[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 101 (Tuesday, June 23, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H4547-H4548]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             END HUNGER NOW

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, last Congress, we passed a new farm bill. 
As a member of the Agriculture Committee, I could not support it, 
either in committee or on the House floor. I couldn't support it 
because it cut SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, our 
Nation's premier antihunger program. I couldn't support a bill that I 
believed made hunger worse in America.
  At the time, members of both parties offered many assurances that the 
changes to SNAP's relationship with LIHEAP, the Low Income Home Energy 
Assistance Program, wouldn't hurt SNAP recipients, that the changes 
were merely ``closing a loophole'' rather than a true benefit cut.
  I was skeptical of those assurances at the time--and with good 
reason. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the change would 
reduce benefits for about 850,000 low-income households by an average 
of $90 a month in the 14 States and the District of Columbia that took 
advantage of a State option to link LIHEAP and SNAP. States chose to 
use this option to alleviate some of the heartbreaking choices that 
poor families face. Seniors and the disabled are all too often the ones 
forced to choose between buying food or heating their homes or paying 
for their prescriptions.
  Throughout the farm bill process, antihunger advocates in the ``heat 
and eat'' States vigorously opposed the LIHEAP cuts to SNAP, saying 
their effects would be much greater than the Congressional Budget 
Office estimates. I'm sorry to say they were right. These cuts are much 
more than just abstract numbers. We are starting to hear real stories 
from real people who are seeing their SNAP benefits cut. Hunger is 
worse in this country because of these cuts.
  Take Judy Beals, a disabled senior from Belleville, Wisconsin. 
Earlier this year, she saw her SNAP benefit cut from $120 a month to 
$16 a month. Let me repeat that, she now gets $16 a month in food 
assistance. That is it. That is unconscionable. How could anyone afford 
to feed themselves for a month on that?
  Ms. Beals says she is forced to eat just once a day now that her SNAP 
benefit has been cut as she tries to figure out how to pay her other 
bills. To add insult to injury, Ms. Beals found out that her SNAP 
benefit had been cut at the register at the grocery store with a full 
cart of groceries.
  Mr. Speaker, Ms. Beals' story is not unique. The Hunger Task Force in 
Milwaukee estimates that, in Wisconsin alone, 255,000 families have 
seen their SNAP benefits reduced since the LIHEAP cuts went into 
effect.
  We are hearing similar stories in New Jersey, another State that did 
not extend its heat and eat program. The Food Bank of South New Jersey 
estimates that 160,000 New Jersey residents have lost about $90 a month 
in SNAP benefits due to the farm bill cut.
  Now, to be fair, there are several States, including my home State of 
Massachusetts, that did the right thing and found a way, mostly with 
State funds, to make up the money lost by the LIHEAP cut in the farm 
bill. Republican and Democratic Governors stepped up and recognized 
that those already struggling to put food on the table would be worse 
off if they didn't find a way to fix the cut. In those States that did 
not make up the money, we will continue to hear stories of people who 
have seen their SNAP benefit cut.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to serve on the House Agriculture Committee. 
Since the beginning of this Congress, the committee has been conducting 
a top-to-bottom review of the SNAP program. Now, I have no idea where 
these hearings are going and, once again, we have heard assurances that 
there will be no cuts in SNAP, but I have this sinking feeling in my 
stomach that these hearings are not leading to a place that is good for 
millions of struggling Americans.
  The fact is SNAP is a good program. It works. It is effective, and it 
is efficient. It is one of the most efficiently run Federal programs 
that exists, with an unbelievably low error rate.
  Instead of cutting SNAP or making other harmful policy changes, we

[[Page H4548]]

should be strengthening the program. Democratic and Republican 
witnesses alike have testified before the Agriculture Committee that 
the SNAP benefit is already too low.
  We have heard that the certification and recertification process is 
time-consuming and onerous, especially for working families. We have 
heard about people who are eligible to get renewed benefits who fall 
off the program because of these onerous, new requirements.
  We have heard from charities that they cannot solve the problems of 
hunger on their own. Charities do incredible work, but they cannot meet 
the demand for food assistance. They need a strong Federal partner.
  We need better coordination among all stakeholders--Federal agencies, 
nonprofits, faith-based organizations, and businesses--to end hunger. 
That is why I have been advocating for a White House conference on 
food, nutrition, and hunger. We need a coordinated, holistic plan to 
end hunger now.
  If we make further cuts to SNAP, we will no doubt hear more stories 
like Ms. Beals where those who are already struggling to put food on 
the table see their food assistance benefits cut.
  The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that we should not be making hunger 
worse in this country. We should end hunger now.

                          ____________________