Sex offenders and the Farm Bill

2-12-17 National:

Editor’s note: This article was originally published February 7, 2014

One of the new provisions in the Agriculture Act of 2014 — aka the Farm Bill — prohibits certain sex offenders from receiving food stamps. I thought of that as I read through the record of a recent administrative hearing in which the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners was attempting to block a sex offender from obtaining the state’s permission to work in his chosen trade.

The case centered around Jason C’s application for Plumber’s Apprentice registration — basically a plumber’s assistant position that requires oversight from a licensed plumber — which he filed a year ago. In April 2013, the examiners board rejected him, citing his criminal record. Jason appealed. The case, in which he represented himself, was heard at the end of last year.

Jason’s crime occurred in June 1996, more than 17 years ago, when as a 20-year-old he sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl, according to court documents. He was sentenced to ten years in prison. After completing an inmate sex offender rehabilitation program, he was released on parole after serving half his sentence. A model client, he was discharged from all supervision in 2007 — meaning all his social debts were paid off more than six years ago.

In court records, Jason described his crime as a “gross lapse in judgment.” As a parolee, records show he participated in a second sex offender treatment program, where his counselors gave him high marks. As part of that program, he also reconciled with his victim, who submitted a letter in support of Jason’s plumbing application.

Since then, not only has Jason held regular jobs, he also has worked as a community leader, aiming to reduce crime in East Austin, documents show. He has been employed by a department store, a cleaning service and a computer product store. He has started his own business.

And, since 2010, he has worked for a plumbing company — all without incident. Jason’s plumbing application contained 13 letters of recommendation and included votes of support from plumbers, community activists and teachers, who noted he had completed a bachelor’s degree with “highest honors.”

In other words, by every measure available, Jason C. has been rehabilitated.

After hearing both sides, the judge agreed. Jason “has fully dedicated himself to rehabilitation,” Administrative Law Judge Anne Perez wrote in her opinion, released two weeks ago. “And he continues to pay his debt to society by registering as a sex offender, which has been a roadblock in his pursuit of honest, gainful employment.” Jason, she concluded, “is currently fit for registration as a Plumber’s Apprentice.” The plumbing board must still approve her recommendation before Jason is permitted to register with the state.

Over the years, government aid programs have banned certain convicted criminals from receiving taxpayer assistance. Convicted drug felons have been prevented from receiving food stamps for nearly 20 years. (Some states have opted out of the restriction; Texas has not.) Same with felons on the lam. And some federal housing programs limit where sex offenders can live.

Agree with them or not, there is a public good argument to be made for each. Drug addicts could use their food stamps to buy drugs. Placing sex offenders in public housing might place other tenants at risk. Extending government aid to wanted criminals could delay their apprehension.

The new restrictions in the Farm Bill, signed by Pres. Obama on Friday, are still being parsed; a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Agriculture said the agency is scrambling to figure out which offenders would be excluded from food aid. But at least on the surface, the prohibitions appear to be a departure from the public safety rationale, and more directly punative. (Ironically, due to existing prohibitions on where they live and what work they can find, sex offenders are more likely to find themselves in need of assistance.)

For those in favor of perpetual punishment for sex offenders, it is undeniably true that many will always be terrible people unworthy of any assistance. Yet, as Jason C.’s case against the plumbing board demonstrates, not all of them are. ..Source.. by Eric Dexheimer American-Statesman Staff

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

ALERT: Congress clears $500B farm bill (Affecting certain sex offenders and family they live with)

Before our Quick Links there is more on Food Stamps background in our other blog HERE

2-5-2014 Washington DC: (FINAL)

The Joint Conference Committee (JCC) has completed the NEW Farm Bill (HR 2642), short of being signed by the President (Ultimately he did sign it), and the article which informs us of this is HERE if folks want to read it. There are thousand of issues in the bill but we only address the portion that affects folks we advocate for.

The JCC has combined the Senate ver. with the House ver., then modified as shown below. While it IS NOT retroactive, there is still a very onerous SLAM to any family that houses one of these future sex offenders. The SLAM comes in the form of how the household food stamp amount is calculated. see "(2) EFFECTS ON ASSISTANCE AND BENEFITS FOR OTHERS" below. Gut feel, is this actionable? ACLU where are you?

Today all is said and done, there is no way to get this changed, but Advocates should make this a priority in future dealings with folks in Congress. And just a reminder, the Second Chance Act also excludes sex offenders which should be remembered when dealing with folks in Congress!

Note that there are other crime types similarly affected which are not part of our advocacy, see below.

From HR 2642:
SEC. 4008. ELIGIBILITY DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR CERTAIN CONVICTED FELONS.

(a) In General- Section 6 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(r) Disqualification for Certain Convicted Felons-

`(1) IN GENERAL- An individual shall not be eligible for benefits under this Act if--

`(A) the individual is convicted of--

`(i) aggravated sexual abuse under section 2241 of title 18, United States Code;

`(ii) murder under section 1111 of title 18, United States Code;

`(iii) an offense under chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code;

`(iv) a Federal or State offense involving sexual assault, as defined in 40002(a) of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13925(a)); or

`(v) an offense under State law determined by the Attorney General to be substantially similar to an offense described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); and

`(B) the individual is not in compliance with the terms of the sentence of the individual or the restrictions under subsection (k) [of 7 USC 2015 below].

---

7 USC 2015 (k) Disqualification of fleeing felons

(1) In general

No member of a household who is otherwise eligible to participate in the supplemental nutrition assistance program shall be eligible to participate in the program as a member of that or any other household during any period during which the individual is—

(A) fleeing to avoid prosecution, or custody or confinement after conviction, under the law of the place from which the individual is fleeing, for a crime, or attempt to commit a crime, that is a felony under the law of the place from which the individual is fleeing or that, in the case of New Jersey, is a high misdemeanor under the law of New Jersey; or

(B) violating a condition of probation or parole imposed under a Federal or State law.

---

`(2) EFFECTS ON ASSISTANCE AND BENEFITS FOR OTHERS- The amount of benefits otherwise required to be provided to an eligible household under this Act shall be determined by considering the individual to whom paragraph (1) applies not to be a member of the household, except that the income and resources of the individual shall be considered to be income and resources of the household.

