[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17309-17315]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS: HUNGER IN AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cramer). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials into the Record on the subject of this 
Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Nevada?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, this evening, we come to this Special 
Order to bring attention to the issue of hunger in America.
  In just a little more than over a week, many of us will spend time 
around our tables celebrating Thanksgiving dinner. And as we give 
thanks for the incredible benefits that we enjoy, there are many 
Americans who will go without. They will go without a nutritious meal. 
They will go without meals in the classrooms or after school. Many of 
our veterans will go without meals as well.
  And so tonight, the Congressional Black Caucus uses its hour in this 
Special Order to bring attention to these important issues, 
particularly at this time in the debate about our budget.
  Earlier this month, on November 1, the 2009 Recovery Act's temporary 
increase in funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, 
or SNAP, expired, resulting in an additional benefit cut to all 
households. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 
this is approximately a $25-per-month or $300-a-year cut to nutritional 
benefit programs for a family of four. SNAP benefits will now average 
less than $1.40 per person per meal in 2014, down from $1.50 
previously.
  Bringing attention to these issues is critical, particularly, as I 
said, when we are entering negotiation on the farm bill as well as 
negotiation on the budget. So tonight you will hear from members of the 
Congressional Black Caucus who see these issues as priorities in these 
negotiations.
  I would like to extend time now to the chair of the Congressional 
Black Caucus, a lady who serves on the Agriculture Committee and who 
has been a champion for the issues of SNAP as well as other food 
assistance programs in the farm bill. I yield to the gentlelady from 
Ohio, Representative Fudge.
  Ms. FUDGE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I would like to thank my colleagues, Congressmen Horsford and 
Jeffries, for continuing to lead the Special Order and for tonight 
leading on a Special Order hour that addresses another important topic, 
and that is hunger in America.
  In 10 days, Americans will come together with family and friends to 
celebrate Thanksgiving, but for many families around the country, their 
Thanksgiving tables will be sparse and some even bear. As one of the 
wealthiest countries in the world, it is shameful that this Nation has 
not and will not address the issue of hunger.
  As ranking member on the House Agriculture Subcommittee that oversees 
our country's nutrition programs, I am working hard to end hunger in 
America.
  One in every six Americans struggle with hunger or food insecurity. 
This is an issue that plagues nearly every community, from our inner 
cities to our rural countrysides. While Americans are still struggling 
to rebound from the recent recession, many families have already seen a 
setback as they experience a reduction in SNAP, which my colleague 
talked to you about just a moment ago. The Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities reports that this reduction is equal to the loss of 16 meals 
for a family of three.
  When children are hungry, they are not able to focus in school. When 
seniors have limited resources and limited incomes, they are forced to 
make the difficult choice between purchasing medicine and sufficient 
groceries.
  Mr. Speaker, when the House adjourns this Thursday, many of us will 
go home to spend the Thanksgiving holidays with our families. Some will 
serve the less fortunate in our communities. But let's all take the 
time to talk to workers at food banks and other charities, ask about 
the impact of Federal benefits cuts, the increased demand on charitable 
antihunger programs and what has been done to fill the gap. Just a 
short discussion with those who have fallen on hard times can be a 
sobering reminder of the impact a little help can provide.
  And to the American people who are struggling this Thanksgiving, 
please know that the CBC has not forgotten you. As the conscience of 
the Congress, we continue to fight for you every single day. The fight 
is far from over, but as long as one American is suffering, we will 
fight on.
  I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. HORSFORD. Thank you to the chair of the Congressional Black 
Caucus. As she said, we will fight on. These are issues that are not 
going to go away.
  With the farm bill negotiations, I am optimistic that, despite the 
fact that when that bill was brought here to the House of 
Representatives in October and there was an incomprehensible $40 
billion cut to SNAP, we can bridge that gap between now and the end of 
the year and pass a farm bill that includes the important policy for 
farm subsidies in this country that are necessary, but do so by not 
including special subsidies for Big Agriculture and other corporations 
while cutting $40 billion in SNAP food assistance to the poor.
  Again, these are issues that are critically important to American 
families across this great country. They are issues that we are hearing 
about daily from our constituents.
  Many people don't realize that it is not only good for the individual 
who is on food assistance, but it is also good for our economy because 
this is money that goes back into our local grocery stores that keeps 
people employed and helps our local economy. So it is a benefit in two 
ways.
  I would now like to turn attention to the gentleman from Indiana, 
Representative Carson from the Seventh Congressional District, for his 
remarks during this Special Order.
  Mr. CARSON of Indiana. Thank you to my dear colleague from Nevada, 
Congressman Horsford, also to my colleague from Brooklyn, 
Representative Jeffries, and also Chairwoman Marcia Fudge of the CBC.
  Mr. Speaker, a special ed teacher contacted my office last month, 
worried about cuts to food stamps and the

