Don't Cut Food Stamps, Senators Urge Farm Bill Conferees

[Indi Guy]

Source: Huffington Post



Congressional negotiators should reject food stamp cuts, a coalition of liberal senators urged Monday.

Republicans and Democrats from the House and Senate are meeting this week in a conference committee to hammer out differences between agriculture and nutrition legislation passed by the two chambers this year. Last month the House of Representatives approved a Republican bill to cut food stamp spending by 5 percent, or $40 billion over a decade. The Senate previously passed a bill that would trim the program by only $4 billion.

Liberal senators, led by Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), urged committee members to reject House Republicans' stricter eligibility standards for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in a Monday letter. Nearly 4 million fewer Americans would qualify for nutrition assistance under the House bill.

"While we support efforts to improve the integrity of the SNAP program, we encourage conferees to reject all SNAP eligibility changes designed to erect new barriers to participation, preventing millions of seniors, children and families from accessing food assistance," the senators wrote. "The eligibility changes also will mean an additional 280,000 children would lose free school meals because children in SNAP households are automatically eligible for school meals."...

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/28/food-stamp-cuts_n_4171569.html

---

Man, the Grumpy Old Party doesn't even try to appear concerned with the well being of Americans anymore.

These "conservatives" won't be satisfied until they're the only ones supported by the state.

[cstanleytech]

1. I wouldnt object to a cut to food stamps really

if the money cut was diverted to a program to assist in setting up sustainable neighborhood gardens that assisted people in growing their own food, that way people have a bit more access to fresh produce plus it saves money in the long run because the people are growing some of themselves.

[questionseverything]

2. as someone that volunteered all last summer

in a community garden i can tell you gardens only supplement meals for about 2 months out of the year at most

[newfie11]

3. +1. Nt

[cstanleytech]

12. Of course they are limited and its why I wouldnt support abolishing the program

however if such a system that is sustainable could be setup it might help both to save money in the long run not to mention it helps provide food thats more healthy for people atleast for part of the year and dont forget there is the potential option of canning and extra food for use later in the year.

[questionseverything]

16. the benefit is already less than 1.50 a meal

the idea that you would reduce the benefit / limit number of those that qualify is just wrong

adding more funding for community gardens is great but do not expect it to be a "fix"

canning is difficult ,expensive and there was nothing left at the end anyways as the food pantries gobbled up the produce

[cstanleytech]

18. Odd, I didnt consider it diffucult to can food once I learned it but anyways

my point is still if they want to redirect the money into programs that in the end still help feed people that I probably wouldnt object.

[questionseverything]

19. a pint jar is over 2 bucks

plus the seed,watering time involved

you have taken a 59 cent can of green beans and made it a buck fifty nine

fresh is better but this gardening idea is not practical to feed masses of people

[cstanleytech]

20. True if it was purely a one shot deal however I am speaking of a sustainable setup

which takes time to build up.
And sure things like jars are pricey at first but they have the benefit of being able to be used more than once if properly cared for.

[questionseverything]

21. i love gardening,i do not want to be arguing against it's

benefits but you are just not being realistic

poor people move so often they can not keep their id s current enough to vote but you think those jars are gonna be returned?

you are not considering the cost of the land at all...reclaiming abandoned buildings sounds great but someone owns that land,maybe the bank.maybe the city...and the first thing that would need to be done is digging out the concrete and hauling it away..so you are starting out like 20-30 grand in the hole

gardening funds in addition to food stamps are a great idea,using it as an excuse to lower food stamps benefits is wrong from a practical point of view and a moral point of view

[cstanleytech]

22. Personally I dont care who owns the land they can suck it up if they are allowing

a building to get so run down that its literally falling down and the roof has caved in, thats the type of building I am refereeing to.
And hey the other benefit of this would be that a major eyesore is gone and those things literally turn off people from investing or moving into areas.

[azurnoir]

4. something many people seem not to know but seeds and bedding plants for food

can be purchased with food stamps

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/retailers/eligible.htm

[JI7]

8. people on food stamps usually don't have time for that

[Indi Guy]

10. Nor do they usually have a place to plant crops. n/t

[cstanleytech]

13. Which is why I advocate the reclaiming of land that has abandoned buildings.

If they arent being used anyway why not put the land to use?

[questionseverything]

17. one of the projects we did in my town

was showing folks from the projects "bucket planting"

tomatoes and peppers can be grown in 5 gallon buckets next to the front door.....I am not suggesting this can take the place of food stamps but for those that tried it ,it was a nice addition to their meals

[freshwest]

5. ' These "conservatives" won't be satisfied until they're the only ones supported by the state.'

That should be repeated over and over...

[Dragonfli]

6. They have already reduced SNAP benefits beginning Nov 1 2013 (by approx 5.5% )

That wasn't enough for the Republicans and blue dogs?

[CatholicEdHead]

7. Tea Party Republicans would prefer Food Stamps to be at 0%

You know for all the Cadillac Welfare cases out there.

[Dragonfli]

9. Of course they do, but why do Democrats compromise in order to help them

reach their goal one cut at a time?

That 5.5% reduction was not an R solo project, and from what I hear the Democratic compromise position currently in the Senate seeks to cut it even more when/if passed. A position I find indefensible.

[Indi Guy]

11. Excellent choice of words. It is indefensible...

...that one inch of ground was given to the Grumpy Old Party on this issue.

[beerandjesus]

14. How sick is it that they need to be "urged"??

And FUCK all the hand-wringing about "improving the integrity of the system". I tell people if the fraud rate were 60%, rather than the 1% or so it actually is, I'd still completely support the program, because it's more important that we feed those 40% than that we "teach" some kind of "moral" "lesson" to the ones gaming the system.

[Indi Guy]

15. The Republican pols have lost all moral authority.

Most of them don't even pretend to care about the less fortunate anymore.