`(3) ENFORCEMENT- Each State shall require each individual applying for benefits under this Act to attest to whether the individual, or any member of the household of the individual, has been convicted of a crime described in paragraph (1).'.

(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 5(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2014(a)) is amended in the second sentence by striking `sections 6(b), 6(d)(2), and 6(g)' and inserting `subsections (b), (d)(2), (g), and (r) of section 6'.

(c) Inapplicability to Convictions Occurring on or Before Enactment- The amendments made by this section shall not apply to a conviction if the conviction is for conduct occurring on or before the date of enactment of this Act.

Note (c) was inserted by the House, not found in the original Vitter proposal (S954). see HR2642 related bills (scroll to end where it shows S954 was inserted into HR2642). See also OnceFallen's review.

For now, have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Farm Bill Finally Passes the House (Updated)

Farm Bill HR 2642: Unfortunately the Conference bill makes certain sex offenders ineligible for food stamps. See section SEC. 4037. ELIGIBILITY DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR CERTAIN CONVICTED FELONS of this bill. And this DOES affect the amount the family gets, if the offender lives with them. However, this ineligibility IS NOT retroactively applied; which is a good thing.

1-30-2014 Washington DC:

Almost six months after the farm bill went down on the floor in partisan flames and GOP whip counts necessitated a variety of political maneuvers just to get the measure to conference, the House on Wednesday morning finally passed a five-year reauthorization of the nation’s agriculture and nutrition programs.

The fiercely negotiated farm bill conference report cleared the threshold for passage. Senate Agriculture Chairwoman Sen. Debbie Stabenow, one of the key negotiators of the conference report, was on the House floor during the vote. The final vote was 251-166.

Republican and Democratic leaders supported the conference report, conceding that any imperfections outweighed the imperative that a farm bill finally get signed into law.

It didn’t stop defections, however, from rank-and-file members on both sides of the aisle. The bill would not have been able to pass without Democratic support, with 63 Republicans voting no. Democrats were split nearly in half, with many opposing any cuts to the food stamp program.

The Republican defectors represent the far-right contingent of the party, among them Tea Party Caucus founder Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise of Louisiana and Randy Weber of Texas, who on State of the Union night tweeted from the House chamber that he was awaiting the arrival of the “Kammandant-in-Chief.”

The GOP “no” column included those who fought hard for the bifurcated farm bill that funded agriculture and nutrition titles in separate pieces of legislation, such as Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana.

“Last summer, the American people won an important victory for common sense and transparency when we ended the unholy alliance between food stamps and farm programs,” Stutzman said on the House floor. “Business as usual fought back and here we are today.”

There were also a few members of Republican leadership who opposed it: Republican Policy Committee Chairman and newly announced Senate candidate James Lankford of Oklahoma, Republican Conference Secretary Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas and Tom Price of Georgia, who doesn’t have an official leadership title but has the ear of his colleagues at the highest ranks.

The 103 Democrats who voted “no” were also predictable. They included some of the loudest voices against cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, primarily Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut.

“Congress has lost its way,” DeLauro said in a statement. “This conference report is nothing more than Reverse Robin Hood legislation that steals food from the poor in favor of crop subsidies for the rich.”

The chairman and ranking member of the House Democratic Caucus Xavier Becerra, Calif., and Joseph Crowley, N.Y., also opposed the conference report on Wednesday morning, as did the co-chairmen of the Congressional Progressive Caucus: Reps. Raúl M. Grijalva, D-Ariz., and Keith Ellison, D-Minn.

There a number of Democratic ranking members, too, who voted against the report: Maryland’s Elijah E. Cummings of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee; Oregon’s Peter A. DeFazio of the Natural Resources panel; California’s George Miller of the Education and the Workforce Committee; and Maxine Waters, also from California, of the Financial Services Committee.

“No” votes also came from ranking members Sander M. Levin, D-Mich., of Ways and Means, and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., of the Budget Committee. They had been pushing for farm bill savings to be used to pay for an extension of emergency unemployment insurance, which expired a month ago.

That campaign was unsuccessful. ..Source.. by Emma Dumain

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Compromise farm bill on verge of clearing Congress

The question is, will it contain the harmful to certain former sex offenders, provision?

1-28-2014 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON — Key lawmakers from both parties announced a final agreement Monday for a multi-year farm bill, putting Congress on the verge of clearing another long-stalled priority from its to-do list.

The proposed compromise, which could come up for a House vote Wednesday, would avert deep cuts sought by Republicans in the federal food stamp program and end direct payments to farmers — a controversial provision under the previous farm bill in which farmers received federal subsidies regardless of their output.

If approved, the bipartisan legislation would extend a somewhat surprising streak of cooperation in Congress, following a two-year budget deal reached in December and a $1-trillion appropriation package passed this month.

Passage in the House is not assured, although the lower-than-expected cuts to the food stamp program were likely to bring more Democratic support. Senate action would follow in the coming weeks.

The final measure would mitigate much of the House-sought cuts to the food stamp program, also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, by reducing funding by $8 billion over 10 years, far less than the $39 billion once sought by Republicans.

Reliance on food stamps has surged since the Great Recession. Nearly 48 million Americans are enrolled in the program, up 47% compared with 2008. Total yearly costs have jumped to nearly $80 billion from about $38 billion.

The bill’s overall price tag was expected to come in below spending levels authorized under the previous law, though a final estimate had not yet been released. The legislation also would prevent a significant jump in milk prices that will occur if no deal is reached. ..Continued.. by Michael A. Memoli

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Why food stamp cuts could mean higher healthcare costs

1-14-2014 Washington DC:

Doctors warn Congress that cutting food stamp programs may be shortsighted. Food stamps cuts may lead to health concerns for family's lacking access to proper nutrition. That, in term, could increase federal healthcare spending.

Doctors are warning that if Congress cuts food stamps, the federal government could be socked with bigger health bills. Maybe not immediately, they say, but over time if the poor wind up seeking treatment in doctors' offices or hospitals as a result.

The doctors' lobbying effort comes as Congress is working on a compromise farm bill that's certain to include food stamp cuts. Republicans want heftier reductions than do Democrats in yet another partisan battle over the government's role in helping poor Americans.