[[Page 17310]]

impact that they would have on her classroom. One of her sixth grade 
students had burst into tears in the middle of her lesson because she 
heard on the news that benefits would be cut on November 1.
  Mr. Speaker, this teacher was compassionate enough to take the 
child's concerns quite seriously. She gave them a voice by contacting 
our office. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to be this child's voice--and 
the voice of all of those who live in the wealthiest Nation on Earth 
but still live in hunger.
  Mr. Speaker, if you look at the list of the most food insecure 
districts in the country, you see populations of every race and every 
ethnicity. Even in the State with the least food insecurity, 15 percent 
of families still struggle to find their next meal. So while I speak 
today as a member of the esteemed Congressional Black Caucus, we stand 
with all Americans.
  Sadly, my congressional district in the great Hoosier State of 
Indiana holds the dubious distinction of having one of the highest 
rates of food insecurity in the entire country. Over 30 percent of 
families in Indiana struggle to put food on the table and don't always 
know where their next meal is coming from.
  To be clear, this is not a criticism of the local food banks or not-
for-profits that serve the poor very honorably. Hoosiers take care of 
one another, which is why we have some of the best service 
organizations in the entire country. But sadly, even the best food 
banks can't pull food out of thin air.
  Over the past few years, Mr. Speaker, I have heard from many Indiana 
food banks that donations are down as more people struggle to make ends 
meet in our economic downturn. With high unemployment and 
underemployment, Federal assistance simply isn't buying enough food to 
meet their demand. The shelves just aren't as full as they used to be. 
This leaves many low-income constituents to rely on SNAP, also known as 
food stamps, a program that will be cut by $5 billion next year as 
recovery provisions expire.
  Even with ideal funding levels, food stamps never means large, 
multicourse meals for poor families. The average person receives less 
than $1.50 per meal.

                              {time}  1930

  For many of these families, Mr. Speaker, a healthful meal is already 
a luxury that remains out of reach. These families just want to put 
food on the table. The program means a few hundred dollars a month per 
family, which is enough for some bread, cereal, and canned food, but 
rarely is it enough for fresh vegetables or meat. No one gets rich off 
of food stamps, but at least they can eat. Yet, for some reason, the 
program remains one of the prime targets of the Members of Congress who 
are now fighting to cut nearly 4 million people from this program. This 
is unacceptable, and it has real-life implications.
  Fortunately, in our district, the Seventh Congressional District of 
Indiana, we have the Indy Hunger Network, the Butler University's 
Center for Urban Ecology, the Indiana Healthy Weight Initiative, 
Indiana's Family and Social Services Administration, FSSA, and the Indy 
Food Council. They are working with our local farmers' markets to 
encourage people who are receiving assistance to reinvest in our local 
economy by matching the SNAP dollars spent on fresh fruits and 
vegetables. These types of partnerships are not supported when we 
decide to cut benefits and eligibility. We must invest in these types 
of creative initiatives, programs that feed our communities and 
incentivize healthy living, programs that create jobs and rebuild our 
economy so that people are fed and healthy enough to go to school, to 
work and to contribute to our economy.
  Some of my colleagues argue that our debt is out of control, that we 
need to rein in spending, and that every American should be asked to 
sacrifice equally, but we have to put this thing into perspective. If 
you are a person who makes millions of dollars every year, you might 
lose hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe. If you own a business, 
you might decide to invest a little less. By contrast, if you make a 
minimum wage and live under the poverty line year after year, what 
might you lose? Monetarily, very little--$50 here, $100 there. There 
would be a small impact on our debt, but that small amount--those few 
dollars here and there--equates to food on the table.
  When looking for so-called ``equitable treatment,'' no one is ever 
asking a wealthy person to go hungry, but that is exactly what some of 
my Republican colleagues are doing with their proposal to cut $39 
billion to SNAP. They are suggesting that some Americans, like those in 
poor neighborhoods in Indianapolis, simply don't deserve to eat because 
it is too expensive. Other Republicans argue that SNAP is only meant as 
a temporary stopgap.
  For most people, Mr. Speaker, poverty isn't a temporary stop on the 
way to prosperity. If a family is fortunate enough to pull itself out 
of poverty, it could take many years, maybe even a decade. 
Unfortunately, our recession pushed many families in the wrong 
direction, costing jobs, incomes, and homes. It also moved people 
deeper into poverty. This means more children will go to school on 
empty stomachs. It means more aging seniors already on fixed incomes 
are forced to choose between buying groceries and medication. It means 
more poverty, not less. In fact, between 2007 and 2012, during the 
height of the Great Recession, the number of food stamp users rose 77 
percent because more people needed them.
  I am standing here with my brilliant and esteemed colleagues, 
Representative Horsford and Representative Jeffries and the 
Congressional Black Caucus, because our districts are some of the 
hardest hit, but this isn't a Black issue, Mr. Speaker. This is a 
nationwide problem that impacts every color and ethnicity in every 
city, county, and town. Yet some of our colleagues in this House are 
willing to ignore millions of their constituents--those who are 
struggling to eat--just to pass a bill to cut SNAP by $39 billion. We 
should be increasing SNAP funding, not decreasing it. We should learn 
the lessons of European austerity measures. We should be debating an 
extension of expiring provisions to avoid benefit reductions next year. 
We should be focused on ending hunger in America, not just on cutting 
programs that might reduce the debt.
  Mr. Speaker, as I close, many of us take for granted that we can grab 
a sandwich or make a salad when we need to eat. Most people here--I 
know I will--will celebrate Thanksgiving next week and will have tables 
full of good food, some of the best food that money can buy. Yet, for 
many in America, Thanksgiving is just another day spent in hunger. For 
these people, a traditional Thanksgiving meal is simply out of reach. 
Yet we believe that struggling families across the country would say 
that, on Thanksgiving, they are thankful for any amount of food they 
can buy--the food that SNAP helps them buy.
  Instead of taking this away, let's fight for a higher quality of 
life, and let's stand together to make sure our neighbors, our 
children, and our vulnerable seniors never go hungry.
  Mr. HORSFORD. I would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from 
Indiana for his remarks and for highlighting the fact that this is an 
issue that affects all American families across this country. We all 
know someone who relies on SNAP benefits or we have come into contact 
with individuals--our neighbors, our friends, our veterans--who rely on 
these benefits as well. To somehow suggest that this is an issue that 
only a certain number of communities should care about is simply false, 
and it is why we are having this conversation, Mr. Speaker. This is a 
conversation that we have on each and every Monday that we have the 
opportunity to come to the floor of the House in order to raise 
important issues like the one we are raising tonight on hunger.
  I want to encourage people who are listening right now to send us 
your comments and to share your experiences with SNAP benefits. You can 
do so by sending us a tweet at #cbctalks, and we will try to share your 
comments and your questions so that we can have this conversation here 
on the

