[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 22, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H3465-H3472]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1800
            SNAP BENEFITS ARE NEEDED BY 42 MILLION AMERICANS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 9, 2023, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Hayes) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
to submit extraneous material in the Record on the topic of this 
Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who have joined me for 
this extremely special SNAP Special Order hour.
  Hunger continues to be a pervasive issue in America. According to the 
USDA, in 2023, over 42 million people rely on the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP, and 41 percent of 
those households have children.
  SNAP benefits are modest, averaging only about $6.20 per person per 
day or about $2 per person per meal.
  The benefits of SNAP are highly targeted to focus on those with the 
greatest needs. Ninety-two percent of SNAP benefits go to households 
with income below the poverty line and 54 percent go to households at 
or below half of the poverty line.
  Additionally, every dollar spent on SNAP benefits generates as much 
as $1.54 to the local economy. House Republicans are putting forward a 
farm bill which would end the USDA's authority to increase the Thrifty 
Food Plan. The Thrifty Food Plan is used to determine the amount of 
benefits a SNAP recipient receives.
  USDA calculates the Thrifty Food Plan using a mathematical model 
based on the cost of food, the nutrients in the food, nutrition 
guidance, and what Americans are actually eating. The Thrifty Food Plan 
goes further than a simple adjustment for inflation to better ensure 
that people have access to food.
  The 2018 bipartisan farm bill directed USDA to regularly reevaluate 
the Thrifty Food Plan and SNAP benefit adjustments as food prices, 
dietary guidance, and other scientific standards shifted over time. The 
farm bill put forth by House Republicans will result in roughly $30 
billion in benefit cuts, according to the Congressional Budget Office. 
That would impact every SNAP household in future years, including 
children, older adults, and people with disabilities.
  It would mean that the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan would be frozen 
no matter what the science says about the cost of a healthy, normal 
diet.

[[Page H3466]]

  In the last 50 years, the Thrifty Food Plan has only been updated 
three times: in 1983, 1989, and 2006, but these updates did not 
increase SNAP benefits.
  As a result of the 2021 update, the benefit amounts were increased 
and the purchasing power of the plan to 21 percent. This led to a $1.40 
per person per day increase in SNAP's average benefits, or about 70 
cents per meal.
  This is not a lot of money to begin with; however, this update lifted 
over 2 million SNAP participants out of poverty or above the poverty 
line, including over 1 million children.
  According to the Urban Institute, the 2021 Thrifty Food Plan reduced 
poverty for Black and Hispanic people, suggesting that reevaluation was 
addressing longstanding systemic racial issues. Additionally, a 2023 
Data for Progress poll found that 66 percent have a favorable view of 
SNAP, including 83 percent of Democrats, 62 percent of Independents, 
and 52 percent of Republicans. All Americans benefit from this anti-
hunger program. A majority of Americans support increasing funding for 
SNAP, not cutting it.
  The total cut to SNAP and related nutrition programs under the House 
Republican proposal is roughly $30 billion. The average per person SNAP 
benefit would be roughly $7 less per month between 2027 and 2031 and 
jump to $15 less per month in 2032 and 2033.
  According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, this cut 
would affect nearly 6 million older adults, 4 million people with 
disabilities, and nearly 17 million children, including 5 million 
children under the age of 5.
  Hunger is a policy choice and SNAP is our most effective anti-hunger 
program, and we must protect the Thrifty Food Plan in the farm bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record four letters in opposition to 
the House Republican farm bill from the American Federation of 
Teachers, the National Education Association, AFL-CIO, and ASFCME. All 
letters disapprove of the nearly $30 billion cut to SNAP.


                              American Federation of Teachers,

                                                     May 22, 2024.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Representative: On behalf of the 1.7 million members of the 
     AFT, I write in opposition to the Farm, Food, and National 
     Security Act of 2024 (Farm Bill).
       Simply put, this bill will only increase hunger and food 
     insecurity for many Americans by cutting $30 billion in 
     Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits 
     over 10 years. This will have a devastating effect on the 
     children, families, older Americans, college students and 
     individuals with disabilities who rely on the program. SNAP 
     is the nutritional safety net that families and individuals 
     depend on to thrive. The AFT represents school food service 
     workers and educators who know firsthand that SNAP is the 
     guardrail, along with school meals, that ensures our most 
     vulnerable students are receiving the food assistance needed 
     to learn and excel in school. This proposal will be the 
     largest cut to SNAP in 30 years. According to the Center on 
     Budget and Policy Priorities, the Summer EBT (electronic 
     benefit transfer) program, which provides families with 
     school-age children a grocery benefit over the summer when 
     students cannot receive their school meals, will also receive 
     a cut of $500 million in this bill.
       SNAP benefits are already limited, with the average benefit 
     totaling approximately $6.20 per person, per day. And this is 
     after the 2021 re-evaluation (the first adjustment in nearly 
     50 years), which provided SNAP recipients with an additional 
     $1.40 per person, per day. According to the Urban Institute, 
     this increase helped reduce poverty by 4.7 percent, impacting 
     approximately 2.3 million Americans. Yet, in addition to the 
     cuts, this is the adjustment the House Farm Bill wants to 
     prevent from occurring again.
       The Farm Bill is also proposing to eliminate the federal 
     protections for merit staffing and privatize the workforce 
     that conducts the essential work for the SNAP program. Merit 
     staff are government workers who ensure the program is 
     working effectively with transparency by providing 
     eligibility screenings, application assistance and 
     verification guidance. As a union of public employees, 
     including those who process SNAP applications, the AFF 
     opposes the proposal to outsource jobs and strip merit 
     staffing that has protected public investment for more than 
     75 years. Not only will this eliminate public accountability 
     for public investment, but it will also set the precedent to 
     remove the merit staffing provisions in other critical 
     federal programs.
       Although the Farm Bill includes programs for rural 
     communities that have bipartisan support, the funding for 
     those programs is paid for with funding taken from SNAP. If a 
     child is hungry, any positive gains of having additional 
     funding for schools, broadband and other services in rural 
     communities are nullified. This is not a time to borrow from 
     Peter to pay Paul.
       Many individuals and families are struggling to buy 
     sufficient, healthy meals. Instead of focusing on real 
     bipartisan solutions for families, children, workers and 
     rural communities, the House Farm Bill is attempting to roll 
     back nutrition and labor protections. I urge you to oppose 
     the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024 in 
     committee.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Randi Weingarten,
     President, AFT.
                                  ____