Food stamps, known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, feed 1 in 7 Americans and cost almost $80 billion a year, twice what it cost five years ago. Conservatives say the program spiraled out of control as the economy struggled and the costs are not sustainable. They say the neediest people will not go hungry.

The health and financial risks of hunger have not played a major role in the debate. But the medical community says cutting food aid could backfire through higher Medicaid and Medicare costs.

"If you're interested in saving health care costs, the dumbest thing you can do is cut nutrition," said Dr. Deborah Frank of Boston Medical Center, who founded the Children's HealthWatch pediatric research institute.

"People don't make the hunger-health connection."

A study published this week helps illustrate that link. Food banks report longer lines at the end of the month as families exhaust their grocery budgets, and California researchers found that more poor are hospitalized then, too.

Among patients from low-income neighborhoods, hospitalizations were 27 percent higher in the last week of the month compared with the first, when most states send out government checks and food stamps, said lead researcher Dr. Hilary Seligman of the University of California, San Francisco.

Dr. Seligman couldn't prove that running low on food was to blame. But she called it the most logical culprit and said the cost of treating health concerns without a hospitalization could provide months of food stamp benefits.

"The cost trade-offs are sort of ridiculous," Seligman said.

She is working on a project with Feeding America, a network of food banks, to try to improve health by providing extra, diabetes-appropriate foods, including fresh produce and whole-grain cereals and pastas, for diabetics at a few food banks in California, Texas and Ohio.

Last year, research from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts estimated that a cut of $2 billion a year in food stamps could trigger in an increase of $15 billion in medical costs for over the next decade.

Other research shows children from food-insecure families are 30 percent more likely to have been hospitalized for a range of illnesses. But after a temporary boost in benefits from the 2009 economic stimulus, children whose families used food stamps were significantly more likely to be well than kids in low-income families that didn't participate, Children's HealthWatch found. About half of food stamp recipients are children, and 10 percent are elderly.

How much would be cut from the food-stamp program ranges from $400 million a year in a Senate-passed farm bill to $4 billion a year in the House version. Congressional negotiators now are eyeing about $800 million a year in cuts.

That would be on top of cuts in November, when that 2009 temporary benefit expired. According to the Agriculture Department, a family of four receiving food stamps is now getting $36 less a month. The average household benefit is around $270.

Since then, food banks are reporting more demand because people's food stamps aren't stretching as far, said Maura Daly of Feeding America.

Conservatives pushing the cuts say they want to target benefits to the neediest people, arguing that those who are truly hungry should have no problem getting assistance if they apply.

The final bill will most likely crack down on states that give recipients $1 in heating assistance in order to trigger higher food stamp benefits, a change that wouldn't take people completely off the rolls.

The bill will also likely add some money for food banks and test new work requirements for recipients in a few states, a priority for many Republicans.

RECOMMENDED: How well do you know your family sitcoms?

"While this program is an important part of our safety net, our overriding goal should be to help our citizens with the education and skills they need to get back on their feet so that they can provide for themselves and their families," said Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., when the farm bill was on the House floor last summer.

Democrats and anti-hunger groups opposing the reductions have said that cutting food stamps could worsen health and raise health costs for the poorest.

"Critics focus almost exclusively on how much we spend, and I wish they understood that if we did this better, we could save a lot more money in health care costs," says Massachusetts Rep. Jim McGovern, who has led the Democrats' defense of the food stamp program.

Dr. Thomas McInerny, past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said too often, poor families buy cheap, high-calorie junk food because it's filling, but it lacks nutrients needed for proper child development, including trouble learning in school. ..Source.. by Lauran Neergaard

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Legal Experts Slam Controversial Farm Bill Amendment In Letter To Congress

12-6-2013 Washington DC:

A group of law professors have written to the House and Senate blasting a controversial amendment to the farm bill currently undergoing negotiations.

Originally published in a study, the letter penned by 14 law professors was obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle and not released publicly. In it, they reportedly criticize the Protect Interstate Commerce Act introduced by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), an amendment that seeks to limit states’ power to supervise their own farming standards. If passed, the amendment would ban states from requiring agricultural and livestock conditions that are stricter than those in other states, so long as the products are intended for out-of-state sale.

The experts allege that the amendment is a food safety risk, writing that there is “a significant likelihood that many state agricultural laws across the country will be nullified, that public health and safety will be threatened, and that the amendment could ultimately be deemed unconstitutional.”

A major target of the amendment is California’s Proposition 2, a 2008 law that enforced higher standards for farm animals’ living quarters. The law later expanded to require all eggs sold in California be produced under Prop 2’s standards. The statute was put into effect to keep out-of-state egg producers from taking advantage of Californians’ high standards and outpricing in-state farmers. ..Continued.. by Lydia O'Connor

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Meeting held for long-term farm bill

11-24-2013 Washington DC:

U.S. Department of Agriculture Undersecretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services Michael Scuse called Friday for Congress to pass a long-term budget, a long-term farm bill and to adopt immigration reform.

Scuse, speaking during the North Dakota Farmers Union Convention at the Holiday Inn in Minot, said a long-term farm bill is important for providing a safety net for farmers, such as crop insurance and disaster assistance following such disasters as the blizzard that killed thousands of animals during a blizzard in South Dakota earlier this year. Other programs funded under the farm bill help provide assistance for export of crops.

North Dakota is the eighth-largest agriculture exporter in the country, according to a press release issued by the office of Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., on Friday, and sells $4.1 billion in commodities each year in foreign markets. North Dakota agriculture exports support more than 45,000 jobs in the state, according to Heitkamp's office.

The U.S. Congress has been unable to pass a new farm bill this year. A farm bill was supposed to have been passed by the end of 2012, but Congress instead voted for a one-year extension. Scuse said Friday he is hopeful that bipartisan negotiations between the House and the Senate will result in a "comprehensive food, farm and jobs bill" being passed by the beginning of next year.

During his keynote address, Scuse also spoke at length about the need for immigration reform. He said North Dakota would experience about $50 million in short-term production losses with the elimination of the labor of illegal immigrants.

Scuse said agricultural producers rely heavily on the labor of illegal immigrants, who work in fields and factories, while other immigrants work on short-term visas. Currently, there is no easy way for employers to hire them legally, he said.

