[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 6]
[House]
[Page 8685]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             END HUNGER NOW

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the 1996 welfare reform law imposed new 
limitations on able-bodied adults without dependents, known as ABAWDs, 
receiving food assistance through the SNAP program. These 18- to 49-
year-olds who do not have children or serve as caretakers to other 
individuals have access to SNAP for only 3 months in any 3-year period 
when they are not employed at least half time or are in a work training 
program.
  It is important to note that the law doesn't require States to offer 
job training programs--most do not--and SNAP recipients have their 
benefits cut off after 3 months even if they are searching for work or 
are working less than 20 hours per week.
  So who are the ABAWDs?
  While some on the other side of the aisle tend to stereotype these 
vulnerable adults, the truth of the matter is there is no one face to 
the ABAWD population. This is a very diverse group. About 45 percent 
are women. Close to one-third are over 40 years old. Many have limited 
educational experiences, with more than 80 percent having no more than 
a high school education or a GED. Some have mental health issues, 
difficult histories of substance abuse, or are ex-offenders who have 
nowhere else to turn, and as many as 100,000 are veterans.
  These childless adults on SNAP are extremely poor and often 
experience chronic homelessness. They often turn to SNAP as a safety 
net when they lose their jobs, when their hours at work get cut, or 
when their wages are so low they are unable to make ends meet. Most 
childless adults on SNAP who are able to work do. At least 25 percent 
of these households work while receiving SNAP, and about 75 percent 
work in the year before or after receiving benefits. While many 
struggle with job insecurity, among those households that worked in a 
typical month while receiving SNAP or at some point during the 
following year, about half worked full time for 6 months or more in the 
year after they were on the program.
  Because childless adults receive only limited government assistance, 
access to SNAP becomes a critical lifeline to these Americans who are 
living in poverty. After these vulnerable adults leave the SNAP 
program, research suggests that many continue to face incredible 
hardship. While some continue to struggle to find jobs, former SNAP 
recipients who work tend to earn low wages that keep them in poverty. 
They struggle to get the healthy food they need. Often, they must eat 
less or skip a meal entirely because they simply have no money with 
which to purchase food.
  A provision in the 1996 welfare law allows States to suspend the 3-
month limit in areas with high and sustained unemployment. In the 
aftermath of the Great Recession, Democratic and Republican Governors 
requested and received waivers from the 3-month limit, and the limit 
has not been in effect in most States during the past several years. 
But as the economy continues to recover, fewer areas qualify for 
waivers despite the fact that many of these vulnerable Americans still 
struggle to find long-term, stable jobs. As these waivers expire this 
year, it is expected that more than 500,000 and as many as 1 million of 
our poorest neighbors will be cut off from SNAP. Thousands already 
began losing their benefits on April 1 as 23 States began implementing 
the time limits for the first time since before the recession.
  These waivers are providing support as they were intended to: helping 
our communities overcome hardship and providing a lifeline to 
vulnerable adults who are unable to find work during difficult times. 
So I am greatly disappointed by the proposals offered by Speaker Ryan 
to eliminate the ability of States to request these waivers during 
times of economic hardship.
  Mr. Speaker, cutting off food assistance for vulnerable adults who 
are unable to make ends meet is a rotten thing to do, and it only makes 
hunger worse in our communities. How does making hunger worse make it 
easier to get a job? Every single congressional district is home to 
Americans who are struggling with hunger. The hardships they face are 
exactly why such cuts are so cruel. These proposals are mean-spirited, 
political documents that are based on the false narrative that people 
don't want to work.
  If my Republican friends were serious about getting people back to 
work and responsibly moving those who can work off of public 
assistance, their budgets would reflect that, but they don't. 
Republicans have offered no guarantees that vulnerable Americans will 
have access to job training programs that will get them back to work. 
Many job training programs are already stretched incredibly thin. If 
Republicans were serious, they would increase job training funding so 
that more Americans could get the help they need to get back on their 
feet. And, at every turn, they have resisted calls to increase the 
minimum wage. Work ought to pay in this country.
  I sometimes wonder if my friends on the other side of the aisle have 
ever met working people who are living in poverty and who rely on SNAP 
for access to food. The truth is their neatly packaged rhetoric doesn't 
match the reality of those who are working to make ends meet.
  We must reject harmful attempts to limit SNAP participation for our 
vulnerable neighbors and, instead, work on solutions to end hunger now.

                          ____________________