Rhonda B. Graham

On Friday, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett – who has no problem starving his state's most populous and academically struggling urban school districts of funding – flipped his fiscal conservative script and declared that Congress needs to preserve food stamps as an important safety net for his state.

Just two years ago, Corbett was willing to wage a major assault on the food stamp program that fed 1.8 million Pennsylvanians. Nearly 500,000 lived in Philadelphia. The targets for barring the food aid were people younger than 60 with more than $2,000 in savings.

Back then the Philadelphia Inquirer pointed out: "Pennsylvania plans to make the amount of food stamps that people receive contingent on the assets they possess — an unexpected move that bucks national trends and places the commonwealth among a minority of states."

That same year, the nation experienced a progression of government dependency on what is called food sustenance. Since January 2012, nearly 900,000 American families applied for and received food vouchers from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Yet the governor decided to preserve benefits for 400,000 Pennsylvania households. On average users of the program in Pennsylvania were to lose $60 to $65 a month to buy food, which adds up to about $300 million a year.

Earlier this year fellow Republicans in Washington failed to reduce overall spending on such "welfare benefits," despite their affection for casting food stamps among the hierarchy of social programs riddled with fraud and waste. And they have a legitimate point, which is why a good number of Democrats in national polls agree on tougher eligibility standards and ongoing monitoring of the benefits.

But Corbett cast a softer tone than expected when he walked back his usual stance on food stamp cuts last week. Why? Because reality forces him to concede to SNAP's necessity and because the November elections are growing closer.

Not to accuse Corbett of being disingenuous, but could it be that he's also holding another card too? Just last month his administration got rid of former Gov. Ed Rendell's ban on granting more leases for natural gas exploration in Pennsylvania parks and forests.

Corbett and state leaders were filled with glee at the prospect of "lifting up entire communities, creating and supporting many thousands of jobs well beyond gas production" by ditching Rendell's ban.

That significant political success will likely rake in $75 million to the state's economy, including allowing counties to raise their own funds with fees on natural gas drilling.

There's no better anti-welfare fraud security than credible economic growth fueled by an expanding job market with a range of work opportunities across an expanded economic spectrum, with room for low-skilled wage earners, among them current welfare recipients.

Short memories

Count me among those who have found New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie a cool dude when it comes to politics, that is until lately with the "bridgegate" scandal. But he didn't help matters last week at the Conservative Political Action Conference with this accusation: "Tell me the last pro-life Democrat who was allowed to speak at a convention … there's never been one. They're the party of intolerance, not us."

If Corbett was on hand, he could have offered Christie this nugget from one Pennsylvania's U.S. senators, Bob Casey Jr., a pro-life Democrat who said the following at the 2008 Democratic National Convention: "Barack Obama and I have an honest disagreement on the issue of abortion. But the fact that I'm speaking here tonight is testament to Barack's ability to show respect for the views of people who may disagree with him."

Contact Rhonda B. Graham at rgraham@delawareonline.com.