[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 80 (Wednesday, May 11, 2022)]
[House]
[Page H4802]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           CONTEMPLATING SNAP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, last month, the 
Agriculture Committee welcomed Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services 
Deputy Under Secretary Stacy Dean to a long-overdue hearing.
  Until last month, the agency of the United States Department of 
Agriculture that occupies more than 80 percent of the Agriculture 
Committee's spending had gone unchecked for nearly 4 years.
  Each section of title IV, the nutrition title, of the 2018 farm bill 
made nominal changes to a program that has since exploded to serve more 
than 42 million individuals, at a current cost of roughly $9 billion 
per month.
  Now, we need to contemplate SNAP through four principles, 
particularly as we shift from emergency spending and administration to 
more targeted and informed programming.
  First, we need to further explore how to serve recipients through 
innovation and flexibility. If the pandemic has taught us one thing, it 
is there is no one way to serve families in need.
  Second, we must think about the best ways to guide recipients to 
independence through employment, education, and training. While waivers 
related to work under the former administration were logical, they are 
now clearly keeping employable individuals idle and disengaged. It is 
time to talk about reemployment, with a specific focus on those who 
have left the labor force.
  The third principle: We cannot deny program integrity has been 
compromised. I want to work with the Department to return to and 
maintain the virtues of SNAP. This includes normal modes of data 
collection and normal modes of analysis and dissemination of 
information to ensure the responsible use of program funds.
  Last, and perhaps most importantly, we must come together to improve 
access and promote healthy foods and improved nutrition. Employment, 
healthcare costs, and general longevity are highly dependent on the 
foods that we consume. Together with modernized nutrition education 
initiatives, the nutrition research funding secured in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2021, and the existing library of research on 
healthy eating, USDA is uniquely positioned to improve the nutrition of 
millions of households, not just those deemed healthy.
  I think my colleagues across the aisle can agree with each of these 
four principles. Where we diverge is how to preserve the program for 
those in actual need, without regulatory loopholes and fuzzy 
interpretations of the law, both of which exploit the very intent of 
the program. Where we diverge is the reality that this one title will 
cost taxpayers nearly $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

  With this exorbitant spending increase--namely, because of the less-
than-transparent and questionable Thrifty Food Plan update--the Biden 
administration and the current majority consciously put a colossal 
financial and political target on any future farm bill, compromising 
not only the nutrition title but the 11 other titles which support and 
protect every farmer, every rancher, and every forester, and rural 
community.
  While my colleagues and I will continue to debate this attempt at 
executive overreach, I asked one thing of Madam Deputy Under Secretary 
and, frankly, the whole Department, USDA: Be more forthcoming. As the 
ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee, I prefer to learn 
directly from the administration, not from lobbyists, not from 
reporters, not from the internet.
  More recently, the White House announced a conference on hunger, 
nutrition, and health in September. Now, this could change how we think 
about health and nutrition, including in the farm bill, but it must be 
nonpartisan and engage community leaders nationwide. This should be a 
platform for innovation, objective research, and local approaches.
  That hearing should be the first of many that allows the Agriculture 
Committee to have an honest conversation about what is working and what 
is not and how we move forward toward the 2023 farm bill.

                          ____________________