maintenance (ISM) calculations in the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. This change would greatly simplify SSI, cutting down on the administrative burdens faced by beneficiaries at little cost to taxpayers.

SSI is meant to provide an income floor for elderly or disabled Americans with low Social Security benefits. Because Social Security is tied to past earnings, people who earned low wages throughout their careers receive meager benefits. This is where SSI steps in: For everyone who is accepted to the program, total income from SSI, Social Security, and other sources is guaranteed to be at least $914 per month. The program is extremely well-targeted to the very poorest individuals: As of 2013, the poverty rate among SSI beneficiaries was 63%, which was more than four times the national average at the time. SSI extends a lifeline to these extremely needy people. In January 2023 alone, SSI provided benefits to nearly 7.6 million disabled or elderly Americans, with the average beneficiary receiving $677 (as a monthly payment).

However, after accounting for what are known as “income disregards,” SSI benefits are reduced by one dollar for every $2 of on-the-job earnings and for every $1 coming from other income sources. Under the program’s ISM test, most food and housing assistance provided to SSI beneficiaries must be counted as other income. For example, if a friend or family member buys dinner or groceries for an SSI recipient, the recipient will have their benefits reduced by the dollar value of the food. The total ISM benefit reduction is capped at one-third of recipients’ monthly SSI payments.

Notably, the ISM test does not apply to other types of purchases (such as medical care or transportation), nor does it apply to food or housing provided by charities or the government. No other safety net program applies a similar test, given the complications associated with tracking food and housing expenses. Unsurprisingly, the ISM test comes with heavy administrative burdens: The Social Security Administration’s instructions on how to assess ISM are approximately 250 single-spaced pages, and many of the most complicated questions during the SSI application process are about food and housing.

In the end, the in-kind benefits test creates more havoc than it is worth: Only about 8 or 9% of SSI recipients have their benefits reduced in any given year, yet problems associated with carrying out the ISM test are one of the leading causes of miscalculated payments. Overall, the ISM test saves taxpayers less than 0.01% of GDP — in other words, it results in a $1 tax cut for every $13,000 of taxpayer income. These meager savings do not justify imposing such administrative nightmares on SSI beneficiaries. By removing food purchases, the Biden administration proposal would effectively limit the ISM test to housing assistance, thereby cutting down on the paperwork and bureaucracy that rob SSI participants of precious time and benefits.

SSI is badly in need of further reform and simplification, but this is clearly a promising first step. And it should be a first step not just towards simplifying SSI, but towards simplifying the safety net more broadly. As PPI has previously noted, the safety net is filled with overlapping, complicated programs that impose excessive administrative burdens on the poor. This reason is one of many that PPI has previously called for a comprehensive regulatory improvement commission aimed at removing unnecessary regulations rather than just letting them pile one on top of the other. As the Biden proposal demonstrates, “simplification” is not necessarily a euphemism for “cuts,” and a simpler safety net can also be a more compassionate one.

Public attitudes toward marijuana have changed dramatically since the counterculture days of the 1960s and 1970s when it was regarded as a “gateway” to more serious drug abuse. Today, marijuana (also known as cannabis) is widely seen as relatively benign and is used by many to ease chronic pain. Many states have moved to decriminalize the use and possession of cannabis. Nonetheless, too many Americans, especially from minority and low-income communities, still are burdened with criminal records from marijuana arrests and convictions.

That needs to change. As more states legalize the recreational use of marijuana, they should also expunge past marijuana convictions. Colorado and Washington were the first two states to legalize the Schedule 1 drug for recreational and medical use. Since then, 37 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have followed suit with laws allowing legal possession and use of marijuana. Taxes on cannabis sales are becoming a lucrative source of revenue for states.

As of 2020, about 40,000 Americans are burdened with marijuana-related convictions. State and federal lawmakers shouldn’t ignore the lingering damage past marijuana policies have inflicted on individuals. According to a report by the ACLU, marijuana-related arrests still account for over half of all drug arrests in the United States. There were over eight million between 2001 and 2010, with Black Americans 3.64 times more likely to be arrested for possession than Whites in every state, including those that have legalized the drug.

Based on the numbers provided by the ACLU, there were around 820,000 arrests annually between 2001 and 2010 and only 6% of those arrests led to a felony conviction for marijuana. The rest are misdemeanor charges which result in fines or probation. Whether or not it leads to prosecution or conviction, the arrest stays on an individual’s record. Having a marijuana arrest on record means the information is available for anyone to look up. Having prior marijuana convictions is a serious obstacle for people seeking jobs, education and training opportunities, and changes in immigration status. Even misdemeanor convictions can make it difficult for people to get driver’s licenses, qualify for insurance policies or apply for bank loans. Felony convictions restrict or limit certain rights such as professional licensing, voting, or receiving government assistance.

Expunging a conviction means that an individual’s case is vacated, dismissed, and “deemed a nullity” in any law or criminal records. When someone’s case is expunged, their past conviction will not appear on any public record and background check. States such as Colorado, Maryland, New Hampshire, and Oregon are allowing automatic expungement and for people to expunge their past marijuana convictions.

Guidelines for expungement differ state-by-state. Illinois legalized the recreational use of marijuana and provided the eligibility status for which individuals can apply for expungement. The act created three groups of marijuana-related records eligible for expungement. The first two groups are eligible for automatic expungement if arrests for possession were under 30 grams or less, while the third group requires a court petition to start the expungement process for possession up to 500 grams. New York’s legislation provides for automatic expungement with additional protection against discrimination in voting, housing, student loans, employment opportunities, and other vital services.

Federal marijuana trafficking cases continued to decline in 2020, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. There were only 1,118 such cases reported in 2020, marking a 67% decrease since 2016. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report in 2020 revealed a decline in the number of marijuana-related arrests with a 36% decrease from 2019; these arrests were primarily made in states where possession remains criminally outlawed.

On the federal level, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) introduced the MORE (Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement) Act of 2021. The proposal would: (1) remove marijuana from the list of federally controlled substances, (2) reinvest in communities and people based on cannabis arrest/conviction records, and (3) provide for the expungement of federal marijuana convictions and arrests.

In 2021, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also proposed a draft of the Cannabis Administration & Opportunity Act (CAOA). Measures in the draft include descheduling cannabis and allowing states to continue to set their own cannabis laws. The discussion draft provides guidelines for the expungement of certain cannabis criminal offenses and prohibits federal agencies from denying a security clearance, federal benefits, and immigrant status based on past or present marijuana use.

Expunging marijuana-related convictions is a logical complement to the national drive to legalize cannabis use. The federal government cannot mandate state expungement, but it can set an example and offer federal funding to help states purge old convictions from legal records.