A bipartisan immigration reform bill would have provided illegal immigrants with the right to stay and work in the country and a pathway to eventual citizenship, provided they paid a fine, passed a background check and went to the back of the line for consideration of citizenship behind immigrants who came here legally. However, immigration reform also seems to have stalled for the time being in the House. ..Source.. by ANDREA JOHNSON

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Congress recesses with no progress on farm bill

11-22-2013 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON — Conferees failed to reach agreement on a farm bill before Congress recessed for Thanksgiving week. With the legislative calendar abbreviated in December, it seemed increasingly unlikely that a compromise farm bill will be adopted by the conference committee, passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama before Jan. 1, 2014. On that date, farm programs would be based on permanent law as established under the 1949 farm act.

The most immediate effect would be resurrecting obsolete dairy programs that would lead to soaring consumer milk prices. It was expected that should Congress not pass a new farm bill before the end of the year, it at the very least would take action to extend the current farm act to provide yet more time to reach a deal and forestall a dairy price shock. ..Source.. by Food Business News

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

David Vitter's Food Stamp Felon Ban Would Barely Save Any Money

Folks check out the Congressional Budget Office answer to Vitter where they show stats for ALL felons not just sex offenders.

11-22-2013 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON -- When Sen. David Vitter introduced legislation banning convicted rapists, murderers and pedophiles from receiving food stamps, the Louisiana Republican suggested convicts had soaked the system for millions.

But just how much in food stamps is currently going to these felons? This week the Congressional Budget Office has an answer: not too much, at least in the grand scheme of food stamp spending.

The CBO says that banning the cons Vitter wants banned would reduce Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program spending by just $5 million next year, or six-tenths of a percent of overall SNAP spending. It isn't sure if Vitter meant to ban people who have already been convicted of those crimes or only new convicts going forward. The latter option, which House Republicans included in their separate food stamp legislation, would save $21 million over the standard 10-year budget window, or slightly more than two-tenths of a percent of $764 billion in projected SNAP spending.

Vitter suggested that more money would be saved when he promoted his measure. In a press release, Vitter's office said Louisiana sent more than $1 million worth of food stamps to incarcerated criminals in just two years, which would be about 4 percent of state benefits distributed in that time period.

But Vitter's legislation doesn't address the problem pointed out in his press release. Federal law already bans prisoners from receiving SNAP benefits. His amendment, meanwhile, would ban convicts even after they've served their time, since it requires food stamp applicants to certify in writing that they've never been convicted of the listed felonies. The senator hasn't explained why he thinks ex-cons shouldn't get food stamps.

Federal law currently bans convicted drug felons from SNAP, but most states waive the prohibition. They'd have no such flexibility to waive Vitter's proposal. On a similar front, House Republicans want to give states new power to require food stamp recipients to submit to drug tests. Democrats say they don't like the idea, but aren't making a huge fuss about it.

Vitter said he hoped his proposal would garner bipartisan support to put a "basic, fundamental limitation in the law." He hoped right: The Senate approved his measure by unanimous consent earlier this year. It is now in the hands of a conference committee under a tight deadline to hammer out a budget deal. The bigger disagreements are over new income and eligibility restrictions that would push as many as 3.8 million Americans from the program, which currently benefits 47 million.

Liberal advocacy groups think Vitter's proposal is terrible, because it would punish ex-cons even after they've paid their debt to society.

"The amendment essentially says that rehabilitation doesn't matter and violates basic norms of criminal justice," Bob Greenstein, director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said in a blog post. "It's also possible that the amendment could contribute to recidivism. Ex-offenders often have difficulty finding jobs that pay decent wages. The amendment could pose dilemmas for ex-offenders who are trying to go straight but can neither find jobs nor, as a result of the amendment, obtain enough food to feed their children and families." ..Source.. by Arthur Delaney

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Farm Bill’s fate in doubt, for second consecutive year

11-22-2013 Washington DC:

An informal, end-of-this-week deadline to get a Farm Bill draft approved by a team of congressional negotiators will not be met, throwing into question whether the Farm Bill can be be passed in the House by year’s end. U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack says congress can act quickly “when there’s a will and there’s a way.”

“We have to have a clear indication from congress that this is going to get done,” Vilsack says. “Obviously there are some who are skeptical about that given the fact that we have already seen one year with inaction.”

A Farm Bill was due to be passed by this time last year, but congress passed a one-year extension. Vilsack says inaction again this year means his agency will begin instituting the federal farm policies of the 1940s — which are far more costly.

“No one wants to do that,” Vilsack says, “and the best and simplest way to avoid it having to be done — at whatever point in time — is to have congress finish its work by the end of the year.”

After this week, congress will be in recess for the Thanksgiving holiday. In December, the House will be in session for just two weeks and the Senate for slightly longer before adjourning for the year. Without passage of a five-year Farm Bill, Vilsack says farmers and ranchers are delaying key decisions.

“Doesn’t know how to decide whether to expand, to buy an additional piece of equipment because he or she does not know what the programs are going to be,” Vilsack says. “There is no question that farmers have taken a ‘wait and see’ attitude to further decisions that could help spur not only their own operation, but spur the economy generally.”

According to a report released Thursday by the White House Council on Economic Advisors, agriculture accounts for nearly five percent of the Gross Domestic Product and one in 12 jobs in the U.S. are in agriculture. Vilsack called it ”a compelling report that makes the argument on a multitude of levels why it’s important for the rest of the country and all of America to see congress finish its work” on the Farm Bill.

The chairman of the House Ag Committee emerged from a meeting on Thursday afternoon saying anything is possible, but it “will be challenging” for Farm Bill negotiators to wrap up their work and have a bill ready for a vote in the House by December 13. There are no plans for the House-Senate conference commitee working out the details of a hoped-for Farm Bill compromise to meet today. Senator Tom Harkin and Congressman Steve King serve on the committee, but neither was involved in this week’s negotiations between the four top lawmakers on the panel. ..Source.. by O. Kay Henderson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Food stamp myths continue to cloud farm bill debate

See also: Farm Bill Conference Committee wants to finish by Thanksgiving

11-17-2013 Washington DC:

It’s unfortunate that progress on a new five-year federal farm bill has become intertwined with efforts to curb the rapid growth of the federal food stamp program. Why?

