[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 40 (Tuesday, April 8, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1302-H1303]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PREVENTING PRISONERS FROM BEING CONSIDERED PART OF HOUSEHOLD UNDER FOOD
STAMP ACT OF 1977
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 1000) to require States to establish a system to
prevent prisoners from being considered part of any household for
purposes of determining eligibility of the household for food stamp
benefits and the amount of food stamp benefits to be provided to the
household under the Food Stamp Act of 1977.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 1000
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. STATES REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH SYSTEM TO PREVENT
PRISONERS FROM BEING CONSIDERED PART OF ANY
HOUSEHOLD UNDER THE FOOD STAMP ACT OF 1977.
(a) In General.--Section 11(e)(20) of the Food Stamp Act of
1977 (7 U.S.C. 2020(e)(20)) is amended to read as follows:
``(20) that the State agency shall establish a system and
take action on a periodic basis--
``(A) to verify and otherwise assure that an individual
does not receive coupons in more than one jurisdiction within
the State; and
``(B) to verify and otherwise assure that an individual who
is officially detained in a correctional, detention, or penal
facility administered under Federal or State law is not
considered to be part of any household participating in the
food stamp program, except to the extent that the Secretary
determines that extraordinary circumstances have made it
impracticable for the State agency to obtain the information
necessary to do so.''.
(b) Penalty.--Section 11(g) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977
shall apply, in accordance with its terms, to any failure of
a State agency to comply with section 11(e)(20)(B) of such
Act.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 11(e)(8)(E) of the Food
Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2020(e)(8)(E)) is amended by
inserting ``or (20)(B)'' after ``(16)''.
(d) Application of Amendments.--The amendments made by this
section shall not apply with respect to certification periods
beginning before the end of the 1-year period that begins
with the date of the enactment of this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Oregon [Mr. Smith] and the gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs.
Clayton] each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Smith].
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. SMITH of Oregon asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1000, a
bill that requires States to establish a system to verify that
individuals detained in Federal, State, or county penal facilities are
not counted as household members for the purposes of determining
eligibility of the level of benefits in the Food Stamp Program.
On March 10, 1997, the General Accounting Office released a report
entitled, ``Food Stamps: Substantial Overpayments Result From Prisoners
Counted as Household Members.'' As a result, the General Accounting
Office estimates that $3.5 million in food stamp benefit overpayments
were made in the year 1995.
The Congressional Budget Office has analyzed H.R. 1000 and has
concluded requiring a verification system will reduce food stamp
benefit overpayments and save an estimated $6 million by fiscal year
2003. Although States and the Federal Government will incur a slight
cost to establish the verification system in fiscal year 1998, that
cost will be more than offset in subsequent years.
Based on the findings and conclusions of the General Accounting
Office, I believe that the verification system requirement of H.R. 1000
is a cost effective method of preventing prisoners from being counted
as members of food stamp households with a minimum burden or
inconvenience on food stamp recipients and States. Additionally,
requiring this verification will identify and reduce program fraud and
increase the collection of benefit overpayments. I urge my colleagues
to support H.R. 1000.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I have been a tireless advocate along with
many of my colleagues in fighting hunger in the United States. The bill
before us today is aimed at helping to ensure that the funds allocated
by the Federal Government for the food stamp program actually go to
feed those who are hungry.
In fiscal year 1995, USDA issued over $22 billion in benefits. Some
26 million Americans were helped by these funds. Congress passed
legislation last year to cut the food stamp program by $23 million
through the year 2002. So the total appropriation for fiscal year 1997
is $23.3 billion, $1 billion less than they were in fiscal year 1996,
which was $24.3 billion.
This bill, H.R. 1000, is designed to ensure that we concentrate those
declining resources to make sure that those who are in actual need get
that help.
Although the Food Stamp Act automatically disqualifies people who
were institutionalized from inclusion in participating households
because they receive meals during their sentences, oftentimes the food
stamp administrative agency is not notified that a member of a
household has been incarcerated.
A GAO audit recently published a report which found out of four
States studied for calendar 1995, California, Florida, New York, and
Texas, 12,138 inmates were included in household food stamp benefits,
resulting in an estimated $3.5 million that was not directed to needy
families.
H.R. 1000 will help prevent this from happening in the future as it
requires States to establish a system to verify that individuals
detained in Federal, State, and county penal institutions are not
counted as household members for the purpose specified by the Food
Stamp Program.
In fact, a database already exists for States to check. The Social
Security Administration maintains such a database, as it too is
required to check for inmates participation.