                               National Education Association,

                                     Washington, DC, May 20, 2024.
     Committee on Agriculture,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the 3 million members of 
     the National Education Association, who teach and support 
     nearly 50 million students in public schools across America, 
     we urge you to vote NO on the Farm, Food, and National 
     Security Act 2024, the reauthorization legislation for the 
     farm bill. Votes related to this issue may be included in the 
     NEA Report Card for the 118th Congress.
       We oppose the bill because of proposed changes to the 
     Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)--that will weaken the Supplemental 
     Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and erode benefits for 
     participants.
       NEA members are teachers and education support 
     professionals in 14,000 communities throughout urban, 
     suburban, and rural America. These educators know firsthand 
     that hungry students cannot focus on learning. We urge you to 
     strengthen SNAP so that it will improve low-income families' 
     health and well-being and help prepare students for learning.
       Approximately two-thirds of SNAP households include a 
     child, an older person. or an individual with a disability, 
     according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 
     (CBPP). Many working-age SNAP recipients hold multiple low-
     paying jobs with unreliable hours and paltry benefits, or no 
     benefits at all. For them, any unexpected expense, health 
     crisis, or other emergency could mean choosing between buying 
     groceries and paying a bill. Among these recipients are 
     approximately 10 percent of education support professionals 
     and approximately 16 percent of school food service 
     professionals--workers who are dedicated to nurturing 
     students and providing them with healthy meals, but struggle 
     to feed their own families. Like these hardworking education 
     support professionals, 70 percent of adult SNAP recipients 
     hold at least one job, according to a Government 
     Accountability Office report.
       Because SNAP is the first line of defense against childhood 
     hunger, the NEA strongly opposes the bill's proposal to cut 
     the program by approximately $30 billion over 10 years, 
     through limiting the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 
     authority to adjust the TFP. This proposal--which would 
     impact as many as 17 million children in a typical month, 
     according to the CBPP--would undercut the TFP's ability to 
     accurately reflect the cost of a healthy diet, eroding 
     benefits and narrowing families' access to fresh fruits and 
     vegetables amid rising prices.
       This change would further impact programs that are tied to 
     the Thrifty Food Plan. NEA is particularly concerned about 
     the impact on the new Summer EBT Program, which provides 
     grocery benefits to children in low-income families during 
     the summer when schools are closed. The summer program would 
     be cut by more than $500 million over the 2027-2033 period 
     due to the TFP change, the CBPP estimates.
       While the bill contains some provisions that NEA supports, 
     such as lifting the drug felony ban, improvements to the Food 
     Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, and extending 
     the Secure Rural Schools program, these are insufficient to 
     make up for such a large and long-term cut to SNAP.
       Instead of undermining SNAP, we ask you to be guided by 
     NEA's priorities for reauthorization, which include 
     strengthening the program by removing the shelter deduction 
     cap and time limits on eligibility, enacting a standard 
     deduction for medical expenses, and aligning SNAP's 
     eligibility standards with the Affordable Care Act to allow 
     lawfully present immigrants and permanent residents to 
     participate in SNAP.
       NEA also supports efforts to ensure that the work to 
     cultivate, process, and secure the food supply chain is 
     respected. NEA seeks a farm bill that ensures workers are 
     paid a living wage, employers maintain safe working 
     conditions, and employers support workers' right to organize 
     in order to have a say in the conditions of their employment. 
     This bill ignores these needs. In fact, the bill undermines 
     labor. NEA further opposes the bill's privatization provision 
     because it would permit the outsourcing of SNAP eligibility 
     determinations, affecting the merit staff employees who 
     administer SNAP.
       SNAP is our nation's largest anti-hunger program. For many 
     families, it means the difference between eating and going 
     without. All students deserve important nutritional support 
     to learn. Robust SNAP benefits not only provide struggling 
     families with a crucial safety net; they are also 
     instrumental in creating the conditions for academic 
     engagement and achievement.
       We must urge you to vote NO on the Farm, Food, and National 
     Security Act 2024 as currently written. We also ask that you 
     support amendments that would strengthen the Supplemental 
     Nutrition Assistance Program and

[[Page H3467]]

     oppose all amendments that would weaken the program.
           Sincerely,

                                                    Marc Egan,

                                 Director of Government Relations,
     National Education Association.
                                  ____



                                                       AFL-CIO

                                                     May 20, 2024.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the 12.5 million workers 
     and 60 affiliate unions represented by the AFL-CIO, I urge 
     you to oppose the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 
     2024 when it comes to a vote in the House Agriculture 
     Committee, and to reject any amendments that further harm our 
     nation's food programs.
       This partisan bill proposes changes to the Thrifty Food 
     Program, resulting in close to $30 billion in cuts to SNAP 
     and other food benefits over the next decade, worsening food 
     insecurity and hunger for over 42 million Americans. 
     According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 
     these cuts will affect 17 million children, 5 million 
     children under age five, 6 million seniors, and 4 million 
     people with disabilities. Among other things, according to 
     this analysis, the bill will result in $500 million less 
     funding for the Summer EBT program, depriving families of 
     food benefits during the summer recess when school lunches 
     are unavailable. Enacting this bill without dramatic changes 
     would push more people below the poverty line and increase 
     child hunger.
       Additionally, we strongly oppose provisions like those in 
     H.R. 5094, which strip the USDA of its oversight authority 
     and eliminate federal protections for merit staffing within 
     SNAP, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for other 
     federal programs. Merit staff are essential for conducting 
     SNAP eligibility screenings and maintaining program 
     integrity. Privatization, as evident in failed experiments in 
     Texas and Indiana, wastes taxpayer dollars and harms program 
     beneficiaries.
       Our unions represent workers across the entire food supply 
     chain--from meat-cutting floors and school cafeterias to 
     grocery store checkouts and agricultural fields. These 
     workers are essential to our economy and community well-
     being. It is imperative that the Farm Bill supports good jobs 
     and includes the voices of food workers in agricultural 
     policy decisions.
       We urge Congress to back agricultural policies that foster 
     well-paying jobs, including the bipartisan Senate Farm Bill, 
     the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act of 2024, which 
     seeks to protect and expand SNAP benefits, improving access 
     for marginalized groups and offering a more effective 
     approach to combating hunger and supporting workers.
       Food safety, nutrition, and agricultural policies are vital 
     to all Americans, especially our union members. We urge you 
     to vote against this partisan Farm Bill and any further 
     damaging amendments, and instead, work towards a more 
     inclusive and effective solution.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Jody Calemine,
     Director, Government Affairs.
                                  ____