Congress hasn’t passed a farm bill since 2008.

And it’s difficult if not impossible to conduct a cogent debate of the food stamp program in America without become mired in the myths of that program – myths like the so-called “welfare queens” and other images that have more to do with the politics of race and class than in factual public policy.

The stereotypical food stamp recipient in political lore is more often than not black, female and poor. In that scenario, the food stamp recipient is a Democratic voter who identifies politically as liberal. But a Pew Center survey earlier this year found what they called “a bipartisan nation of beneficiaries.”

The survey focused on federal entitlements including food stamps, unemployment benefits, welfare, Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare programs. The survey found that significant proportions of Democrats (60 percent) and Republicans (52 percent) say they have benefited from a major entitlement program at some point in their lives. So have nearly equal shares of self-identifying conservatives (57 percent), liberals (53 percent) and moderates (53 percent).

But when dealing solely with the question of food stamps, the survey revealed a partisan component in that about one-in-five (22 percent) of Democrats had received food stamps compared with 10 percent of Republicans. About 17 percent of independents said they had received food stamps.

Food stamps should not define the farm bill debate, but it’s clear that food stamps remain a political lightning rod.

The Census Bureau documents the facts of the food stamp or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — that more than 61 percent of the households that receive food stamps in America are white while some 27 percent of the households are African-American.

Bloomberg reporters John McCormick and Greg Giroux compiled an analysis in which they purport that in the 2012 election, there were 254 U.S. counties where the number of food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011 — and that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney carried 213 of those counties.

Without question, Southern states with high poverty rates like Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee are states where Republicans fare best in presidential politics. There is a huge political disconnect on food stamps, particularly in states like Mississippi where food stamp dependence is highest.

First, there’s the notion that welfare recipients are responsible for the exponential expansion of the food stamp program. Not so. Congress is responsible for the expansion of the food stamps program.

At inception in 1965, food stamps helped only about 561,000 Americans.

Now, 47.7 million Americans are dependent. Congress enacted the laws that expanded that program and other entitlements without providing recurring funding to pay for them.

American farm policy and national nutrition policies should be linked. But holding farm policy hostage to what is a social welfare question is foolish.

Congress created food stamps, they expanded the program and they helped create — for the purpose of currying favor with voters — the over-the-top scope of the program.

Under the myths of race and class, running against food stamps is increasingly popular for many politicians. But it ignores the facts of how the program was created and how it grew to what it is today. ..Source.. by Sid Salter

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

New farm bill has glimmer of hope

11-5-2013 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A cohort of legislators met in the capitol Wednesday in an attempt to find common ground on a new farm bill. But they made no real progress toward resolving differences between the U.S. Senate and House over legislation that covers a range of programs that affect dairy farmers, those who get food assistance and other Vermonters.

“Congress needs to pass a new farm bill — it’s getting ridiculous,” said Jenny Nelson, the agriculture policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. “Dairy farmers have had no support after the MILC (milk price support) program expired Oct. 1.”

The conference committee consists of 12 senators and 29 representatives. Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat, is the only member of the Vermont delegation taking part in the negotiations.

A conference committee consists of members of both houses of Congress, convened for the purpose of reconciling two different versions of the same bill. In this case, legislators will try to find a compromise between a farm bill the Senate passed in June and a version the House passed in September.

The farm bill sets the nation’s food and nutrition policy. First created by Congress in 1933, the farm bill is traditionally passed every five years. In 2012, Congress failed to pass a new bill, and instead voted to extend the 2008 bill through Sept. 30, 2013.

After a farm bill was passed in the Democrat-controlled Senate, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, did not put that version to a vote in his chamber. Instead, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives drafted its own version of the bill, with deep cuts to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). It was passed by a vote of 217-210, with no Democrats voting in favor. The Senate version passed 66-27, garnering significant bipartisan support.

Serving since 1975, Leahy has presided over the passage of seven farm bills. The Senate’s president pro tempore, Leahy is the most senior member of that body.

In his opening remarks to the committee, Leahy stressed that this legislation sets much more than farm policy.

“This is not only a farm bill; it is a trade bill, a hunger bill, a conservation bill, a reform bill, an innovation bill, a deficit reduction bill and above all, a job creation bill,” Leahy said.

According to projections, the Senate version of the bill would cut $24 billion from the deficit and around $5-6 billion from the SNAP program. The House version would cut $39 billion from SNAP. Senate leaders and the White House have thus far opposed deep cuts to the SNAP program.

ANOTHER DEADLINE LOOMS

According to its legislative calendar, the Senate has 39 working days left this year. While Congress works to make up business postponed by the 16-day shutdown in October, it is uncertain if a new farm bill will be passed by the end of the year.

The clock is ticking for local dairy farmers. If Congress does not pass a new dairy program by Dec. 31 — be it the Dairy Stabilization Act as part of a new farm bill, or a standalone piece of legislation — the government will revert to a 1949 federal statute, the last time a permanent farm bill was passed.

Because farming methods were much less efficient then, the government would pay about double for milk than it did under the last farm bill. In theory, the cost of milk for consumers would skyrocket.

The previous USDA dairy support program, the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC), compensated dairy producers when milk prices fell below a certain level. It expired at the end of September.

Without this crucial safety net, farmers are left unprotected from volatile market swings. In 2009, the global demand for milk fell by just 5 percent, and milk prices dropped by nearly 50 percent.

“Farmers have not forgotten the dairy crisis of 2009 and they know that an insurance program alone is not enough,” Leahy said to his colleagues. “Without stabilization, we will cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of additional dollars and virtually guarantee another dairy crisis.”

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said a new farm bill is within reach, and that Congress is capable of meeting the Dec. 31 deadline.

“My hope is that the new farm bill will come as close as possible to the Senate version,” Welch said. “It came close to passing in the House Agriculture Committee.”

Welch said he believes there is bipartisan support for the Senate bill in his chamber. For the House to approve that measure, every Democrat and 16 Republicans would need to vote in favor of the bill.

