The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“WHO WILL BE HARMED BY THE FARM BILL” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H3579-H3581 on April 26, 2018.
The Department is primarily focused on food nutrition, with assistance programs making up 80 percent of its budget. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, said the Department implements too many regulations and restrictions and impedes the economy.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
WHO WILL BE HARMED BY THE FARM BILL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for 5 minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, last week after turning their backs on bipartisanship, Republicans on the Agriculture Committee advanced a highly partisan farm bill that hurts our most vulnerable constituents. The farm bill cuts the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, by over $23 billion. It eliminates State flexibility. It erects new barriers to assessing the program and creates a massive new untested and underfunded bureaucracy.
Most troubling, the bill reduces or eliminates benefits for nearly 2 million kids, veterans, working families, and other vulnerable adults. The bill was drafted in secret and is not reflective of the 23 hearings that our committee held on SNAP over the past 2\1/2\ years. In fact, I am having a difficult time determining where some of these controversial provisions originated.
Were they cooked up at some far-rightwing think tank? Did they come from some outlier in the Trump administration? Were they the creation of Speaker Ryan, who is desperate to pass his extreme welfare reform agenda before he retires at the end of this Congress? This secretive, closed process has left me with more questions than I have answers, Mr. Speaker. It is awful. And it is not the way the people's House should operate. It is not fair to our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, last week I came to the House floor and outlined some of the most troubling provisions Chairman Conaway and House Republicans insisted on including in this bill. Today I would like to take a few minutes to share with my colleagues who will be harmed if this reckless proposal is allowed to advance.
Provisions in the Republican farm bill specifically target millions of older adults, over the age of 50, who rely on SNAP to put food on the table when times are tough. While SNAP law already includes strict work requirements and time limits, House Republicans are now seeking to completely cut off assistance for people who are unable to find work or a suitable job training program, and they are doing this without a serious plan that would actually help them find work. It is a rotten thing to do.
To make matters worse, Republicans are extending these mandatory work requirements to people up to the age of 60. The AARP, our country's leading voice for those over 50, has cautioned Chairman Conaway and Republicans in Congress that it is particularly difficult for individuals over 50 to find consistent work. In a letter to our committee, AARP's senior vice president for government affairs, Joyce Rogers, said this bill could
``increase food insecurity and likely have negative consequences on health.''
Mr. Speaker, this damaging mandatory work proposal does not just impact older Americans; it extends to other groups as well. For example, under this bill, thousands of veterans would lose access to SNAP benefits if they can't find work or a job training program. Veterans, Mr. Speaker, men and women who have put their lives on the line for us. The least we could do--the very least--is ensure that they have access to modest food benefits when they fall upon hard times.
Among the other vulnerable adults who will be subjected to mandatory work requirements are teenagers just aging out of foster care, people with underlying mental health issues, chronically homeless individuals, and ex-offenders with nowhere else to turn. Are these the people we want to be turning our backs on, Mr. Speaker? Their lives are already challenging. This Republican Congress should not be making it more difficult for them to survive.
Other provisions in this terrible bill target working families with kids. The bill eliminates an important provision that provides States with the flexibility to raise income cutoffs and ease asset limits. Taking away this State option cuts 400,000 eligible households--900,000 adults and kids--off of SNAP and takes free school meals away from 265,000 kids.
Sadly, this bill also limits access to benefits for people with disabilities. It imposes new paperwork requirements on SNAP recipients with out-of-pocket utility costs, placing more burdens on those living with disabilities. While there appear to be some exceptions to the burdensome work requirements I noted earlier for people with disabilities, many others who may not meet the statutory definition, who have not yet been identified, would be cut off of assistance.
That is why the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities sent our committee a letter strongly opposing this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the letters from AARP and the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities.
AARP Real Possibilities,
Washington, DC, April 17, 2018.Hon. K. Michael Conaway,Chairman, House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC.Hon. Collin C. Peterson,Ranking Member, House of Representatives, Committee on
Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Conaway & Ranking Member Peterson: On behalf of our members and all Americans age 50 and older, I am writing to urge you to modify H.R. 2, the Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018, to avoid the negative impact the current bill would have on the millions of Americans, including older Americans, who rely on the Supplementation Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). AARP, with its nearly 38 million members in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories, is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, nationwide organization that strengthens communities and fights for the issues that matter most to families such as health care, employment and income security, retirement planning, affordable utilities and protection from financial abuse.
The changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) included in H.R. 2 will put at risk the critical food and nutrition assistance for 43 million Americans who depend on this program. In 2016, 8.7 million SNAP households had at least one adult age 50 or older. As we stated in a letter sent to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on April 10, 2018, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a critical part of the safety net available to low-income families, including many older Americans and people with disabilities. It has been shown that participating in SNAP can lead to improvements in a household's food security status, especially for those with very low food security.
Categorical eligibility is essential to improving access to SNAP for low-income Americans of all ages and must be protected, as was done in the last farm bill. Categorical eligibility advances the goals of simplifying administration, easing entry to the program for eligible households, emphasizing coordination among low-income assistance programs, and reducing the potential for errors in establishing eligibility for benefits. Individuals who have already undergone determinations for programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TAN F) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) bypass the income and resource tests and have their SNAP benefits approved. This streamlined process leads to individuals receiving their SNAP benefits faster and reduces the number of individuals who may be facing hunger.
Most individuals who receive SNAP benefits and are required to work already do work. Unfortunately, those individuals who are not working are likely to have chronic health conditions, which prevent them from holding employment. Over 1.7 million low-income older workers have a health difficulty. Expanding work requirements for SNAP would be especially burdensome for older workers ages 50-59. Workers ages 50 and older typically take longer than younger workers to find employment after being unemployed. Denying individual's access to SNAP benefits for up to three years for not being able to comply with tougher work requirements could increase food insecurity and likely have negative consequences on health. One recent study showed how healthcare and food insecurity causes are inexorably linked, finding the risk for hospital admissions for low blood sugar spike 27 percent in the last week of the month as compared to the first week of the month when food and SNAP budgets of low-income populations have often been exhausted.
We urge you, as this bill heads into mark-up, to protect the critical assistance that SNAP provides and preserve the program's ability to carry out its important mission in providing nutrition to America's vulnerable populations. We ask you to work in a bipartisan manner, bringing all perspectives to the table, and prioritizing the needs of the individuals being served. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to me.
Sincerely,
Joyce A. Rogers,Senior Vice President, Government Affairs.
____
Consortium for Citizens
with Disabilities,
Washington, DC, April 17, 2018.Re H.R. 2, Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018 (Farm Bill)
Hon. K. Michael Conaway,Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC.Hon. Collin C. Peterson,Ranking Member, House Committee on Agriculture, Washington,
DC.
Dear Chairman Conaway and Ranking Member Peterson: On behalf of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Poverty Ad Hoc Task Force, we urge you to continue the longstanding bipartisan commitment to protect and strengthen the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by rejecting proposals to restrict eligibility, reduce benefits, cap or reduce funding, or make harmful structural changes to SNAP in the Farm Bill.
CCD is the largest coalition of national organizations working together to advocate for federal public policy that ensures the self-determination, independence, empowerment, integration and inclusion of children and adults with disabilities in all aspects of society.
In the United States, all too often food insecurity and disability go together. Families that include people with disabilities are two to three more likely to experience food insecurity than families that have no members with disabilities. Similarly, people experiencing food insecurity have increased likelihood of chronic illness and disability.
SNAP is vitally important for people with disabilities and their families. By increasing access to adequate, nutritious food SNAP plays a key role in reducing hunger and helping people with disabilities to maximize their health and participate in their communities.
Using an inclusive definition of ``disability,'' in 2015 an estimated 11 million people with disabilities of all ages received SNAP, representing roughly one in four SNAP participants.
Roughly 4.4 million households with non-elderly adults with disabilities received SNAP in 2016.
Non-elderly adults with disabilities who receive SNAP have very low incomes, averaging only about $12,000 per year in 2016.
SNAP benefits are extremely modest, averaging $187 per month for non-elderly people with disabilities in 2016--or just $6 per day.
Existing SNAP time limits are harsh, unfair, and harm many people with disabilities and their families by cutting off essential food assistance. Federal law currently limits SNAP eligibility for adults between the ages of 18 to 49 without dependents to just three months out of every three years--unless they can engage in work or job training activities at least half time, or qualify for an exemption. These provisions cut off food assistance at a time when people need it most and do not result in increased employment and earnings. At least 500,000 low-income individuals nationwide lost SNAP in 2016 due to this time limit.