                                                       AFSCME,

                                                     May 21, 2024.
     Hon. Glenn ``GT'' Thompson,
     Chair
     Hon. David Scott,
     Ranking Member,
     Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chair Thompson and Ranking Member Scott: On behalf of 
     the 1.4 million members of the American Federation of State, 
     County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), we strongly oppose 
     the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024 pending 
     before the committee because it would deeply cut future SNAP 
     benefits by nearly $30 billion over the next decade, take 
     away good union jobs and harm program integrity.
       Tens of thousands of AFSCME members under merit-based 
     personnel systems are proud to administer SNAP benefits 
     because SNAP is the cornerstone of the nation's nutrition and 
     food security safety net, helping to put food on the table 
     for 41.2 million low-income participants each month. Cuts to 
     SNAP would harm families, young children, college students, 
     seniors, veterans, active-duty military families and people 
     with disabilities in all U.S. states and territories. SNAP is 
     a lifeline for low-wage workers, child care providers and 
     school employees, including school food service workers and 
     classroom assistants.
       AFSCME strongly opposes Sections 4105 and 4111, and any 
     other SNAP provisions which undermine, erode or eliminate the 
     current federal requirements for SNAP to be administered by 
     workers under a merit-based personnel system.
       Merit-based personnel systems at the federal, state and 
     local levels require hiring, advancement, demotion and 
     discipline be based on merit and competence.
       Federal law requires that merit staff public employees 
     conduct the essential work of SNAP to screen for eligibility 
     and determine benefit levels, including providing application 
     assistance, answering client questions about missing 
     information, pursuing missing information, providing 
     verification guidance and to thoroughly explore and certify 
     whether an individual meets the state's criteria for 
     participation in Employment and Training (E&T).
       Merit staffing ensures that all important SNAP 
     determinations are unbiased, high quality, free from 
     political influence and without fear of arbitrary management 
     action or retaliation.
       Merit staffing protects program integrity and ensures that 
     SNAP beneficiaries receive the help they need from a 
     professional workforce, that recipient data remains private, 
     and determinations are based on qualifications rather than 
     profit or other motives.
       Section 4111 is based upon H.R. 5094, which we oppose. and 
     despite its misleading title, this provision would not 
     provide ``flexibility'' but would dismantle longstanding 
     federal merit-staffing requirements that protect program 
     integrity. States and counties currently have significant 
     flexibility to administer SNAP. Experiments with the 
     outsourcing of merit-staffed work in Texas and Indiana, in 
     particular, have proven to be a waste of taxpayer dollars and 
     a programmatic nightmare, as well as a drain on good, local 
     jobs that pay better than private for-profit companies who 
     rarely provide essential benefits, including health care and 
     retirement.
       Outsourcing has resulted in none of the promises of 
     improved performance, efficiency or cost savings. In fact, it 
     has harmed struggling families, seniors and the disabled, and 
     compromised the integrity of the program itself.
       Section 4105 is an additional attack on merit staffing, 
     unwarranted by current merit staff performance, and 
     inefficient. This provision would allow a state to hire for 
     profit contractors to screen SNAP beneficiaries for E&T 
     referral after merit staff have already reviewed an applicant 
     for benefit determination. Merit staff responsibilities are 
     designed to be ``one stop,'' designating one staff point of 
     contact to screen and refer potential beneficiaries to needed 
     programs. Dividing screening and referral responsibilities 
     creates duplicative work for the multiple screeners and 
     additional points of contact and likely duplicative document 
     submissions for people in need of assistance who are already 
     navigating a complex system. This duplication would likely 
     delay referrals for employment and training, create needless 
     backlogs, and compromise the quality of services.
       Both proposed privatization provisions (Sections 4105 and 
     4111) do not allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
     to stop states from privatizing important work, nor would 
     USDA have authority to oversee the actions of for-profit 
     contracts. This lack of oversight and accountability would 
     threaten access to essential SNAP benefits as a direct result 
     of the actions of private companies whose past performance 
     has been proven to result in increased backlogs, costs and 
     error rates. Furthermore, the reference to collective 
     bargaining agreements (CBAs) in Section 4111 is misleading 
     and ineffective, providing no real protection to union 
     workforces, and absolutely no protection to workers in states 
     where there are no public sector CBAs.
       AFSCME is relying on you to vote ``no'' on this partisan 
     farm bill and any harmful amendments that compromise the SNAP 
     program. We are counting on you to protect SNAP from deep 
     benefit cuts and maintain current SNAP public sector merit-
     staffed employment requirements, which allow the program to 
     continue to serve our nation's most vulnerable individuals 
     and families.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Edwin S. Jayne,
                           Director of Federal Government Affairs.

  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Brown).
  Ms. BROWN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Hayes for organizing 
this Special Order hour on SNAP.
  Today, I rise because tomorrow the House Agriculture Committee will 
vote on the GOP's partisan farm bill. If passed, it will force severe 
cuts to the SNAP program that would risk benefits for years to come.
  SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known 
as the Food Stamp program, is a vital resource to families and 
individuals who have fallen on hard times. In Ohio's 11th Congressional 
District, almost one in four households rely on SNAP benefits to put 
food on the table.
  These are our friends, our family, neighbors, and my constituents. It 
shouldn't be controversial to want members of your community fed.
  On the House Agriculture Committee, I am committed to making that 
known, but this farm bill will see the largest cut to SNAP benefits in 
over 30 years, taking nearly $30 billion in food out of the mouths of 
people who really need it.
  Being poor isn't a condemnation of morals, but Republicans have shown 
they want to treat it that way, which is why I urge my Republican 
colleagues to reconsider their extreme proposal and to join Democrats 
as we continue to put people over politics.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
(Ms. Wild).
  Ms. WILD. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut for convening us this evening