[[Page 17311]]

floor of the House, because it is a conversation that many families 
across America are confronting.
  I would like to invite up my esteemed colleague from New York, with 
whom I have the honor of co-anchoring the CBC Special Order hour. It 
has been a great opportunity to get to know him and to work with him on 
these important issues. I would like to start a bit of a conversation 
with him, if I can, on these issues. There are a number of things I 
would like to touch on with the gentleman from New York.
  The first is on which households are most affected by this food 
insecurity across America. Will you touch upon that? Then I would like 
to talk about how the attack on SNAP also plays into the Affordable 
Care Act.
  I yield now to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Congressman Horsford, thank you very much for yielding, 
and thank you very much for the tremendous leadership that you have 
shown on this issue and for anchoring the CBC Special Order, this hour 
of power during which, for 60 minutes, members of the Congressional 
Black Caucus consistently, every Monday that we are in session, have 
the opportunity to take to the floor of the House of Representatives 
and to speak directly to the American people about an issue of great 
significance affecting their quality of life. Today, we are tackling an 
extremely important issue in a country that is the wealthiest Nation in 
the world. It is the issue of hunger.
  For the life of me, I haven't been able to figure out why in this 
country, with all of this wealth--I come from the city of New York, 
where Wall Street is the engine that drives the world's economy. Yet, 
in neighborhoods that are in the shadows of Wall Street, you have 
children and seniors who are going to bed hungry and who are waking up 
the next day without any hope as to how they will be able to satisfy 
their nutritional needs.
  Across this country, it appears that there are approximately 50 
million people who are food insecure--50 million Americans who go to 
bed hungry at night. Approximately 16 million of those Americans are 
children born into very difficult circumstances not of their doing. 
They are not hungry by choice. They are hungry based on the urgency of 
their situations. It seems that, in this great Nation, we should be 
doing everything possible to deal with that food insecurity.
  Now, as it relates to Americans and to those who are most impacted by 
food insecurity and hunger, approximately 1 in 10 Caucasian households 
is food insecure; one in seven overall households in America is food 
insecure; and approximately one in four African American households--25 
percent of the people in the African American community--goes to bed 
hungry. Not a single person, whether he is Black or White, Asian or 
Latino, old or young, should be food insecure in the greatest Nation in 
the world.
  The reality of the situation is that, as opposed to making progress 
on this issue in America, we stand here today on the floor of the House 
of Representatives and are at the risk of going backwards because there 
are some in this Chamber on the other side of the aisle who, for some 
reason, think that it makes sense to balance the budget on the backs of 
children and seniors and of those who are hungry in America. There is 
no other way, Representative Horsford, to explain the fact that, in 
this Chamber, you had people voting for a $39 billion cut to the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, colloquially known as ``food 
stamps''--a $39 billion cut.
  Now, the explanation that is often given to us is that this is a 
fiscally responsible approach to the reality that, from a financial 
standpoint, we are on an unsustainable path in America. Certainly, as a 
member of the Budget Committee, I am of the view that there are some 
challenges that we have to confront in moving forward, particularly as 
they relate to the growth of the older American population and to the 
fact that people in America are living longer. Those two realities are 
going to create a strain on health care costs in America, and it is 
something that we are going to have to confront in moving forward. When 
you hear doom and gloom statements made about the deficit and the debt 
in America, it is important to unpack those statements and to really 
and truly evaluate what has driven the explosion of the debt in 
America.
  It certainly hasn't been the fact that there are hungry people in 
this country whom we are trying to help. That is not driving the debt 
explosion in America. It is a failed war in Iraq while in search of 
weapons of mass destruction, weapons that to this day have not and will 
never be found because they didn't exist; a mis-prosecuted war in 
Afghanistan that has carried on much longer than it needed to because 
we were off on a diversion in Iraq; the Bush tax cuts that were passed 
in 2001 and in 2003, which helped to explode the deficit, that were 
unpaid for and that benefited disproportionately the wealthy and the 
well off in America.
  These are the reasons we are in the debt and deficit situation that 
we confront in this country today. It is not because we have got 50 
million Americans who are food insecure whom we are trying to help in 
the greatest Nation in the world.
  Now, I am thankful for organizations like the Food Bank For New York 
City, back at home, which provides assistance to those who are trying 
to make it on a day-to-day basis with food banks all across the city, 
including many in the district that I represent.