“The challenge Mr. Boehner has is to rehabilitate Congress after the spectacle of the shutdown,” Welch said. “That may provide incentive for Republican leadership in the House to compromise.”

Welch reaffirmed his support for the Dairy Stabilization Act, but stopped short of saying he wouldn’t vote for the bill if the program were stripped from it.

“I want to get (the Dairy Stabilization Act), and I’m going to work hard to get it,” Welch said. “But if we don’t get it, the question becomes what is the best alternative safety net can we get?”

SNAP CUTS TAKE EFFECT

As of this past June, more than 100,000 Vermonters were participating in the SNAP program, accounting for 16 percent of residents in the state. According to research by the USDA, 14 percent of Vermont households are food insecure, meaning they cannot afford to fulfill their daily nutritional need.

Welch and Nelson said they believe cuts to the SNAP program will be the biggest obstacle for the conference committee to surmount.

“Sen. Sanders will not support a farm bill that makes hunger worse,” Nelson said.

Already, the SNAP program has become another casualty of Congressional inaction. A $42.5 billion increase in SNAP benefits that was authorized in 2009 to meet growing demand for the program expired Nov. 1, resulting in a 6 percent decrease for recipients across the board.

“The vast majority of SNAP recipients are children and the elderly poor,” Welch said. “We’re still dealing with the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression, and a 6 percent cut means a family will have $30-40 less a month.” ..Source.. by Zach Despart

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Food stamp stimulus money expires, benefits cut 5.5 percent

Another factor in recent (11-1-2013) cuts in food stamps.

11-3-2013 Washington DC:

At midnight (10-31), federal taxpayer stimulus money that was approved in 2009 for food stamps in response to the recession expired. The expiration cuts monthly distributions by 5.5 percent.

For a mother with two children, the reduction means about $29 less per month. For a family of four, it’s a cut of about $36 a month, to $632.

The cuts will increase pressure on food banks and food pantries, which have seen record demand since the recession and tepid recovery, according to Juliana Chase-Morefield, executive director of Second Harvest Food Bank of North Central Ohio. About 44,000 of the 1.8 million Ohioans receiving food stamps are in Lorain County. In June, 34,000 people used food pantries served by Second Harvest, she said.

Many are food-stamp recipients who use pantries when their food stamps run out. Chase-Morefield, who has been involved with food assistance since 1998, said anxiety among those running food banks and pantries is the highest she’s seen.

“We don’t have endless supplies of food,” Chase-Morefield said. “We wish we did.”

Chase-Morefield said for some, the cuts may mean choosing between whether their children eat or rent is paid. About half those using food stamps are children and about 41 percent work or are in households where someone works, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs the program.

The reduction comes in the wake of cuts in food stamp eligibility and funding. In January, able-bodied people between 18 and 50 without children not working 20 hours per week or enrolled in a job training program will be cut off from food stamps in 72 counties, including Lorain County.

In September, the Republican-majority House of Representatives passed a bill cutting food stamps by $39 billion between 2014 and 2023. The 5-percent cut would reduce the number of food-stamp recipients from 48 million to 34 million by 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

One of those voting yes was U.S. Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Lakeville, who represents a portion of Lorain County. Gibbs said he expects a compromise bill being negotiated in a House-Senate conference committee will be completed by year’s end.

The Democratic-majority Senate bill cut food stamps $4 billion. Gibbs said he expects the final cut will be between $10 billion and $20 billion. “The people who need it are going to get it and not people that are abusing the system,” he said.

While Gibb’s cited “quite a few reports of abuse,” the USDA said just 1 percent of benefits involve fraud, down from about 4 percent in 1993. Gibbs said food stamp cuts reduce the deficit predicted by CBO to drop to $642 billion this year, the lowest since 2008. Nonetheless, the cutting has received bipartisan criticism.

“There seems to be a war on the poor,” Gov. John Kasich told The New York Times on Monday. “If you’re poor, somehow you’re shiftless and lazy.”

U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Toledo, called the cuts “unforgivable” saying they will hit children and the elderly particularly hard.

“I can’t think of a more cruel act than to take food away from people,” said Kaptur, who represents Lorain. “It’s as low as it gets.”

Kaptur and Chase-Morefieldurged Republicans who voted for cuts to visit a food pantry to better understand clients’ needs.

“It sounds easy on paper to cut money out of food stamps,” Chase-Morefield said. “But these aren’t numbers. These are real people.” ..Source.. by Evan Goodenow

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Federal Food Stamp Program To Lose $5 Billion In Funding Starting Today

11-1-2013 Washington DC:

Emily Edwards works full time and makes $1,000 a month but after rent and utilities there is little left, so Emily and her five-year-old rely on food stamps.

“That’s how I feed my son, how I feed myself and my $358 in food stamps doesn’t even last a whole month,” said Emily Edwards.

The 2009 stimulus act that initially increased food stamp benefits expires this November, reducing the amount of money that the 1.8 million residents in Pennsylvania will get. For Emily and her son, that could be about a hundred dollars less for food.

“I will have to resort to getting more canned food than fresh food because fresh food costs more,” said Edwards.

The Edwards family is not alone. Millions are affected nationally including families, seniors, children and veterans. In Pennsylvania alone, there are 766,000 children who depend on the food stamp program. Many of their schools provide snacks for kids, but that’s not enough. Emily Edwards says she is turning to food banks for help and worries hundreds of others will do the same.

“It becomes really difficult to go to pantries because even the pantries don’t have food now,” said Edwards.

Congressman Bob Brady says more needs to be done.

“As elected officials we’re supposed to help and we’re hurting the people we should be helping.”

The Congressman says he wants to help those in need but urges constituents to reach out to their leaders.

“It’s wrong and I have to fight that to try to see how much we can do to try to change this,” said Congressman Brady.

There are now several members of Congress working to extend SNAP, or the food stamp program, for another year.

Currently, Congress is considering a farm bill that could eliminate up to $40 billion in funding which could mean some families would get cut from the program all together over the next decade. ..Source.. by Ileana Diaz

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

The next food stamp crisis is about to hit

15% of the US Gets Food Stamps. Click for interactive map.