[[Page H3468]]

to discuss an issue that affects every corner of our Nation: food 
insecurity.
  In blue, red, and purple districts alike, too many families struggle 
to afford the food that they need to keep themselves and their families 
healthy and fed. Throughout my time in Congress, I have used my voice 
and my vote to support nutrition programs because I am determined to 
ensure that in our Nation, the richest in the history of the world, no 
one goes hungry.
  As part of this effort, I have prioritized key nutrition programs. In 
2018, my very first vote was to reauthorize the farm bill, which funds 
many critical nutrition assistance programs that people in our 
community rely on. These programs include the Supplemental Nutrition 
Assistance Program, known as SNAP; Meals on Wheels; The Special 
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children; 
nutrition assistance, school breakfast programs, and summer meal 
programs.
  Now, extreme Members of the House have put forward a farm bill that 
includes devastating cuts for SNAP participants that so many in our 
community rely on to feed their families. Their proposed bill would cut 
nearly $30 billion in SNAP benefits that families rely on to put food 
on the table every night.
  In 2023, one in eight households, roughly 44.2 million Americans, 
experienced food insecurity or lack of access to an affordable, 
nutritious diet. In my district, Pennsylvania's Seventh, the Greater 
Lehigh Valley area, nearly 40,000 households, or 13 percent of the 
households in our community, rely on SNAP to feed themselves and their 
families.
  In the richest Nation in the world, no one should go to bed hungry 
because they can't afford to eat, and no one should have to worry about 
having enough food for their kids because politicians decided to play 
games with the necessary benefits that they rely on every single day.
  This is a moral imperative of the highest priority. Children's 
physical and cognitive development depends on proper nutrition. Quite 
simply, adequate food sets them up for success in school and throughout 
life.
  We cannot, we must not abandon families in our communities that 
struggle with food insecurity. This should not be a partisan issue and 
it is deeply disappointing to me that Members on the other side of the 
aisle would put forth a bill that so severely cuts SNAP benefits.
  I will always stand up to efforts to strip benefits away from the 
most vulnerable members of our society, children. I hope to work with 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on a bipartisan path forward 
that protects critical nutrition programs, including SNAP, in the 
upcoming farm bill reauthorization.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Wild for those powerful words.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. 
Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my colleague, Congresswoman 
Hayes, for bringing us together today to talk about something so 
important.
  We do live in the richest country in the world at the richest moment 
in history, and the very idea that we would tolerate and even think 
about adding to hunger in America is beyond belief.
  It is a moral issue, but how could we even think about cutting the 
opportunity for our children, for our families, for older Americans, 
for people with disabilities, for people who simply can't afford to put 
food on the table. This is not because we have a shortage of the food 
that is available. It is not because there is not the funding to make 
sure that we take care of those in need.
  This is the beginning, pretty soon, of the hunger season because many 
schools that have provided school lunch programs and school breakfast 
programs may not be available in the summer months, and yet these 
children and families need to eat.
  How can anyone think about cutting the SNAP program, 60 million 
people in the United States, half of whom are children? No. It is just 
not tolerable.
  I beg that we are going to make sure that everyone in the United 
States of America who is hungry will have food on the table.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Vargas).
  Mr. VARGAS. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely thank the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut for bringing us together tonight to defend the SNAP 
program.
  In America, no child should go to bed hungry. No family should have 
to worry about where their next meal is coming from. SNAP is the most 
important and effective tool we have to stave off hunger in our 
country. It is our first line of defense, and yet House Republicans 
have proposed the largest cut to the program in decades. This is cruel, 
plain and simple.
  These proposed cuts stand to harm more than 40,000 families in my 
district in California and over 40 million families nationwide who 
benefit from this program. Almost 80 percent of the people who benefit 
from SNAP are children, seniors, people with disabilities, and 
veterans.
  SNAP also boosts our local economies. Every dollar spent on SNAP 
benefits generates roughly $1.50 in economic activity. For too many 
people in our country, making ends meet is a daily battle. Programs 
like SNAP are vital tools for ending hunger and helping those who are 
most in need. They provide Americans with the help they need to find 
the footing in tough times and to make life better for themselves and 
their children. We should be expanding these programs, not cutting 
them.

                              {time}  1815

  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I would add that $18 billion of the cuts 
would affect households with children, which, in a typical month, would 
include nearly 17 million children.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Barragan).
  Ms. BARRAGAN. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans are coming after the 
food benefits of disabled veterans who receive food assistance or SNAP, 
part-time college students and single moms on SNAP. House Republicans' 
farm bill would make the largest cuts to SNAP and food assistance 
programs in 30 years.
  Many American families are on the brink. They rely on SNAP to put 
food on the table. Eighty-six percent of all SNAP benefits go to 
households that have children or households with older Americans or 
individuals with disabilities.
  As chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, I am also concerned 
about the harm SNAP cuts will bring to communities of color, including 
Latinos. Forty percent of Latino adults report not having enough food 
to eat, more than any other ethnic or racial group. Over 5 million 
Latinos in the United States receive SNAP to put food on the table.
  Right now, a single person will receive at most $9 in SNAP assistance 
for food per day. To those in need, $9 can determine whether they can 
eat that day.
  Three square meals a day should not be a partisan debate. Without 
SNAP, hungry Americans will be forced to choose between food to eat and 
necessities like electricity, running water, or medication. It is a 
cruel and inhumane choice we should not force on the American people.
  House Democrats will continue to fight to preserve and expand access 
to SNAP so that no family goes hungry.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican colleagues to put people over 
politics and join House Democrats to protect SNAP. We must stand 
together for compassion, dignity, and the well-being of all Americans.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I would add for the record that $9 billion 
of the cuts would affect households with preschool-aged children or 
children under 5, which, in a typical month, would include about 5 
million young children.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
  Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Speaker, I thank my wonderful, amazing, dedicated, 
committed colleague from Connecticut, who is today, as we say in 
Detroit, speaking truth to power when it comes to our most vulnerable 
in the United States.
  We have heard over and over again that we are the richest country in 
the world. Even though we live in the richest country, millions of 
children live in poverty, lacking access to necessities like food, 
housing, and healthcare. It is shameful.