                              {time}  1945

  But there is a role for government to play in providing assistance to 
needy Americans. These aren't individuals who have chosen poverty as a 
lifestyle. They have not chosen hunger as a lifestyle. These are 
individuals who find themselves in a difficult spot, and we as a 
government should be doing everything we can to help them turn their 
lives around.
  In 2008, the economy collapsed. It was the worst situation 
financially that we found ourselves in since the Great Depression. 
Since that moment, the recovery that we have experienced, as I have 
talked about from time to time on the floor of the House of 
Representatives, has been a very schizophrenia one. It has been an 
uneven one. It has been a recovery that has benefited some in America 
while others have been left behind.
  Earlier today, the stock market crossed over to the 16,000 point mark 
for the first time, I believe, in our Nation's great history. The stock 
market is way up, CEO compensation is way up, corporate profits are way 
up, the productivity of the American worker is way up. Yet unemployment 
remains stubbornly high and consumer demand is stagnant and working 
families and middle class folks are struggling. Income inequality has 
reached levels in some places in this country not seen since the Great 
Depression; and, as we have discussed, far too many Americans are 
hungry.
  It seems that in the midst of this uneven, schizophrenia, economic 
recovery, where the corporate titans are doing well and those with 
robust stock portfolios are doing extremely well, and CEOs and 
companies are doing extremely well, that we can find the compassion in 
this House and in the Congress and in our great government to make sure 
that in America, the richest Nation in the world, we can embrace the 
principle that no child, no senior, no individual should go to bed 
hungry; and that we can't rest until every single American has been 
able to benefit from the turnaround that began to take place under this 
administration, but that still has a ways to go in order for all 
Americans to be included in getting up off the ground, moving forward, 
and putting them in a place where they can pursue life and liberty and 
happiness consistent with that principle included in that grand 
document of our Founding Fathers.
  Let me close by making an observation. Earlier this week, or a few 
days ago over the weekend, I had an opportunity to attend a farmers 
market in the east New York portion of the district. At this farmers 
market, there was a whole host of healthy food options that were being 
sold, many of

[[Page 17312]]

which were grown in the community garden that was immediately adjacent 
to this farmers market. It was a wonderful sight to see seniors and 
young people and others who were out with the opportunity to purchase 
healthy food options--fruits and vegetables--at an affordable price. It 
was an example for me of what can be done on a community level to help 
tackle this issue.
  I resolved myself that as I came back down to the Congress, I would 
commit to doing all that I can to replicate that effort for the people 
in the Eighth Congressional District back home, for the people in 
Nevada, for the people all across this country to deal with the hunger 
issue, but also to make sure that healthy food options are made more 
available, because we recognize that the consequence, not just of 
hunger, but of poor diet, bears a direct relationship to the fact that 
many in urban America and in other parts of the country are 
disproportionately suffering from a wide range of ailments--respiratory 
disease, heart disease, childhood obesity--that directly relate to poor 
nutrition.
  That is one of the reasons why we on this side of the aisle have 
remained committed to the Affordable Care Act as something that is good 
for America. All of these issues that we work on here in this country 
ultimately tie toward trying to do things that are good for America--
for children, for seniors, for working families, and for the middle 
class.
  That is why I am proud to stand with my colleague, Representative 
Horsford, as well as the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, in 
tackling the issue of food insecurity, tackling the issue of the 
Affordable Care Act, and continuing to work on behalf of the betterment 
of America.
  Mr. HORSFORD. Thank you to the gentleman from New York, the co-anchor 
for this Special Order hour, Representative Jeffries. I look forward to 
a dialogue on this, but let me just underscore what it is we are faced 
with in this House of Representatives.
  Our colleagues on the other side, the House Republicans, proposed $40 
billion in food assistance cuts to low-income families over 10 years. 
This would affect 210,000 children who currently receive free school 
meals and would affect some 170,000 veterans--yes, veterans--who also 
depend on SNAP benefits in our country, and would cost an estimated 
55,000 job cuts in just the first year of cuts alone.
  At a time when we should be growing the economy, adding jobs, helping 
our veterans, helping the poor, and those who are striving to be part 
of the middle class, the bill that was passed in October has these 
devastating cuts to children, to seniors and, yes, even to our 
veterans.
  Now, I have said before, and I will say it again, we should not be 