In addition, this legislation takes into account the needs of the
various States and permits them some flexibility. Mr. Speaker, I urge
every Member of this body to support this legislation as we consider it
under suspension of the rules, so that limited funds that we do have
allocated to the Food Stamp Program go actually to those who are
eligible and to those who are hungry.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume
to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Goodlatte], the chief sponsor of
this legislation.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the committee for
yielding me this time as well as for his strong support for this
legislation.
[[Page H1303]]
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1000, a bill I introduced to
require States to establish a system to verify that individuals
detained in Federal, State, city, or county penal facilities are not
counted as household members for purposes of determining eligibility or
the level of benefits in the Food Stamp Program.
The General Accounting Office recently released a report on its
review of prisoners counted as household members in the Food Stamp
Program. Currently, prisoners are not permitted to be included in food
stamp households or receive food stamp benefits, nor should they be.
Despite this prohibition, GAO's limited review discovered over 12,000
prison inmates who were included in food stamp households resulting in
$3.5 million in food stamp overpayments. The bill before the House
today requires States to set up a system to enforce the current
prohibition in the Food Stamp Act.
I believe that the GAO report identified a problem which is a
significant concern. I believe that public confidence and support of
the Food Stamp Program are undermined when a household receives a
higher level of food stamp benefits than an identically situated
household simply because the household receiving more food stamp
benefits is illegally counting an incarcerated individual as a member,
who is, after all, receiving three squares a day in the slammer.
This concern is furthered by GAO's conclusion that a cost effective
matching technique can be used to prevent this problem, but that many
States have not done so.
H.R. 1000 requires States to establish a system to verify that
individuals detained in Federal, State, or county penal facilities are
not counted as household members for purposes of determining
eligibility or the level of benefits in the Food Stamp Program.
H.R. 1000 allows States to avoid establishing a verification system
if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that extraordinary
circumstance have made it impractical for the State agency to obtain
the information necessary to establish such a system. I believe that
this exception should be invoked by the Secretary in rare and truly
extraordinary circumstances. An extraordinary circumstance would
include when a State does not have computerized records of its State or
county inmate population. Under such circumstances, the State could
have great difficulty establishing a verification system and the
Secretary may be justified in granting an exception. I would expect,
however, that in such circumstances the exception to be narrowly
tailored to address the specific situation.
If a State fails to comply with the requirements of this bill, the
penalty provisions of section 16(g) of the Food Stamp Act apply. This
provision provides the Secretary notify the State that it is in
noncompliance. If a State continues to fail to establish a verification
system, the Secretary may withhold a portion of the State's
administrative funds.
Under the Food Stamp Program, one-half of the State's administrative
costs are paid by the Federal Government. Additionally, the Secretary
may request the Attorney General to seek an injunction ordering a State
to establish a verification system.
The Food Stamp Act requires that States attempt to collect
overpayments made to food stamp households. As an incentive to States,
each State retains a portion of the overpayments its collects. States
retain 35 percent of overpayment collections resulting from intentional
program violations and 20 percent of overpayment collections resulting
from recipient error. By identifying overpayments that have previously
gone undetected, the verification system required by H.R. 1000 will
enhance each State's abilities to identify and collect overpayments.
Because States retain a portion of these collections, any increase
results in additional funds for the States, clearly making this not an
unfunded mandate.
Finally, H.R. 1000 provides States with 1 year from the date of
enactment to comply with the provisions of this bill without risk of
penalty.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1000. It is an
important bill that deserves their attention and full support.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, food stamp rules make quite clear that
residents of most institutions are not eligible to participate in the
Food Stamp Program. Yet, according to GAO, thousands of prisoners are
being counted as members of food stamp households, resulting in those
households receiving more food stamps than they should. GAO has
recommended that the Food and Consumer Service encourage States to
implement periodic computer matches of data on State and local prison
inmates with data on food stamp participants.
H.R. 1000 goes several steps further than this recommendation. It
requires States to perform such periodic verifications and also
requires that the matches be not only of State and local prison inmates
but of Federal inmates as well. It includes a provision allowing the
Secretary of Agriculture to exempt from this requirement any State
having circumstances making it impractical to perform the matches, such
as a lack of a central computerized data base for its prison
population. States will have 1 year from the date of enactment to
comply with the new requirement.
Several States, such as Texas, already conduct such matches. Other
States have plans to begin conducting these matches in the future. This
bill will provide the impetus for most States to perform periodic
matches, thereby saving the taxpayers at least $1 million a year. It is
a good bill, and I urge your support of it.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Smith] that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 1000.
The question was taken.
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________