[[Page H3469]]

  More than 44 million people in our country face hunger, including 
over 15 percent in one of the largest counties in my district, Wayne 
County. SNAP is an essential food assistance program that has been a 
key tool in combating hunger in our most vulnerable communities.
  Now, my Republican colleagues want to cut this essential program that 
so many of our families rely on to feed their children. It is shameful. 
The GOP farm bill would make the largest cut to SNAP in nearly 30 
years. The bill threatens $27 billion in SNAP benefits for low-income 
families. It is utterly shameful.
  We must stand together strongly in support of expanding the social 
safety net and increasing funding programs for SNAP and other child 
nutrition programs. They are essential in creating healthy, thriving 
communities.
  It is time to protect programs to combat hunger, not make extremist 
cuts. Working families in our country should not have to worry about 
where their next meal is coming from.
  In this body, we see over and over again that we seem to find money 
for endless wars like this, but we can't seem to find the same 
resources to end child hunger in our country.
  The first African-American woman ever to serve in our Congress was 
Shirley Chisholm. She used to say children can't learn if they are 
hungry.
  Children should and must have access to SNAP benefits to experience 
long-term positive outcomes like better health, improved learning, and 
higher success as adults.
  I don't think people realize the trauma of what the most vulnerable 
people among us go through in going to sleep hungry. Access to 
nutritious meals is essential for every child's health and development. 
We know this.
  Why make these extremist cuts? We must continue to invest in 
universal school meals and so much more.
  I am proud to cosponsor the Universal School Meals Program Act and 
proud to say to all my folks in the 12th Congressional District that I 
am not going to back down. I am not going to back down until we fully 
fund SNAP benefits.
  Mr. Speaker, it is the least we can do in this Congress. It is not 
just our children. It is our disabled neighbors, our seasoned 
residents, our veterans, and working-class folks who are working hours 
and hours a day but still can't put food on the table. We must do 
better.
  Mr. Speaker, I again thank my colleague from Connecticut for bringing 
us together today to discuss the importance of protecting SNAP.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, $5 billion of the cuts will affect 
households with older adults, which, in a typical month, would include 
more than 6 million individuals age 60 or older whose benefits would be 
cut.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson).
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise because it is imperative 
that this body move with all deliberate speed to pass a farm bill that 
is both responsible and enriching for the American people.
  The farm bill is one of the most fundamental pieces of legislation 
that we enact as a government, not simply because of the dollars we 
dedicate, but more so because of the number of people who are supported 
by the passing of this indispensable law.

  Unlike most of the bills we pass, the farm bill is not a dry and 
depersonalized legislative act. There are names and faces attached to 
food. There are real people in dire situations associated and connected 
to the success of this bill.
  Unlike most of the appropriations we allocate in this body, the farm 
bill is a moral document that reminds us that we owe each other as 
human beings.
  It brings us back to the fundamental things. It reminds us that the 
politics of the future mean nothing in the stomach of a child who is 
hungry.
  To be sure, this bill compels us to move forward. This bill moves us 
beyond politics of blame so that we might embrace a more excellent way. 
In fact, I would go so far as to say that the farm bill is one of the 
few manifestations of the social contract this government makes with 
the American people. The SNAP program alone is a moral accomplishment 
that we have to reach for.
  Over 300,000 people make up my district in Illinois. Almost 73,000 of 
those households receive SNAP benefits. Almost 40 percent of these 
households have a child in them, and almost 45 percent of those 
children have some sort of disability.
  In fact, I would go so far as to say that the bill is one of the few 
manifestations of the social contract of this government that the 
American people deserve. The SNAP program alone is our moral 
achievement, and I say this because all of us know that 86 percent of 
the SNAP benefits go to the households of women and children.
  Mr. Speaker, we have to move with speed. Ask not what you can do for 
your country but what your country can do for you. Let me tell you, 
there is a mutuality in this contract. We also have to understand that 
the state has to support the people, not simply the people supporting 
the state. The farm bill helps those who are in need when their backs 
are against the wall.
  Does this bill achieve that? No, Mr. Speaker. Taking food off of 
children's plates is not the best of the American ideal. We say our 
prayers, and we pray for the food we are about to receive. We do not 
pray for the food that has now been removed from our table by our 
government.
  We must, indeed, fight for the rights of all those women and children 
and disabled families that need our help.
  This is important because the time when we ignore cities and emerging 
farming centers is over. In the district that I represent, we celebrate 
community gardens and urban farms because inasmuch as I believe that 
access to healthy food is a right that all human beings should enjoy, 
it is also a responsibility that each of us must take into our own 
hands. Each of us must do whatever we can to ensure that our families 
have the sustenance and nutrition they require for flourishing and the 
possibility of a great life.
  We need a farm bill that is responsible. Taking food out of the 
mouths of the most desperate and those of the least, the lost, and the 
left behind cannot stand. I will be opposing this farm bill until it is 
more responsive and we leave SNAP alone and ensure that every family is 
well fed in America.
  I thank Mrs. Hayes for picking up this fight.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate everything Representative 
Jackson said, and I thank him for his words.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Thompson), the chairman of the Task Force on Agriculture and Nutrition 
in the 21st Century.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am one of 
those Members who represent a significant agricultural district which 
actually has its economy based on agriculture. I also represent the 
district that former Congressman Jamie Whitten represented. Ultimately, 
he framed the farm bill such that it did not pit rural America against 
urban America.
  This bill pits rural America against urban America, and that is not 
the purpose of a farm bill. Let's talk a little bit about it.
  Mr. Speaker, you can't penalize the needy for the greedy. What I am 
saying in that respect is, so many people in this country are in need 
of nutrition benefits. That is why we have a farm bill. A substantial 
majority of the farm bill is devoted to nutrition, and rightfully so.
  Let's talk a little bit about where I am with it. This is my fourth 
farm bill. I have gone through all of it. I have seen everything that 
has been had with it, but the important part is that I serve as the 
chair of the Task Force on Agriculture and Nutrition in the 21st 
Century, appointed by Leader Jeffries.
  We went all over the country. We heard from people saying, look, 
there are important things for the farm bill, but it is all about 
compromise and working together.
  What did we hear people say? The first thing they said: Food is 
medicine. If you are worried about healthcare in this country, if 
people don't have nutrition, that is a problem.
  Today, the cost of food is steadily rising, which means Americans 
cannot afford to purchase healthy and nutritious meals.
  In going around the country, there were a number of things that we 
heard from east, west, north, and south. People said that we must 
eliminate the hot

[[Page H3470]]

food ban for SNAP recipients. SNAP recipients should have the benefit 
of hot meals. We must address the hunger among college students. We 
should protect SNAP against harmful cuts to eligibility requirements.
  Talking about eligibility requirements, most people don't know that 
if you are on Social Security and Medicare, that counts against 
seniors' eligibility for SNAP benefits. By doing that, veterans are 
also penalized in the qualification for SNAP benefits.
  We also have those individuals who have made a mistake. They have 
come out, but they are ineligible for SNAP benefits. We always talk 
about second-chance people, so why shouldn't formerly incarcerated 
people be eligible for food stamps?