cutting the safety net for our most vulnerable while maintaining costly 
government subsidies for the well-off industries. That is what my 
colleague from New York just talked about. Littered in this farm bill 
are subsidies for Big Ag, some of which they themselves didn't even ask 
for and they know should be expiring in order for us to preserve 
funding for children, seniors, and veterans.
  So it is not a Nevada child in my district who receives just over $4 
a day to eat who is the problem with the Federal budget deficit. The 
problem is corporate welfare and the special interest giveaways that 
litter our Tax Code. It is time that we put a face to the individuals 
who are benefiting from these programs. That is what we are here to 
spotlight tonight.
  I would like to share just three quick stories of constituents who 
have shared with me in my office their impact and reliance on the food 
assistance program, known as SNAP.
  The first is Alma. She lives on Social Security in my district. She 
currently receives $932 a month. Out of that she pays all of her 
bills--her rent, her utilities, she gets all of her necessities, and 
has very little left over. She has about $91 a month that she can live 
off for food. Now, with these proposed cuts, it would be $54 based on a 
history of cuts and adjustments. She doesn't want to be on SNAP 
benefits; but without that safety social net, she will go hungry.
  Another constituent, Erin, is currently a pre-law student and is 
unemployed and recently found out she is pregnant. She is working 
really hard to make a better life for herself and her family, but right 
now she can only provide for herself; but she has a child to take care 
of and the SNAP cuts will hurt her ability to do that.
  And, finally, there is Bertha, whose monthly SNAP benefit is $310 a 
month. She is a single mom of four children, and that SNAP benefit 
gives her about 2 weeks' worth of food. Her paycheck barely covers 
daily expenses, so any cut--$10, $20, $30--will have a serious impact 
on her family. And, oh, by the way, her kids are 9 months, 12 years 
old, 14, and 18.
  So these are the real people who are being affected by these cuts, 
and it is not just the SNAP program. Unfortunately, this targeting of 
the poor for savings throughout the budget is nothing new by our 
colleagues on the other side. Those who are striving to break into the 
middle class face serious barriers to entry because the House 
Republicans' budget cut job training, they are about to cut 
unemployment benefits, they have cut child care assistance and funding 
for Head Start.
  They are also trying to undermine the Affordable Care Act, which 
provides health insurance to many who could not afford it otherwise. I 
would like to tell you some stories of constituents in my district who 
have voluntarily shared their story and given me permission to share 
their story of the success of the Affordable Care Act.
  One is Michelle. She is a constituent in Pahrump, Nevada, which is 
about an hour outside of Las Vegas in my district. Michelle enrolled in 
a plan on the exchange that will save her $200 per month and allow her 
access to her OB/GYN services closer to home. She calls her enrollment 
in the program an ``overwhelmingly positive experience.'' Michelle is 
currently on a HIPAA-guaranteed plan that costs her about $565 per 
month. If she gets sick and needs an urgent visit to the doctor or a 
mammogram or other OB/GYN service, she has to drive to Las Vegas from 
Pahrump, which I said is about an hour outside.
  After enrolling in the Affordable Care Act, she will save more than 
$200 a month and have access to local urgent visits and OB/GYN services 
in her community in Pahrump. Mr. Speaker, now is not the time to turn 
back the clock or leave constituents like Michelle behind.
  There are other constituents who have also shared their stories with 
me--Jeronimo and Teresita. They have been without health insurance for 
10 years and were finally able to receive affordable insurance through 
Nevada Health Link. So, if you are watching, go to nevadahealthlink.com 
and sign up today.
  There is another one--Victor and Yumaria. They had never had 
insurance before. They are a father and a daughter who were approved 
for a qualified health plan at an affordable price, and they are very 
happy and thankful to finally have insurance.
  Then there is Lisa, who is also enrolled in Medicaid for her and her 
family, which she is entitled to based on the eligibility requirements.
  In my home State, there are some 21 percent of Nevadans who are 
currently uninsured. More than 30 percent of the children in my State 
are uninsured. So not only is it the cuts to SNAP, the cuts to Head 
Start, to job training, to vital services that so many families depend 
on, but it is this undermining of vital social safety net programs that 
people in the middle class are striving to be a part of.
  So I want to ask my colleague, Representative Jeffries, from New 
York, what are some of the positive economic impacts to the SNAP 
program? How can we help to reinforce this message that not only is 
this good for the families that we are talking about, but it is also 
good for the economy? And what about those 55,000 jobs that could be 
cut in the first year alone if the House GOP plan to cut these services 
goes into effect?
  I yield the time to the gentleman from New York.

