The Incredible Bottomless Congress
Congress is now debating a farm bill. One of its provisions, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, better known as food stamps), is on the cutting block. The reason? As the number of Americans receiving food stamp aid jumped from 26 to 45 million between 2007 and 2011 because of the recession, and the cost to the federal government soared from $30 billion to $78 billion, a budget-cutting Congress has determined this program ripe for a trimming.
Senator Jeff Sessions,(R—Alabama) is leading the charge in that chamber. Here’s a quote from one of his speeches on the subject: Is the food stamp program, he asked, “encouraging people to look for ways to be productive and be responsible for their families? Or does it create dependency on a series of government programs?”
About three-quarters of the benefits in this program go to children, the disabled, the elderly. The kind of people the senator appears to think might be encouraged to be more productive and responsible if they have less to eat.
Taking food from the mouths of kids, the sickly, the old, as an act of tough love, while sparing the rich a miniscule tax hike so as not to upset Grover Norquist? What is one to say about such priorities? No simply stated negative judgment seems adequate to the perversity on view here.
Share This
“What is one to say about such priorities?”
Nothing that isn’t in serious violation of the posting rules of this blog.
OK, so 75% goes to elderly, children and disabled. That leaves 25% going somewhere else.
The bill provides for 500 billion of 5 years. Take out the 75% or 375 billion, that leaves 125 billion where some changes can occur.
Like direct payments to farmers even if they do not plant a crop which saves 5 billion per year, countercyclical target pricing cut which saves 1.5 billion per year, caps on subsities to farmers that make over $750,000 per year with caps at $50,000 for a farmer and $100,000 for a farmers and his wife, and caps the amount that taxpayers pay for corp insurance for farmers.
In addition, it reduces the number of federal programs from 23 to 13, consolidating programs and eliminating duplicated services, insures lottery winners have to report lottery winnings that could reduce benefits, eliminates liquor and tobacco stores from accepting stamps and makes other minor adjustments. All of these changes saves 4 billion a year.
So when attacking actual reductions, look at the detail before parroting the political talking points. It could be this country could save real money without hurting anyone much.
Remember that part of that other 25% includes people who have jobs.
Hi RP,
I’m glad you brought up this “other 25 percent” thing.
When a real reform of programs like SNAP is undertaken, the specific recipients who will no longer receive aid (or receive less aid) is clearly articulated. When you simply reduce the size of a program, however, in the real world the strong, the clever, the adept continue to benefit on what remains, while the truly needy suffer.
Aside from a few ridiculous specifics proposed by Republicans — like making it illegal for lottery winners to be in the program (all 12 or 13 of them), these are just straight forward budget cut proposals that will inevitably lead to suffering for many children, the sickly and the elderly. This is he way of things in the real world.
And utterly disgraceful.
@RP and largely in agreement with what Michael said, if the GOP was going to propose that stuff that would be great, but that’s not what they are doing. Its broad stroke stuff they are proposing. Also, I would like to add that of that 25%, I’m sure there are many able bodied people of working age that are actually in serious need of food assistance as well. We have quite a few Americans in the poverty range these days, and I’m not against giving help to those who need it, even if there are going to be some who abuse the system. If the GOP wants to reduce aid because they think people are bilking the system I would at least like to see them include some information as to what percentage of the program is being taken up by fraud. While no doubt there is some as there will always be those jerks who try to work the system, I’d need to see a case made that justified wholesale slashes before we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The jerks that are going to commit food stamp fraud are probably the same jerks that are going to commit voter fraud. It’s a vicious cycle and their number are legion.
Jeff Sessions is typical of republican “thinking” when it comes to programs helping people who genuinely need help. I continue to be amazed at the number of republicans who consider themselves Christian. If they had their way social security would be abandon and the elderly would go back to living lives of poverty just as they did before SS. Let them eat cake..
So let me get this right – starving children is OK, but increasing taxes on the rich isn’t? Have the Republicans been drinking funny Kool-aid?
Looking for something positive to say about congress.
I’ll let you know if I find anything.