[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 31 (Tuesday, March 5, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1129-S1131]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ROBERTS (for himself, Mr. Thune, and Mr. Johanns):
  S. 458. A bill to improve and extend certain nutrition programs; to 
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, my colleagues, I rise today to introduce 
a bill that has a long title: Improve Nutrition Program Integrity and 
Deficit Reduction Act of 2013. Big title, but it is a good bill.
  Last June, I stood in this body, along with Chairperson Stabenow of 
the Agriculture Committee, to encourage my colleagues to pass 
bipartisan reform legislation known as the farm bill.
  The legislation we put together in the Senate Agriculture Committee 
would have strengthened and preserved the safety net for our farmers 
and ranchers while also being responsible to taxpayers by providing 
billions of dollars for deficit reduction. At the time we were told by 
the Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, that the farm bill passed by 
the Agriculture Committee, one of the first bills, by the way, that we 
were able to pass under regular order and in record amount of time, 
2\1/2\ days--the CBO estimated at that time the farm bill that was 
passed by the Agriculture Committee in the Senate would save $24 
billion over 10 years, including $4 billion from the nutrition title.
  However, according to the latest CBO projections, a projection that 
has reverberated in farm country, released just last Friday, the farm 
bill we passed last year would now only save $13 billion and no longer 
represents savings in the nutrition title. We could have done more last 
year, and we must do more this year to rein in the largest expenditure 
within the Department of Agriculture budget.
  No, it does not go to farmers. We are talking about specifically the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, called SNAP, more commonly 
known as food stamps.
  In the context of sequestration, SNAP was exempted from any across-
the-board cuts, along with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. It 
was in that pasture. A lot of other things were in different pastures, 
especially national security.
  However, it is clear there are several areas within the program that 
could provide significant savings that were, unfortunately, left 
untouched. The legislation I introduce today, along with Senator 
Johanns and Senator Thune, builds off of several amendments previously 
offered in a piecemeal fashion. We have wrapped them all together. Each 
should be enacted, but combined in this bill they represent over $36 
billion in savings.
  By eliminating loopholes, duplicative programs, unnecessary bonuses, 
inflation adjustments, and restricting lottery winners from receiving 
benefits, this legislation will instill and restore integrity to SNAP 
while still providing benefits to those truly in need. I ought to 
repeat that this restores integrity to SNAP while still providing 
benefits to those truly in need.
  I am not proposing a dramatic change in the policy of nutrition 
programs. Instead, this legislation enforces the principles of good 
government and returns SNAP spending to much more responsible levels. 
While saving over $36 billion, our legislation also makes commonsense 
and comprehensive reforms to SNAP, the Food Stamp Program, that can and 
should be enacted immediately.
  Over one-half of the SNAP food benefits in our country are utilized 
by households with children, and SNAP can play, and does play, a 
critical role in helping people put food on the table in times of need. 
However, at least 17 States, I am sorry to report, 17 States are gaming 
the system by designing their Low-Income Home Energy Assistance 
Program--the acronym for that is

[[Page S1130]]