10-21-2013 Washington DC:

If you've been following the food stamp debate in Washington, you know it's about whether to cut food stamp benefits for the disadvantaged by $4 billion a year (the House proposal) or only $400 million a year (the Senate plan).

Here's what you may not know: By its pure inaction, Congress is about to impose a cut in food stamp benefits that beats both. Next week, on Nov. 1, benefits will be cut by $5 billion for this fiscal year alone.

That number may be hard to grasp, but here's what it means on the ground. It means a loss of 21 meals a month for a family of four on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP (the formal name for food stamps). About 47 million Americans will be affected by the coming 15% reduction in benefits across the board.

Sounds like a crisis needing immediate relief, doesn't it? Not to our Congress. "Congress would have to take action, and there's no pending legislation to do that," said Dorothy Rosenbaum, a SNAP expert at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Even if there was, time is obviously tight. The lawmakers only come back to work on Tuesday, having taken a long weekend to recover from their horrific workload during the, er, government shutdown. (Posturing for the TV cameras in front of the shuttered World War II Memorial takes a lot out of you, don't you know.)

The coming benefit cut is the perverse result of the fiscal stimulus legislation of 2009, followed by a couple of other stimulus measures enacted later. The 2009 stimulus measure increased monthly food stamp benefits by about $20 to $25 per month as a spur to economic recovery. For an eligible family of four, the increase of just over $80 a month raised the maximum benefit to $668, from $584.

The idea was that the increase would fade away over time, as inflation increases brought the basic benefit up to that $668 level. The original estimate was that the increase would be completely eaten away by late 2014.

But Congress accelerated the sunset. In 2010, lawmakers moved up the expiration date to April 2014 to help pay for the Education Jobs Act, which raised federal funding for school districts to keep teachers on the job. Four months later, Congress moved up the expiration further, to this Oct. 31, to pay for the reauthorization of child nutrition programs. That's known as taking away with one hand what you give with the other, and it's where things stand today. ..Continued.. by Michael Hiltzik

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Senate reappoints Farm Bill conferees

10-14-2013 Washington DC:

The U.S. House sent the bill that combined its farm program and nutrition bills to the Senate Monday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid followed Tuesday with a request for a conference committee to resolve the differences between the House bill and the Senate version. He also named Senate conferees - reappointing the seven Democrats and five Republicans first named in August.

The Democrats are Senate Ag Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Max Baucus of Montana, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Michael Bennet of Colorado.

The Republicans include Ag Ranking Member Thad Cochran, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, John Boozman of Arkansas and John Hoeven of North Dakota.

All 12 are members of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Stabenow believes the conference should occur quickly - saying there’s no reason they can’t sit down this month and get it done. According to Stabenow - there’s no excuse not to get it done.

Stabenow admits the nutrition title could be difficult - as the House plan to cut 39-billion dollars from food stamps over 10 years is not even close to what the Senate would accept. Stabenow says she wants to do everything to make sure nutrition is accountable - but also wants to find savings without playing with people’s lives.

Another difference between the House and Senate is that the House bill reauthorizes nutrition programs for three years and the farm program for five years. That - if kept in the conference report - could set the programs on a permanent path of separation. U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack says decoupling the farm program from nutrition programs would mean the House would not pass a farm program.

He says the farm program and food stamps were put together in one bill to provide food for the hungry, increase consumption of food, stabilize farm income, create economic activity and provide a reason for urban members of Congress to vote for the farm bill. The Agriculture Secretary says separating the two is bad policy for farmers in his view. ..Source.. by KXLO Radio, Lewistown MT

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Roby to Serve on Farm Bill Conference Committee

10-14-2013 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today named U.S. Representative Martha Roby (R-AL) to serve on the conference committee charged with negotiating a final agreement on the Farm Bill.

The House and Senate passed different versions of the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act, commonly known as the Farm Bill, leading to a conference committee of lawmakers from both bodies to work out the differences. Rep. Roby, who serves on the House Committee on Agriculture and has championed reforms to farm and food stamp policy, said she was honored to be chosen for the task.

“For almost three years we’ve been working on a new Farm Bill that would meet this country’s agricultural and economic needs while enacting long-needed reforms to farm and food stamp policy. I’m pleased that the process is moving forward,” Rep. Roby said. “Not passing a Farm Bill is simply unacceptable, and though the House and Senate versions are very different, I’m hopeful we can find common ground.

“Agriculture is Alabama’s top industry, and I understand the need to pass a long-term Farm Bill to provide our farmers the certainty they deserve. However, we must ensure the bill contains the kind of reforms that shows Congress is serious about changing the culture of spending and government dependence.”

Rep. Roby will serve alongside fellow Alabama-delegation and Agriculture Committee Member Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL). Alabama Farmer’s Federation President Jimmy Parnell said having two Members of Congress from Alabama serving on the Farm Bill conference committee gives the state a significant voice in ensuring strong farm policy.

“We are proud to have two members of Alabama’s congressional delegation serving on this important committee,” Parnell said. “U.S. Reps. Mike Rogers and Martha Roby are strong supporters of Alabama agriculture. They understand the urgent need to pass a farm bill, so farmers can make planting and financial decisions. We appreciate their work to provide long-term stability for farmers in a way that’s fiscally responsible.”

Additional Republican House Members selected to serve on the Farm Bill Conference Committee are:

Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-OK), Chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture
Rep. Steve King (R-IA)
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R-TX)
Rep. Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-PA)
Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA)
Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR)
Rep. Kristi Noem (R-SD)
Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA)
Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL)
Rep. Steve Southerland (R-FL)
Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA)
Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA)
Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI)
Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) ..Source.. by WTVY.com

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

ACTION ALERT: One version of the Farm Bill is going to be consider by the US House next week

10-12-2013 Washington DC:

Folks may remember my earlier post about all the different versions of the Farm Bill floating around in Congress (See HERE if you want to read that).

Well the US House has decided to consider ONE version next week: HR-2642 and -as written right now- if passed it will deny certain sex offenders Food Stamps if they apply for them. However, this version is NOT RETROACTIVE (the House recently removed the retroactive portion from this version. Confusing, yes), so it would only affect certain sex offenders with conviction dates -in the future-, assuming it passes as written today (See version 5 on the Thomas website).