  Those are the things that we heard.
  More importantly, this $30 billion cut is totally unreasonable. It 
makes no sense, and again, it penalizes people by putting politics over 
people. I hope when this issue is taken up tomorrow, Democrats will 
stand firm in their opposition against it.
  If Republicans are genuinely interested in making this work, we can 
do that, but from the nutritional standpoint, don't penalize people who 
need help. The demonstration of their help is already here.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to, after this issue is defeated, coming 
back together, pulling people together, working through all the 
logistics, and not being cute about how we fund certain programs and 
defund other programs.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I want to amplify the point that we have to 
have a farm bill that works for everyone. I often hear people say that 
we need a farm bill that represents farmers. I would challenge that. We 
need a farm bill that represents everyone.
  Members often ask me whether I represent a farming community. My 
response is that we all represent communities where people eat, and 
that has to be a part of the conversation, as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. 
Pressley).
  Ms. PRESSLEY. Mr. Speaker, before we began this Special Order hour, I 
approached Congresswoman Hayes to thank her for her leadership in 
pulling this together. She said: You are welcome, but I am so sorry we 
have to do this at all.
  I am also sorry, as are we all. It is such a shame.
  I thank Congresswoman Hayes for her leadership and partnership in our 
fight to eradicate hunger and for convening us this evening.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in solidarity with the over 50,000 SNAP 
beneficiaries in Massachusetts' Seventh Congressional District, as well 
as the 41-plus million across our country.

                              {time}  1830

  Parents who choose to go hungry because there isn't enough to feed 
both themselves and their children, they would rather make that 
sacrifice than threaten the cognitive development and nutrition that 
their children need to thrive and, certainly, to support their 
readiness to learn.
  I rise in solidarity with those families who, given the high cost of 
housing and food, are struggling because incomes are not keeping pace.
  Mr. Speaker, food insecurity is on the rise, but it doesn't have to 
be. Congress should not advance a farm bill that cuts $30 billion in 
SNAP funding.
  Now, to be clear, we are not here due to a deficit of resources for 
SNAP. We are here due to a deficit of empathy, a deficit of empathy for 
those who are food insecure, a lack of empathy for our most vulnerable 
and marginalized neighbors.
  This Republican cut to our Nation's largest nutrition program will 
disproportionately harm our seniors, veterans, children, adults with 
disabilities, and working families.
  In my home State of Massachusetts, this cut will impact one in six 
residents, over 1 million people, people who depend on SNAP to put 
healthy food on the table.
  That alarming statistic is worse for Black and Latino families who 
are twice as likely to face food insecurity.
  For decades, SNAP has been a critical tool in reducing hunger for 
low-income people, lifting millions out of poverty, and improving 
health and well-being.
  To make it plain, food is medicine. Food is life. We should not 
tolerate the suffering of our neighbors as they live in anxiety and 
fear, wondering where their next meal will come from.
  Republicans need to stop playing with people's lives. Hunger is a 
humanitarian crisis, a moral failing, and a policy choice.
  I urge my colleagues to choose compassion and care over cruelty and 
callousness and support full funding of SNAP.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Pressley for her 
remarks. I add that children in some of our most vulnerable communities 
don't have lobbyists, but they do have Members of Congress, and it is 
our job to make sure that we are actively working to improve their 
lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Omar).
  Ms. OMAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Hayes for her tireless 
efforts, and, yes, she is right. Children, the poor, the elderly, and 
the downtrodden do not have lobbyists, but they have us.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to Chairman Thompson's partisan 
farm bill. Hunger is rising at an alarming rate among U.S. households. 
In Minnesota alone, over 500,000 people are facing hunger, including 
over 180,000 children.
  SNAP serves as the first line of defense against hunger for children, 
for the elderly, for veterans, and for those who have disabilities.
  Yet, last week, Republicans unveiled the largest cuts to SNAP in 
nearly 30 years. This extreme proposal would slash SNAP funding, which 
provides food benefits for low-income families by approximately $30 
billion over the next decade, impacting every participant.
  Instead of proposing this unacceptable policy, we should be passing 
my universal school meals program. We should be fully funding SNAP. We 
should be fully funding WIC.
  Enacting this bill without dramatic changes would push more people 
below the poverty line and exacerbate hunger. I urge my colleagues to 
reject this proposal and prioritize our constituents over making 
political points.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I would add that in 2023, 1.2 million 
veterans participated in the SNAP program. I really don't understand 
why in this Congress whenever we have to make tough policy choices, 
these are the people that are always targeted.
  Last year during the debt ceiling negotiations, the program that was 
targeted and cut was SNAP and nutrition programs.
  In September when we went back for the appropriations budget, the 
program and the hard lines that were targeted were, once again, feeding 
and nutrition programs. When will this end?
  I yield to the gentlewoman from Vermont (Ms. Balint).
  Ms. BALINT. Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut, has been a champion on this issue, and I am so glad she 
has convened us here tonight.
  Over 41 million Americans depend on nutrition assistance to feed 
themselves and their families, and SNAP benefits reach millions of 
rural Americans every day.
  No State, no community, and no Congressional District in our Nation 
is immune to hunger and food insecurity.
  Paradoxically, in rural areas that grow most of our Nation's food, 
many households face real struggles with hunger. It is not just in 
metropolitan areas.
  We know poverty is the root cause of hunger, and it is often acute in 
rural communities, like in my home State of Vermont, with 15 percent of 
households in rural areas facing food insecurity.
  Millions of working families, veterans, people with disabilities, 
seniors, and children in rural communities cannot always afford enough 
food to keep themselves and their families healthy.
  Simply put, too many Americans are going hungry every day, but we 
have a vital program that actually helps to address this problem, the 
SNAP program. It provides monthly benefits to low-income families and 
individuals to help them to buy food.
  The Republicans' attack, and it is just the latest attack on this 
essential program, would slash the program by $30 billion over the next 
decade.
  If enacted, the bill would make the largest cuts to SNAP benefits in 
30

[[Page H3471]]

years at a time when we have gross wealth inequality in this country. 
Slashing anti-hunger programs that we know work is stupid, it is 
inhumane, and it is also shortsighted.