Many people with disabilities are already hurt by SNAP time limits, despite existing exemptions for people who receive governmental or private benefits on the basis of a disability or are able to document that they are ``physically or mentally unfit for employment.'' For example, in a study of SNAP participants subject to time limits referred to participate in work activities in Franklin County, Ohio, one-third reported a ``physical or mental limitation''.
Cutting off food assistance from SNAP would only make it harder for people to work and increase their economic self-sufficiency. We strongly oppose any action that would cut off or reduce SNAP benefits, narrow eligibility, or force more people to navigate harsh and unnecessary program rules, including people with disabilities and their families.
In particular, we are concerned that the draft Farm Bill released last week includes a number of provisions that would harm people with disabilities and their families. Small increases in the proposed bill are insufficient to make up for significant benefit reductions.
New work requirements with highly punitive rules would cut off SNAP benefits for many people--including in families with children, adults, and seniors with disabilities. It may seem simple to assert that ``people with disabilities will be exempt,'' but converting such a statement into an effective policy process is complicated, expensive, and fundamentally flawed. Many people with disabilities receive SNAP, but do not meet SNAP's statutory definitions of ``disability'' or have not been so identified. Under SNAP, states have no obligation to help people prove they are exempt, even if they have difficulty obtaining the necessary records or verification from a doctor. In addition, states are under no obligation to ensure that people with disabilities have access to the full array of services they might need to work--such as accessible transportation, supported employment, and personal care aid services. People with disabilities often want to work, but need additional supports and services to obtain and keep jobs, in addition to facing discrimination and misconceptions about their ability to work.
Underfunded work programs would be woefully inadequate to meet training needs. Proposed new investments in SNAP employment and training programs--funded in large part by benefit cuts--amount to only about $30 per person per month. This amount would be grossly insufficient to provide adequate employment services for people subject to proposed new work requirements, including jobseekers with disabilities.
New reporting requirements would create major hurdles to benefits. Proposed new reporting requirements related to eligibility, employment and training, and time limits would be extremely difficult for many people with disabilities to navigate and comply with. For example, ending a decades-old simplification measure and instead requiring people to share utility bills with the SNAP office--or else, see their benefits reduced--is harsh, unnecessary, and burdensome both for SNAP participants and states.
If Congress wishes to explore meaningful opportunities for SNAP participants to increase self-sufficiency through employment, we recommend awaiting the results of the Employment & Training pilot projects authorized under the 2014 Farm Bill. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) awarded pilot grants in 2015, all 10 state programs are operational, and evaluation activities will operate through 2021. Already, a number of pilot states have cited multiple barriers faced by participants, including ``health issues.'' It will be important for USDA and the evaluators to carefully explore the experiences and outcomes of people with disabilities and their families in these pilot programs. Congress should await the final pilot evaluations before considering any changes in these areas.
We call on you to reconsider proposals that would weaken SNAP's effectiveness as our nation's foremost anti-hunger program by limiting access, reducing benefits, and creating administrative hurdles. We urge all Members to vote no on the draft Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018 released last week, and instead to work on a bipartisan basis to strengthen and protect SNAP as part of the Farm Bill.
Sincerely,CCD Poverty Ad Hoc Task Force Co-Chairs:Lisa Ekman,
National Organization of Social Security Claimants' Representatives.Chris Rodriguez,
National Disability Institute.T.J. Sutcliffe,
The Arc of the United States.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I could spend hours pointing out the bad provisions in this bill, but I'll close by once again urging this Republican leadership to stop their attacks on those living in poverty. Pull this bill. Pull this awful bill.
Let's work together to craft a bipartisan farm bill that supports our farmers and our nutrition programs. Let's advance a bill that we can all be proud of. Negotiate a bipartisan bill. Stop insisting on this
$23 billion cut to SNAP benefits. Let's pass a good farm bill, not this partisan nightmare.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the Republican leadership in this Congress to join with us to end hunger now. Stop trying to make hunger worse. Let's join together and end hunger now. It is our moral imperative.
____________________