[[Page 17313]]



                              {time}  2000

  Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distinguished gentleman from the Silver 
State, and I think it is very important to note that in addition to the 
compassionate reasons to provide food assistance to hungry Americans in 
the greatest Nation in the world--that, it seems to me, should be 
sufficient enough reason for the government to act. But if that, for 
whatever reason, does not provide adequate motivation for my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle to deem it significant, to allow for the 
robust Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to remain in effect, I 
would suggest that there are also economic benefits to making sure that 
we provide assistance to low-income Americans.
  Every economist who has studied the sluggish nature of our economic 
recovery recognizes that perhaps the biggest problem that we confront 
is the inadequate nature of our consumer demand, that Americans, for a 
wide variety of reasons, aren't spending enough. One of the reasons on 
the low-income side of the socioeconomic strata is because poorer 
Americans just don't have the resources. One of the reasons why I 
support an increase in the minimum wage is because independent 
economists have clearly indicated that, if you put additional dollars 
in the hands of lower-income Americans, the likelihood is they will 
spend those dollars, which increases economic productivity because of 
the increase in consumer demand.
  Similarly, if you have Americans who are food insecure and you 
provide them with additional resources in order to deal with the hunger 
problem in their household, they are not going to save that money. They 
are going to spend that money to deal with their food insecurity and 
that of their children. But that has a stimulant effect on the economy. 
It helps our economy grow. That was the reason why increased SNAP 
benefits were included in the Recovery Act.
  As my colleague from Nevada indicated, as of November 1 of this 
month, those increased SNAP benefits have lapsed; therefore, you have 
got people all across America with $20 to $24 less per month that they 
can spend in trying to address the food insecurity issues that they 
have. That is a problem in America. That is why one of the reasons when 
we as Democrats talk about things that should be done to turn the 
economy around, to invest in America, we support a balanced approach to 
deficit reduction and economic recovery. The other side supports an 
approach that balances the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable 
in our society. My friends on the other side of the aisle will say: 
That is just hyperbole; what facts do you have to support that charge?
  Well, is it hyperbole when you cut $39 billion from the Supplement 
Nutrition Assistance Program that your intent is to balance the budget 
on the backs of the hungry in America? When your budget cuts $168 
billion in higher education spending, is it hyperbole to suggest that 
your intent is to balance the budget on the backs of younger Americans 
in pursuit of the American Dream through a college education? Is it 
hyperbole to suggest that when you cut $810 billion from Medicaid, as 
your budget does, that your intent is to balance the budget on the 
backs of the sick and the afflicted and the poor in America? That is 
not hyperbole. These are the facts that your budget, your legislative 
action, have laid on the table.
  Mr. HORSFORD. I would like to underscore a couple of points that the 
gentleman is making here. The first is the fact that this does 
disproportionately affect the poor and those who are striving to become 
a part of the middle class. At the same time, there are corporate 
subsidies, billions of dollars of corporate subsidies for the 
agriculture industry in the farm bill and in other legislation that has 
come before this House that they will move expeditiously and then leave 
the food behind in the farm bill, for the first time that I am aware of 
that we have approved a farm bill without also including the food 
assistance component to it. They later came back and included it, but 
with a $40 billion cut.
  And the positive economic impacts of this cannot be underscored 
either. I hear from representatives from the retail industry who tell 
me that SNAP creates some $340 million in farm production for each $1 
billion of retail that is generated. There is some 3,300 farm jobs that 
are created for each $1 billion of funding that is provided for; that 
for every $1 billion of SNAP benefits, it also creates between 9,000 to 
18,000 full-time jobs. So not only is this the right thing to do, not 
only is it the morally conscionable thing to do, it is also good for 
the economy.
  And so as we make this argument, how important it is to debunk some 
of the myths surrounding SNAP, one of them being that there is fraud in 
the SNAP program and that is why the cuts aren't going to hurt the poor 
or those who are striving to be part of the middle class.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. I think if I had a dollar for every time that a Member 
on the other side of the aisle claimed wage, fraud, or abuse in order 
to justify some egregious, draconian cuts, I would be a 
multimillionaire right now.
  It is unfortunate that in the absence of legitimate facts, in order 
to justify going after these programs, that the allegation of waste or 
fraud or abuse, without a scintilla of systematic evidence, is laid on 
the table to justify actions, but let's be clear. The reason that my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, have made the 
decision to go after programs like SNAP and higher education funding 
and a wide variety of our social safety net programs that have made 
America great in many ways is because, essentially, in the budget 
supported by the majority, passed in this House, Representative 
Horsford, the majority wants to take the top tax rate in America, 39.6 
percent, and what they do in this budget, after making all of these 
egregious cuts, is to lower that top tax rate from 39.6 percent all the 
way down to 25 percent. Now, the argument is always made that the 
reason this is being done is because of stimulating the economy as a 
result of some well-worn, tired, trickle-down theory that has been 
proven to be discredited based on the facts as we know them over the 
previous two administrations.
  And I will just briefly make that point related to why in the world 
would you, in 2013, make the argument that if you drop the tax rate 
from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and then cut $39 billion from SNAP in 
order to try and do it, cut billions of dollars from higher education 
funding, voucherize Medicare, cut hundreds of billions from Medicaid, 
it is because you expect America to accept the argument that that is 
going to create a stimulating effect on the economy. Well, when the top 
tax rate was 39.6 percent during the 8 years of Bill Clinton's 
Presidency, 20 million jobs were created; when, under the Bush 
administration, the top tax rate was dropped to 35 percent, we lost 
approximately 650,000 jobs. The facts don't support the nature of your 
argument.
  That is why we think that there is just absolutely no justification 
to engage in alleged cost-cutting behavior, such as cutting $39 billion 
from SNAP in support of an economic theory that has widely been 
discredited.
  Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman.
  I would like to debunk another myth, and that is: just let the 
charities handle it. We have a number of great nonprofits out there, 
the church community, the faith-based community, can step up and fill 
the void.
  Well, I would like to turn your attention to this chart which shows 
that, with all the great work that the nonprofits and the faith-based 
community is doing in addressing hunger and food insecurity, that 
amounted to about $5 billion in estimated value of all food that is 
distributed by U.S. charities this year. That compares to $5 billion 
that has already been cut since November 1 because of the setback, the 
so-called hunger cliff. This does not take into account the additional 
cuts that are on the horizon both in the Senate plan, which is about 
$4.1 billion of additional cuts, compared to the House GOP plan, which 
again is estimated to be $39 billion.
  Now, I support the charities in my local communities. Three Square is 
our

[[Page 17314]]

local food bank. They do a phenomenal job in southern Nevada in helping 
both our rural and urban areas, getting the needs of the families and 
the food that they need in those communities.
  While my family and I will be making a donation to our local food 
bank and helping families get meals for Thanksgiving, that is not going 
to absorb the $39 billion of cuts that are proposed by the other side. 
This is just another one of those examples where the arguments don't 
support reality.
  We are living in reality. The families who are struggling on these 
benefits whose stories we have shared tonight are dealing with reality. 
It is not a mother who is raising her children who is struggling to 
make ends meet who wants to rely on SNAP benefits that is the problem 
with our budget. It is simply not. It is not the veterans who have 
served our country with distinction and honor and who have come back, 
and because of the environment in their communities, they are also 
relying on SNAP benefits. They are not the problem with the Federal 
budget deficit. It is not the seniors at the Pahrump food bank that I 
visit who literally are having their meals cut back because of their 
draconian budget cuts. These American families are simply relying on a 
safety net that has been there and should be there in the wealthiest 
country in the world.
  Now, I agree with my colleague who says that from a budget standpoint 
we have to tackle these problems, but there is a way to do it right. 
There is a way to do it without costing more in human toil, and there 
is a wrong way to do it. And the proposal by House Republicans to 
balance the budget on the backs of our children, our seniors, our 
veterans, the working poor and those who are striving to be part of the 
middle class is not it.
  We will work with you on other ways to balance the budget, but it 
shouldn't be by making more families food insecure.
  Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time we have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 5 minutes remaining.