  Even if you don't think we have a moral responsibility to feed the 
children of this Nation and make sure they don't go hungry every night, 
even if you don't think it is a moral imperative, which I do, but if 
you don't, there are real consequences for individual Americans and for 
our healthcare system.
  When Americans don't have enough food, this greatly impacts the 
health of those who go hungry. Food insecurity can lead to Type 2 
diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and obesity.
  The gentlewoman from Connecticut and I are both former teachers. We 
know children who go hungry struggle in school. They have health 
problems. Americans who are food insecure are more likely to struggle 
with psychological and behavioral health issues.
  This year's farm bill should be providing more benefits to Americans. 
We should be expanding and protecting SNAP benefits.
  Instead, what are we doing? Once again, demonizing the poor. It is 
time that House Republicans drop their partisan extremism and work 
alongside Democrats to pass a truly bipartisan farm bill and actually 
help feed the American people.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Balint for her 
remarks. As my colleague stated, she and I are both former educators, 
and I really wish that before Members of Congress cast their vote on 
these cuts to programs like SNAP that they were forced to sit in a 
classroom on a Tuesday morning after a long weekend and count the 
number of kids who have their heads down on their desk.
  I wish that Members were forced to sit in a classroom on any given 
day as a kid said they had a headache third period, and you realize it 
is because they haven't had breakfast.
  I wish that Members of Congress were forced to stand with you at the 
after-school program when a kid hung behind and asked if they could 
take something home for their little brother who has been home all day, 
and they know they haven't eaten.
  I wish every Member of Congress and everyone in this Chamber were 
forced to do that before these proposals were put into a bill like the 
farm bill and before Members voted on these things.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stevens).
  Ms. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good colleague, the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut, for yielding time, and I reflect on this farm bill 
from the standpoint that at this period in time, Americans are paying 
more of their earned income for food than they have in the last 30 
years.
  Our President's FTC chair has notified us that grocery stores, big 
grocers, some food manufacturers, but mostly the grocers are price 
gouging.
  If you are middle class, if you are poor, if you are trying to save 
for college for your kid, or if you are trying to save up for an 
unexpected occurrence, food is squeezing the middle class and working 
families of this country.
  We have a responsibility to pass a farm bill that addresses the needs 
of the hungry and addresses the needs of our middle class.
  We have to get real because what we do is we say, oh, you know what? 
We are going to cap you at this income level. If you are a single mom, 
and you are raising your kid, and you are $500 over that income level, 
you don't get the SNAP benefits.
  I am sick of this type of governance. I am sick of this type of means 
testing. We did this in the pandemic. It wasn't hard.
  Steve Mnuchin was able to give everybody a capped unemployment level, 
but when it comes to food, you have a Democratic Caucus over here 
fighting over and over and over again.
  We have free and reduced lunch in our schools. Thanks to the Governor 
of Michigan for actually getting that done. We would like to see that 
in the United States of America.
  This is real stuff, and kids are going to school hungry, and kids are 
ashamed when they are carrying in those meal cards, and parents are 
worried.
  Do you know what we have? We have over a trillion dollars of credit 
card debt because people can't go to the grocery store.
  They can't take their kids out to eat because it costs $50 for a 
family of four. You can't get lunch for under $15.
  What are we litigating here? We are just filling the pockets of the 
grocers and the big business and the this and the that when we don't 
actually have a real North Star here in this Chamber.
  Just one last fact: The maximum benefits of SNAP right now fell 19 
percent short of covering basic meal costs.
  One study revealed that in 98 percent of counties, SNAP benefits did 
not cover the cost of a modestly priced meal, so we are not even 
meeting the bare minimum, my friends. We are not even doing the bare 
minimum.
  The House Democrats are going to continue to stand up to this wrong-
minded package that will not be serving the American people.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I can't help but reflect on the irony of us 
hearing every day about inflation and the rising cost of food and basic 
things that people need while also proposing cuts to the most 
vulnerable people on an anti-hunger, antipoverty program.
  I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Kennedy), the newest 
member of our Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I will start by thanking Congresswoman 
Hayes for leading this effort.
  Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 62,000 households in New York's 26th 
Congressional District that rely on the SNAP program, I rise to urge my 
colleagues to oppose the changes in the Thrifty Food Plan in the farm 
bill.
  In New York State alone, these cuts would result in the loss of $2 
billion in SNAP benefits over 10 years and the loss of over $3.5 
billion in total local economic activity.

                              {time}  1845

  At a time when overall food insecurity in New York State has 
increased from 11.4 percent to 13.5 percent and child food insecurity 
increased from 15.4 percent to 18.8 percent, the absolute last thing we 
should be doing is cutting SNAP benefits.
  These changes to the Thrifty Food Program will negatively impact 
benefit levels for Summer EBT and funding for food banks. This is 
simply unacceptable.
  Instead, Congress should pass legislation to expand access to SNAP. 
That is why I cosponsored the Enhanced Access to SNAP Act, which would 
eliminate work-for-food requirements and expand benefits for millions 
of college students.
  In my district, our primary food bank, FeedMore Western New York, has 
seen the need for food assistance in the community triple since the 
pandemic. The number of people served today has already exceeded 10-
year growth projections.
  As a Nation, we have an obligation to eradicate hunger. This bill 
will do just the opposite. I urge my colleagues to oppose this 
legislation as written.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico 
(Ms. Leger Fernandez), a leader on the Rules Committee.
  Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Hayes so 
very much for organizing and for giving me this time, because I am here 
on behalf of my good friend and the ranking member of the Rules 
Committee,  Jim McGovern, who Republicans silenced today for simply 
telling the truth about a criminal trial.
  Imagine that, on this House floor, we cannot state a fact about a 
trial. Here is another fact about the former President that represents 
a policy choice Democrats oppose. President Trump supported cutting 
SNAP by nearly 30 percent within 10 years.
  Mr. McGovern stands for the opposite. He stands up every week on this 
House floor with his poster ``end hunger now.'' If Republicans hadn't 
silenced him, he would have spoken tonight against the farm bill 
because of its impact on farmers. If Republicans hadn't silenced him, 
he would have spoken up for families who do not have enough food to 
eat.
  Similar to me, Mr. McGovern represents a district that includes 
thousands of farms and farmers who benefit from SNAP because they sell 
their produce to the program, but also farmers need to use SNAP because 
they don't make enough money. We are starving the people who are 
raising the food for us.