So I think it best to keep the pressure on your US Representatives in Congress, asking them to REMOVE that section from the Farm Bill. In HR-2642 that section is titled "SEC. 4037. ELIGIBILITY DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR CERTAIN CONVICTED FELONS."

Just remember the nation needs a new Farm Bill, but without that particular section. So, e-mail, write and call your Reps. Right now that is the best we can suggest, and get your family members to do the same.

For now have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Farm Bill extension expires at midnight (Sex Offenders v Price of Milk)

Whats Happening with the Farm Bills in Congress?

9-30-2013 Washington DC:

At midnight tonight the temporary extension of the Farm Bill expires. Iowa Farm Bureau president Craig Hill is among the many residents of farm country who’re finding it difficult to read the signals of congress.

“I can’t tell you whether they will try another extension — we can’t support another extension — or whether they’ll have a stop-gap measure and continue to kick the can down the road,” Hill says.

The most immediate impact of the Farm Bill’s demise will come with the October shut down of programs that promote the sale of U.S. farm commodities overseas. In addition, Hill says the U.S. will be accused of trade violations when it comes to the cotton market and country-of-origin labeling.

“Both of those could be resolved with the new reform bill,” Hill says. “Avoid having that, we kind of disrupt our ability to be a good partner in trade, as well as many of our export enhancement programs — our Market Access Program and other programs — that will lack funding and so long-term we will adversely impact our ability to trade.”

There’s uncertainty for farmers hoping to do conservation projects this fall, like build terraces in fields once the harvesting is done. This comes just as the Iowa Farm Bureau and other groups have begun to urge farmers to take such steps to avoid soil erosion and farm chemical run-off into Iowa waterways.

“Without conservation funding and authorization the CSP program, the CRP program, a number of the things that we use as stewards won’t be available to us and we won’t be able to plan for those tools,” Hill says, “also disrupting our ability to help retain soil and have a safer water supply.”

It’s hard to put a dollar value on the overall financial impact of the impasse in congress, but there is one certainty: if congress doesn’t act by January 1, the price of a gallon of milk is going to more than double. That’s because the price supports for milk will revert to 1949 levels.

“On the farm, that means $39 a hundredweight (of milk) as opposed to $18 a hundredweight today,” Hill says. “That will be unacceptable by consumers and I think politicians will again take notice to that.”

If congress fails to fix the problem, milk prices will rise above $6 a gallon. It was that prospect which helped lead congress to pass an eight-month extension of the Farm Bill last December. By the way, there are about 12 gallons in a hundredweight of milk, which is the measurement dairy farms use when milk is sold. ..Source.. by O. Kay Henderson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

House approves contentious bill to cut food stamp program

US House Bill HR-3102 introduced on 9-16-2013 includes provision to deny Food Stamps to certain sex offenders and others, and was passed by the US House on 9-19-2013. Bill includes provision which WILL EFFECT INCOME of FAMILY of sex offender, living with sex offender, reducing the family's benefits.

9-21-2013 Washington DC:

Washington — The U.S. House narrowly approved a contentious bill Thursday to cut the nation's food stamp program by roughly $39 billion over 10 years.

Wisconsin Democrats warned that thousands of the state's poorest would be kicked off its rolls; state Republicans embraced it as a path to much-needed reforms.

Approved by a vote of 217-210, the House bill is expected to revive a beleaguered effort to pass a multiyear farm bill even as key Democrats pledged it would not survive a conference with the Senate. Wisconsin's delegation split along party lines with Republican Reps. Paul Ryan, Tom Petri, James Sensenbrenner, Sean Duffy and Reid Ribble voting yes, and Democratic Reps. Gwen Moore, Mark Pocan and Ron Kind voting no.

Ryan dismissed concerns by some that the bill's cuts and changes went too far.

"Anybody who needs food stamps will get food stamps," he said, adding the program not only grew quickly but went beyond its original purpose to allow those who should not qualify to become eligible.

Ryan singled out for criticism the waivers some states have received that boosted their rolls. "It is harmful to upward social mobility to waive work requirements," he said.

Ryan said the integrity of such safety-net programs should be maintained so they will be available to those who really need the temporary assistance.

Asked about concerns that the cuts proposed in the House bill — roughly 10 times what has been approved in the Senate — are too much to ask, he compared the effort on food stamps to the one that led to welfare reform in the 1990s under then-President Bill Clinton and a Republican-controlled Congress. That effort, Ryan recalled, required multiple votes.

Still, he conceded the effort on food stamps, now known as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, faces an uphill fight.

"At the end of the day, we can make the moral case for welfare reform just like we did in the late 1990s," Ryan said.

Concerning the size of the cuts, Petri said they may look large to some, but not when compared with the amount being spent on the program. He said the cuts also may not be as big after the waivers on work requirements expire.

Kevin Moore, deputy secretary for Wisconsin's Department of Health Services, said the legislation aligns closely with Gov. Scott Walker's commitment to reduce waste, fraud and abuse as well as ensure that the state's safety net program remains in place for the most vulnerable citizens.

He noted that the state is already moving forward with implementing one provision included in the House bill. Walker invested nearly $17 million in state funds for worker training for able-bodied adults without dependent children who receive FoodShare Benefits. The state has informed the federal government it intends to enforce the work-training requirements beginning next year.

In contrast, Gwen Moore described the bill's proposed cuts as harmful and the vote to approve it as shameful.

"Once again, instead of working to help struggling Americans, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle chose to cater to the minority within their party," she said. "Over 47 million people rely on this vital lifeline each year. The Republican bill could cut approximately 4 million from nutritional assistance."

In Wisconsin, Gwen Moore said, that figure could be more than 150,000, including 4,000 children.

Pocan called the bill extreme, adding it would force more Wisconsinites into hunger while putting less money into the state economy.

Kind described the bill as dangerous and said Congress should find a better way to pass a farm bill. "That's why I'm continuing to lead the fight to rein in wasteful subsidies that favor big agribusiness over family farmers," he said.

It remained unclear how conferees will be able to bridge the funding gap in food stamps between the House and Senate bills.

Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, all but guaranteed conferees will produce a final product, but Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), the panel's ranking member, expressed serious doubts, especially given tight deadlines and the other issues facing Congress. ..Source.. by Jim Myers

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...