                              {time}  2015

  Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, in that remaining time, I would like to 
yield to my colleague, Mr. Jeffries, for any concluding remarks that he 
has, and then I will close out this Special Order hour.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distinguished gentleman again for his 
tremendous leadership in bringing to the House floor such an important 
issue of concern to the African American community, but really of 
concern to all Americans.
  Hunger is an issue that should be nonpartisan in nature. It affects 
urban America and parts of suburban America and certainly rural 
America. It affects individuals who are Black, who are White, who are 
Latino, who are Asian, all different religious groups and ethnic 
persuasions. It is an issue that we should be willing to work on on a 
nonpartisan basis to find common ground with folks on the other side of 
the aisle to address an issue that should trouble every single Member 
of the House of representatives.
  How can it be that we accept the fact that there are 50 million 
Americans who are food insecure in the wealthiest Nation in the world?
  I have traveled all over the district that I represent, and I hear 
the arguments of some on the other side of the aisle that the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, as it is sometimes 
referred to, is a program that creates dependency. Well, I haven't met 
a single one of my constituents who chooses hunger as a lifestyle. It 
seems to me that is a rough style to choose.
  These individuals, for one reason or another, find themselves in a 
tough spot, and we in the Congress should be doing everything we can to 
try and help them out, to get them back on their feet, to put them in a 
position where they can move forward and make progress for themselves 
and for their families. Ultimately, that would mean progress for the 
community and for this country.
  I thank the gentleman again for his leadership, and I look forward to 
working with you on this issue as we move forward.
  Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from New York for your leadership 
and commitment to this issue. You have come to this floor on many 
occasions to talk about the important issues facing our country, and 
you are always inclusive and factual. You make a compelling argument 
for why this body needs to take up these issues.
  Let me just conclude, Mr. Speaker, by saying not only do we reject 
$40 billion in cuts to the food assistance program, but we are actually 
calling on our colleagues on the other side to work with us, to help 
make SNAP work even better for America's families, to build on the 
great things that SNAP already does. This program is actually one of 
the most successful antihunger programs that we have. It lifts more 
families out of poverty than most other programs.
  Let me just close by sharing one example that we can be addressing. 
The example I want to close with is the Thrifty Food Plan, which is 
currently how SNAP benefits are currently calculated. The TFP is the 
lowest cost of the four food plans developed by the USDA, and it is 
unrealistic for a family of four.
  A family of four receiving $632 per month doesn't go very far in 
buying those fresh fruits and vegetables that my colleague talked about 
at the local farmers market. The current TFP formula fails to calculate 
difficulties associated with the lack of food availability. The fact 
that in many of our communities, both rural and urban, the 
accessibility to nutritious, wholesome meals and fruits and vegetables 
isn't even available. That falls disproportionately on the poor to have 
to pick up those costs. For example, it doesn't include the cost of 
transportation. It doesn't include food preparation time that so many 
working families struggle with. It leaves the average family of four 
with a $200 monthly benefit shortfall.
  Again, this is simply unacceptable. As the wealthiest Nation in the 
world, no American--not our children, not our veterans, not our 
seniors--should be forced to survive on what is now $1.40 per meal. 
That is why, Mr. Speaker, we are here this hour to bring attention to 
this issue and to call upon our colleagues to work with us, to not 
implement these cuts and to make these programs work--not only SNAP, 
but Head Start and the other vital programs that so many families are 
depending on as part of that social safety net and the fabric of the 
American society.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to 
recognize the devastating impact of hunger in America. The debate 
surrounding cuts to nutrition assistance coupled with nationwide food 
insecurity is a recipe for disaster for our neediest citizens.
  The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a vital tool 
that helps feed Americans struggling economically. More than 90 percent 
of SNAP beneficiaries are children, elderly, veterans, or disabled. 
Four to six million low-income people will be affected by cuts to SNAP 
funding, including the 450,000 residents in Dallas County, that are 
food insecure, 300,000 of which are children.
  The GOP's efforts to cut $40 billion in SNAP are unconscionable and 
we must stand strong for the 16.4 percent of our population that 
remains food insecure. According to the USDA, one in every five Texas 
households experiences food insecurity. Out of the estimated 1.8 
million Texas children, one in four live in food insecure households. 
Approximately 3.6 million Texas residents receive some type of federal 
food assistance.
  In my district, I chair the Dallas Coalition for Hunger Solutions 
which is composed of organizations dedicated to fighting hunger and 
making Dallas County food secure. I strongly support the federal 
programs that work to support the needs of our citizens nationwide. I 
urge my colleagues to oppose any proposed cuts to nutrition assistance. 
Collectively, we can do so much to confront food insecurity in our 
nation.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, on November 1st, thousands of families in 
my congressional district saw a cut to their SNAP (food stamps) 
benefits. A family of four saw a loss of up to $36 a month. Over the 
course of the next 12 months, many families across my district will 
lose more than 24 million meals. Michigan

[[Page 17315]]