[[Page H3472]]

  In my district, one in five New Mexicans receive SNAP benefits, the 
highest of any State. This Republican majority silenced him, so I am 
here to read the remarks that the Republican majority might not want to 
hear from Mr. McGovern. These are his remarks:
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans are advancing a bill that cuts SNAP, our 
Nation's first line of defense against hunger, by an astounding $30 
billion.
  He would have probably raised his hands and said: You can't make this 
up.
  MAGA Republicans included a provision in their extremely partisan 
farm bill that will prevent SNAP benefits from ever being increased, 
even if a scientific review says they should be.
  The last reevaluation, in 2021, which was the first update in 50 
years, gave families an extra--wait for it--$1.40 per person per day to 
purchase food. That extra help has meant families can access more 
nutritious food. It has meant fewer skipped meals. It has meant better 
food security.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this MAGA 
Republican farm bill which would cut future benefits and increase 
hunger for kids, seniors, people with disabilities, and other 
vulnerable adults.
  Those are  Jim McGovern's remarks. While House Republicans silenced 
him today, they will never silence the truth that he speaks. We must 
end hunger now. We must answer the call: ``When I was hungry you gave 
me to eat; when I was thirsty you gave me to drink.''
  I thank Representative Jahana Hayes for her advocacy in bringing us 
together to heed this call.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Goldman).
  Mr. GOLDMAN of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from 
Connecticut very much for yielding.
  I rise today, alongside so many of my colleagues, to make one thing 
very clear. Republicans' proposed funding cuts to SNAP are 
unconscionable and will send millions into poverty and food insecurity.
  SNAP is an essential lifeline that working families across America 
rely on to put food on the table. In New York City alone, where I come 
from, more than 1.7 million people rely on SNAP benefits to help them 
feed their families. Nationwide, there are more than 41 million SNAP 
recipients.
  According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 92 percent 
of SNAP benefits go to households with income below the poverty line 
and a shocking 54 percent go to households at or below half of the 
poverty line.
  It begs the question: What do my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle have against working families doing their best to succeed? Do you 
not care if our children go without food?
  It is just simply unacceptable. Food is a basic necessity. In the 
wealthiest country in the world, it should not even be a question 
whether our government is going to make sure that everyone, especially 
innocent children, have basic necessities.
  Our budgets show where our priorities lie. Let's reverse these 
draconian cuts to SNAP, let's not cut taxes on the wealthy, and let's 
put our families and our children first.
  Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to thank all 
of my colleagues who participated in tonight's SNAP Special Order.
  I will close by saying that these cuts will affect Summer EBT, which 
is how most families feed their children over the summer, by $500 
million in this farm bill.
  I am not really sure if there is a full appreciation of who is 
affected by these cuts. I have been very transparent about my story and 
the fact that I grew up in a household that received food stamps. As a 
young college student and a single mom, I was working two jobs, 
attending community college, and still qualified for benefits.

  I promise you that my story is the same as a constituent in the 
district of every single Member of Congress who just wants a shot, who 
just wants a chance at raising their children with dignity, who just 
wants a chance at moving their family from poverty into being 
contributors to society.
  Every single one of you has someone in your district just like me, 
hundreds of families going through the same thing, working families 
that will be affected by the $11 billion in cuts that would affect 
their households and their earnings.
  I urge my Republican colleagues to rethink these proposals, to come 
back to the table and let us work on a bipartisan farm bill that helps 
everybody in America. Of all the things that we can say that we have 
done, I don't want taking food out of the mouths of children to be one 
of them.
  Tomorrow, we will go into a markup on this farm bill, and we will 
review it title by title. There are 12 titles. The Thrifty Food Plan, 
which is what many of us have spoken about tonight, which is a 
mathematical system by which benefits are evaluated and based upon, was 
moved from title IV, which is the nutrition title, to title XII, 
miscellaneous and others.
  Nutrition is not miscellaneous. It is something that should be a 
priority in this country. It is something that we have the ability to 
do. Once again, it is a policy choice.
  I held out until I saw the text because I prayed about it and I hoped 
and I wished that the cuts were not as bad as I had read about in the 
papers and heard talk about, but they are. Mr. Speaker, $30 billion in 
cuts are devastating to a program that is the most effective antihunger 
program that we have.
  I urge my colleagues to really consider their votes on this farm bill 
and the impact that it will have on children and families.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. GARCIA of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I know what it is like to grow up 
hungry.
  I know the feeling, as a young girl, opening the refrigerator, only 
to see the water jug.
  I know what it's like growing up on government-provided commodity 
food--cheese, peanut butter, oatmeal.
  This Farm Bill proposal cuts more than $30 Billion from SNAP for 
what?
  I want my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to explain why.
  I want them to explain to the single mom at the grocery store whose 
hours are being cut because the store isn't making enough revenue or to 
the farmer trying to keep the farm afloat for the next generation, who 
relies on the grocery store to make payments.
  Most importantly, I want them to be able to explain this to the 
children in my district.
  Texas ranks second worst in the nation for hunger, and if these cuts 
do become a reality, Texas will receive $2.3 billion less in SNAP 
benefits.
  Let me repeat that: $2.3 billion.
  In my district, SNAP serves over 57,000 households.
  These cuts would have a devastating impact on children, seniors, and 
individuals with disabilities.
  It's a shame that House Republicans are weakening our ability to feed 
the most vulnerable members of our communities.
  Instead of attacking SNAP, we must improve and protect it.
  I know that the dysfunction of this Congress can mess with our sense 
of reality. So let me remind you:
  The Farm Bill has long been a way to connect Republicans and 
Democrats, rural and urban, to serve all Americans. It reminds us that 
small places can do big things.
  So, it is very sad that Republicans are holding out on farmers, 
families, and our neighbors. I mean, why are we balancing budgets on 
the bellies of hungry children?
  We must put people over politics. We must put kids over cruelty. We 
must feed our kids and our communities.
  I oppose any cuts to SNAP. I oppose these harmful choices made by my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

                          ____________________