LIHEAP, a very commonly used term with regards to nutrition programs 
and the energy programs. But these 17 States designed their programs to 
exploit the Food Stamp Program. This is not right. It is not right.
  The LIHEAP loophole works like this: A participating State agency 
annually issues extremely low LIHEAP benefits to qualify otherwise 
ineligible households for standard utility allowances, which then 
result in increased monthly food stamp benefits. For example, today a 
State agency can issue only $1 annually in LIHEAP benefits to increase 
monthly food stamp benefits on an average of $90 a month. That is 
$1,080 per year for households that do not otherwise pay out-of-pocket 
utility bills.
  That is not right. Last year the Senate farm bill included a 
provision to tighten the LIHEAP loophole. Even though it would only 
reduce the loophole, it set the minimum qualifying LIHEAP benefit at 
$10 annually--not $1, $10. At the time it would have saved taxpayers 
nearly $450 million every year for a total of $4 billion over a 10-year 
period.
  Completely eliminating the LIHEAP loophole, as my legislation does, 
will save taxpayers $12 billion. Let me be very clear about it. 
Eliminating the LIHEAP loophole does not affect SNAP eligibility for 
anyone using the Food Stamp Program. Eliminating the LIHEAP loophole 
would only decrease SNAP benefits for those who would not otherwise 
qualify for the higher SNAP benefits, the food stamp benefits.
  Let me point out another area that must be reformed: States using 
categorical eligibility for automatic eligibility to provide food stamp 
benefits. Categorical eligibility is simply known as Cat-El. It was 
designed to help streamline the administration of SNAP by allowing 
households to be certified as eligible for the food stamp benefits and 
be certified without evaluating household assets or gross income, a 
previous requirement.
  Now, 42 States, unfortunately--I do not like to report these kinds of 
things. However, 42 States are exploiting an unintended loophole of the 
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Program and simply provided 
informational brochures and informational 1-800 numbers to maximize the 
food stamp enrollment and the corresponding increase in Federal food 
benefits.
  These States are gaming the system to bring otherwise ineligible SNAP 
participants into the program. My legislation ties categorical 
eligibility to cash assistance, thereby eliminating this loophole. That 
saves taxpayers $11.5 billion, a lot of money. To be clear, this 
represents a cut to SNAP food benefits. However, this amount represents 
the amount of benefits to people who would not otherwise be eligible 
for these benefits were it not for States gaming the system.
  In an ongoing effort to streamline government programs and reduce 
redundancy and taxpayer spending, we should also look at the 
unnecessary spending in Federal employment and training programs. 
According to a GAO report last year, there are currently 47 such 
programs that annually cost $18 billion. Let me repeat that. There are 
47 programs annually costing $18 billion--Federal employment and 
training programs.
  Nobody would object to a Federal employment and training program 
given the problems we have with our country. But 47, according to a GAO 
report, $18 billion. Eliminating the duplicative SNAP employment and 
training programs would save more than $4 billion and would not affect 
SNAP food benefits. I repeat. This provision of this legislation would 
not cut the buying power of any food stamp household to put food in 
their refrigerators and also their kitchen cupboards.
  What am I talking about? In addition to the base program funding that 
we are talking about with employment and training help, States have the 
option of providing their own funding to their State education and 
training program. Then the Department of Agriculture is required to 
match that.
  Currently, four States receive over 80 percent of the total 50-50 
match funding. Four States, 80 percent? What about the rest of the 
States? They include New York, California, Pennsylvania, and New 
Jersey. New York, 36, 37, percent; California, 21 percent; 
Pennsylvania, about 13 percent; New Jersey, about 10.
  This optional 50-50 Federal match is uncapped. It can be used by 
States to provide reimbursement for participant expenses in regard to 
education and training that are deemed reasonable and necessary. But 
somebody has to define ``reasonable and necessary.'' The following 
items have come under ``reasonable and necessary,'' especially in these 
four States: union dues, test fees, clothing and tools required for the 
job, relocation expenses, licensing, bonding fees, transportation, 
childcare, tennis lessons. I made that up. I thought it would catch 
your attention, Mr. President. No, there are no tennis lessons. There 
might be, could be. But at least in regards to this reform, let's go to 
another provision of my legislation.
  It ends the USDA practice of giving $48 million in awards every year 
to State agencies for basically doing their job to ensure proper use of 
the American tax dollar. Currently, bonuses are given to States for 
``best program access,'' signing up as many people for food stamps as 
possible. ``Most improved program access.'' How many more people signed 
up for SNAP compared to the previous year? So if you sign up more 
people then you signed up last year, well, you get an award. ``Best 
application timeliness.'' That is handling applications within the 
required guidelines, and we are getting a benefit from that.
  State agencies are rewarded for performing the minimum expectations 
for stewardship of the Food Stamp Program and also of the American tax 
dollar. The bonuses are not even required to be used for food stamp 
administration. A recipient State may choose the funding for any State 
priority. So we are talking about $48 million.
  That goes to State agencies of these four Oscar Awards in regard to 
food stamps, but they can use the funding for anything, for any State 
priority. Eliminating these unnecessary State bonuses will save 
taxpayers, over 10 years, $480 million.
  Another area where my legislation streamlines government programs is 
through the elimination of the SNAP Nutrition Education Grant Program. 
A number of existing nutrition education programs are delivered more 
equitably with a cost-benefit ratio that makes more sense, at least six 
Federal programs administered by the Department of Agriculture and the 
National Institutes of Health and Land Grant University Extension 
Programs.
  In practice, the SNAP Nutrition Education Program is inequitably 
distributed with the top four States--here we go again--receiving over 
54 percent of the funding. The bottom 33 State agencies receive less 
than 1 percent of the total funding. That is not right.
  Additionally our bill ends inflation adjustments for countable 
resources and for emergency food assistance, saving over $600 million.
  The legislation also terminates the ongoing stimulus of several years 
ago enacted by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 
which provided extra funding to increase monthly SNAP food benefits.
  Finally, the legislation does prohibit lottery winners--Senator 
Stabenow insisted on this in the last farm bill and it makes a lot of 
sense--from receiving SNAP benefits and keeps them from receiving new 
benefits if they do not meet the financial requirements of SNAP.
  Overall, by eliminating several duplicative programs, closing 
loopholes, and ending unnecessary spending, the Improve Nutrition 
Program Integrity and Deficit Reduction Act will save taxpayers over 
$36 billion, the latest score by the CBO.
  I understand the importance of domestic food assistance programs for 
many hard-working Americans, including many Kansans. I know that. In 
1996, when I was chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, there was 
an effort to send the Food Stamp Program back to the States--and the 
Governors wanted it. They wanted the money, they didn't want the food 
stamps. We made an effort under a very historic farm bill at that time 
not only to save and reform but restore integrity to the Food Stamp 
Program. We have another opportunity right now. I do understand the 
importance of domestic food assistance programs for many hard-working 
Americans and Kansans.

[[Page S1131]]

  My goal is very simple, again restoring integrity to the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program in a commonsense and comprehensive manner. 
Enacting this package of reforms will allow the Federal Government to 
continue to help those who truly need SNAP food benefits and 
assistance.
  Again, I thank Senators Thune and Johanns for their assistance in 
this effort. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact 
these reforms for the benefit of all Americans.
                                 ______