families are already struggling to put food on the table, and the last 
thing we should do is take food away from those who need it most. 
Unfortunately, this has already happened.
  There's no sugarcoating it: we have a hunger problem in Michigan and 
across the United States. The majority of households receiving SNAP are 
those with children. It is our responsibility to protect--not cut--
critical programs like SNAP for the families and kids who rely on them. 
That's why I introduced H.R. 3353, the ``Extend Not Cut SNAP Benefits 
Act'' which would extend the Recovery Act's 13.6% increase in SNAP for 
an additional year.
  This extraordinarily low level of SNAP benefits under the new levels 
will force families to find ways to stretch their already limited 
benefits even further at the grocery store in order to put healthy, 
nutritious food on the table for their kids. With less money to spend 
on groceries each month, the importance of nutrition education becomes 
even more real.
  Yet the House and Senate proposed deep cuts within the Farm Bill 
could cut SNAP by as much as an additional $40 billion (on top of the 
cut we just saw on November 1st) and would cut funding for SNAP 
Education (SNAP-Ed). Keeping SNAP and SNAP-Ed strong isn't just the 
right thing to do--it's also the smart thing to do. Children who get 
enough of the healthy food they need, as a rule, face fewer health 
problems, do better in school and grow up to lead stronger, more 
productive lives.
  Mrs. BEATTY. Mr. Speaker, as we begin to enter the holiday season, 
let us reflect on the devastating impact of hunger on individuals, 
families, and communities.
  Mr. Speaker--hunger is no holiday for millions of Americans.
  50 million individuals in this country are food insecure and 17 
million of them are children.
  Making sure children are well fed is necessary if America is to reach 
its health, education, economic, and fiscal goals.
  In 2011, 679,900 children in Ohio lived in food insecure households.
  On Nov. 1, the largest cuts in the history of our country's food 
stamp program, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program, went into effect when the increase given by the 2009 economic 
stimulus package expired.
  This reduction, which totaled $5 billion, has already touched more 
than 47 million people--1 in 7 Americans.
  Moreover, billions more in cuts are scheduled to occur in the 
following two years, despite the fact that food insecurity in America 
has not even begun to return to pre-recession levels.
  Mr. Speaker, we are in a hunger crisis.
  When almost 50 million people in the richest country on the planet 
are hungry, that is a crisis.
  Moreover, food insecurity can have wide-ranging detrimental 
consequences on individual's physical and mental health, especially 
with the more vulnerable populations such as pregnant women and 
seniors.
  According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, more than 1 in 6 
Ohio households faced food insecurity from 2010 to 2012, up 6.3 
percentage points from a decade earlier.
  Ohio trailed only Missouri and Nevada in hunger increases during that 
same time.
  Ohioans have been left to cope with loss of employment, wage 
stagnation, slow economic recovery, and food insecurity.
  Ohioans are hurting.
  Shellie, a mother in my district expressed to me that by the end of 
every month, she has to tell her kids that all they have left to eat is 
enough food for dinner.
  There is nothing left in the pantry to put on the table for breakfast 
or lunch.
  Then there is Roberta, who was a county caseworker in my district for 
25 years and a school board member for ten years, and suffered a 
serious and sudden illness.
  Now, because of medical bills, she and her family rely on food stamps 
and food pantries.
  Another touching example is Saundra in my district, who is disabled 
and lost her job during the recession.
  Food stamps are her only recourse for food.
  There are thousands of stories like Shellie's, Roberta's, and 
Saundra's throughout our country.
  We must let our constituents know that we hear their struggles and we 
are fighting for them.
  Preventing irrational cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program (SNAP) is a great first step to curbing hunger.
  The large $40 billion cuts in the House version of the 2013 Farm Bill 
are unprecedented.
  SNAP should remain a part of the farm bill and I urge anyone who 
believes hunger and food insecurity should end to make sure that it 
does.
  This is a practical and moral imperative.
  I will continue to support the American people through their daily 
fight to preserve funding for these initiatives and to end hunger in 
America.
  I thank you for the opportunity to speak on this important issue.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the stance of the 
Congressional Black Caucus in their daily fight to preserve, support 
and increase funding for initiatives to end hunger in America. The 
Congressional Black Caucus has proposed a fiscally sound and morally 
responsible budget that protects the SNAP program as well as other 
programs that are vital to vulnerable communities.
  As a member of the House Hunger Caucus, Out of Poverty Caucus, and 
proud co-sponsor of H.R. 3353, the ``Extend Not Cut SNAP Benefits Act'' 
I am dedicated to educating my fellow Members on hunger-related issues 
as I understand the devastating impact hunger has on millions of 
children and families in our country.
  The cuts in SNAP benefits implemented on November 1, 2013, reduce the 
amount per-meal that beneficiaries receive to $1.40, affecting not only 
the families that rely on SNAP but also straining the resources of 
local food pantries that will be pressed to fill the gap, to keep 
people from going hungry. Together, the SNAP meals lost in 2014 from 
the scheduled cuts--nearly 3.4 billion meals--would exceed the 
projected annual meal distribution by Feeding America food banks around 
the country.
  Further, a family of 4 will receive $36 less each month which 
translates into a week of groceries that will be taken away from poor 
working families, disabled persons, the elderly and children.
  This reduction in benefits is the largest wholesale cut in the 
program since Congress passed the first Food Stamps Act in 1964 and 
affects nearly one in seven Americans or more than 47 million people. 
The cut is equivalent to 16 meals a month for a family of three.
  SNAP programs lifted 4.7 million Americans above the poverty line in 
2011, including 2.1 million children. Approximately 91% of SNAP 
benefits go to households with incomes below the poverty line. SNAP is 
also a win for the economy because every $1 in benefits generates $1.70 
in economic activity.
  In the 18th Congressional District of Texas, my constituency, there 
are 154,741 persons who will suffer because of the reduction in food 
assistance to an average of $1.40 meal. Studies have documented the 
inadequacy of this level of funding to meet the minimal nutrition 
requirements for children and families. Hundreds of thousands of Texans 
may go hungry if the cuts to the SNAP programs are not restored.
  As I stated earlier I am a strong advocate for H.R. 3353, the 
``Extend Not Cut SNAP Benefits Act'', which maintains SNAP benefits at 
the pre-November 1, 2013 levels and allows the House and Senate to work 
to reach agreement on the Fiscal Year 2014 budget for food programs.
  Congress has the power to enact supporting legislation for the 
individuals, families, and communities that struggle with food security 
in our country. I encourage the collaboration of both sides of the 
aisle to work for this common good.

                          ____________________