[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 89 (Thursday, June 20, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E941-E942]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       FEDERAL MANAGEMENT REFORM AND RISK MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2013

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 18, 2013

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1947) to 
     provide for the reform and continuation of agricultural and 
     other programs of the Department of Agriculture through 
     fiscal year 2018, and for other purposes:

  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Chair, today we have a 
major piece of legislation before us which provides an opportunity to 
set the general direction for America's farm and food policy. Congress 
first enacted the farm bill in response to the Great Depression in 
order to foster growth in our Nation's economy and to protect those who 
were most in need. Today, we are still recovering from

[[Page E942]]

what some economists call, ``the Great Recession.'' We find ourselves 
at a crossroads where we must decide how to manage our fiscal 
priorities while still protecting those who were hardest hit by the 
recent recession. When considering H.R. 1947 we should not forget the 
underlying principal which defines the farm bill, which is to provide 
assistance to those most in need.
  Our Nation looks on as the Republican majority in the House of 
Representatives attempts to justify having nearly two-thirds of the 
savings generated from the entire bill come from cutting $20.5 billion 
in SNAP funding. While we are in a very difficult fiscal climate, we 
simply cannot continue to place further burden on our Nation's most 
vulnerable citizens. In these tough budgetary times, we should not 
signal to our constituents that helping those most in need is no longer 
a priority.
  President Eisenhower once said, ``Every gun that is made, every 
warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a 
theft from those/who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are 
not clothed.'' We must consider the short and long term consequences of 
these cuts on our children, the elderly and disabled. Madam Chair, I 
would like to remind my colleagues that 95% of SNAP funding goes 
directly to families to buy food. For many of these at-risk 
populations, SNAP is the sole form of income-assistance they receive 
and is a powerful anecdote to extreme poverty.
  Madam Chair, I am disappointed that two amendments I offered, which 
would have made improvements to this bill were not considered. Although 
I have many concerns with this bill, I feel they would have made modest 
improvements. My first amendment would have provided language which 
would have enabled the reauthorization of USDA's Hunger-Free 
Communities grant program. This program was created to provide public 
funding for comprehensive and collaborative efforts to end hunger at 
the community level. The 2008 Farm Bill authorized the grant program 
and $5 million was appropriated for Fiscal Year 2010. 14 communities in 
eight states, including my State of Texas, were awarded 2-year grants 
ranging from $63,000 to $2,000,000.
  My second amendment addressed the issue of broad-based categorical 
eligibility. My understanding is that if broad-based categorical 
eligibility is ended under H.R. 1947, all states will have to use the 
asset test. Current law states that ``that a household otherwise 
eligible to participate in the supplemental nutrition assistance 
program will not be eligible to participate if its resources exceed 
$2,000 or, in the case of a household which consists of or includes an 
elderly or disabled member, if its resources exceed $3,000.'' If that 
is the case I feel that the asset limit should be higher. My amendment 
would have increased the asset eligibility for the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program to $5,000 for all households, including 
those households including elderly and disabled members.
  Madam Chair, In conclusion, I simply cannot support a bill which cuts 
$20.5 billion from our Nation's most important anti-hunger program 
which touches nearly 1 out of 7 American's.

                          ____________________