[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 124 (Thursday, September 19, 2013)]
[House]
[Page H5660]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    SNAP CUTS VERSUS CROP INSURANCE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, later today, this body will vote on the 
House majority leadership's plan to cut $40 billion from food stamps 
and force over 4 million low-income Americans--citizens, veterans, 
seniors, and children--to go hungry.
  This bill is immoral. It is wrong to take food from the mouths of 
hungry people. It is especially cruel when, at the same time, the House 
majority continues to support crop insurance subsidies for wealthy 
farms and agribusinesses.
  Let us be clear about this so-called ``nutrition bill'' we are voting 
on today. The majority's leadership is making an explicit choice. They 
want us to force the poorest families in America to go hungry at a time 
of great need, while continuing to support and even expand giant 
government subsidies to the wealthy. This is reverse Robin Hood.
  This makes no economic sense. Even as it left anti-hunger programs in 
limbo, the farm bill passed in July by the majority expanded crop 
insurance subsidies. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget 
Office, these crop insurance subsidies will cost taxpayers $90 billion 
over the next decade. USDA, the United States Department of 
Agriculture, reports it spent $14 billion on crop insurance last year 
alone. Keep in mind that means we will spend over twice as much on 
these subsidies as this proposed cut to food stamps will save us.
  Some Members of the majority like to argue that these deep cuts to 
food stamps are necessary and that we, the richest Nation on Earth, 
cannot afford to help feed the most vulnerable members of our society. 
This is untrue. A decision is being made to cut $40 billion in food aid 
to the poor while giving $90 billion in subsidies to the wealthy.

                              {time}  1030

  That is not right.
  So who exactly are receiving these subsidies?
  That is a good question. Right now, U.S. taxpayers pay, on average, 
almost two-thirds of crop insurance premiums for high-income farmers; 
62 percent, we pay, for these crop insurance premiums. And according to 
the Congressional Budget Office, the Federal Government paid $1.4 
billion in crop insurance administrative costs to financial and 
insurance companies, including a bank in Switzerland.
  Last year, over 10,000 farmers each received over $100,000 in crop 
insurance subsidies. And because the program is not means tested or 
capped, 26 farmers made over $1 million from the Federal Government; 26 
wealthy farm owners whom we are prevented from identifying, and they 
could even be Members of Congress. We can't get their names. They are 
statutorily protected. And as I stand here, we are going to fight every 
day to get the names of these 26 individuals.
  Meanwhile, the bill that we considered today would deny SNAP benefits 
to jobless adults without children whose incomes average only about 
one-fifth of the poverty line; and that, my friends, is $2,500 a year. 
Let's say ``no'' to them for food on their tables.
  We also know that crop insurance subsidies have a higher error rate, 
meaning more waste, fraud, and abuse, than the food stamp program, one 
of the most efficient programs the Federal Government undertakes. And 
sadly, we know that there are Members of the majority arguing 
strenuously for these deep cuts to food aid who, at the same time, are 
pocketing millions themselves in crop insurance subsidies. They should 
be ashamed.
  Families on food stamps are struggling. We hear about seniors who 
have to choose between buying food and medicine, veterans trying to get 
back on their feet after serving their country, students in the 
classroom who can't even concentrate when others are eating because 
they're actually going hungry. These are the Americans this bill would 
see go hungry, even as we subsidize handouts to wealthy farmers.
  This is immoral. If this is not wrong, nothing is wrong.
  But even if that doesn't sway you, consider the math. This bill would 
cut $40 billion from food aid, while the majority in this body voted to 
keep $90 billion in crop insurance subsidies. It would deny over 4 
million low-income individuals a chance to eat, even as we are giving 
26 faceless individuals $1 million each. I cannot support a bill that 
hurts millions of low-income citizens, children, seniors, veterans, as 
the majority continues to subsidize wealthy agribusiness.
  Historically, addressing hunger in America has been a bipartisan 
effort, Democrats and Republicans who come together to say we have a 
serious problem of hunger in America; let's work to eradicate it. That 
was McGovern and Dole, Javits, Kennedy, and so many others.
  I urge my colleagues in both parties to vote this heartless bill 
down.

                          ____________________