Republicans Ramp Up Their Nutrition Assistance Attacks in House Agriculture Committee
Democrats called further SNAP cuts a red line, saying they would “stand united” against any Farm Bill that reduces benefits for poor and working class people.
House Republicans continued their long-term campaign to reduce benefits, expand work requirements, and increase barriers to participation for popular U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) nutrition programs in yesterday’s House Agriculture Committee Farm Bill hearing.
After a bruising fight in last week’s debt ceiling deal over expanded Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirements, House Agriculture Committee Chair Glenn Thompson (R-PA) attempted to use softer, gentler rhetoric this time around. Thompson repeatedly expressed support for nutrition programs during the hearing—titled “Innovation, Employment, Integrity, and Health: Opportunities for Modernization”--even as Republican witnesses and members proposed program cuts.
USDA’s 15 nutrition programs “show the world how we, as a nation, take care of one another,” Thompson said in his opening statement. “And if we can put politics aside to have honest dialogue, promote pragmatic policymaking, and commit to good governance, we can move mountains for those in need.”
Democratic members of the House Agriculture Committee were having none of it.
Though he agreed that some program improvements could be made in a bipartisan manner, Ranking Member David Scott (D-GA) and other Democratic members affirmed their commitment to protecting SNAP and other nutrition programs.
“My Democratic colleagues and I have said, and will continue to say, we stand united against efforts to take food away from children, families, or any vulnerable Americans – in the Farm Bill or any legislation,” Scott said in his statement. “We’re too big a country, we’re too powerful a country, to let any American go hungry.”
Representative Jim McGovern (D-MA), who led Democratic opposition to Republican SNAP cut proposals during the last Farm Bill re-authorization process in 2018, doubled down on Scott’s opening.
“The Freedom Caucus has all kinds of red lines we’re supposed to adhere to, well I have a red line, too,” McGovern said. “You cut SNAP, you make more people in this country hungry, then we are against this Farm Bill. We will fight against this Farm Bill, plain and simple.”
McGovern went on to question unsubstantiated claims in testimony by witness Dawn Royal, Director and Past President of the United Council on Welfare Fraud (UCWF), that SNAP fraud rates could be as high as 40%. Royal provided no evidence to back up her assertions, nor is there any public information on the UCWF website documenting anywhere close to 40% SNAP fraud rates.
(NOTE--The Cocklebur has requested this information from UCWF. The organization responded saying they would provide further information once their staff returns from Washington, DC.)
Nutrition programs make up around 80% of Farm Bill spending, dwarfing farm supports, crop insurance, conservation, research, rural development, and other important programs. The current Farm Bill must be re-authorized or extended by September 30, 2023, when the current bill expires.
As previously reported in The Cocklebur, a larger percentage of rural people actually use SNAP when compared with urban and suburban places. According to the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), rural people are 25% more likely than their urban counterparts to participate in SNAP. Nationally, participation is highest among households in rural counties (16%) compared with households in metro counties (13%).
More people use SNAP in rural America because rural counties tend to have higher rates of poverty than metropolitan counties. According to Daily Yonder analysis, 301 of 353 (85.3%) persistently-poor counties in the U.S. are rural. Persistent poverty counties (as they are termed by USDA’s Economic Research Service, ERS) are clustered in the South (84%). Of the 301 nonmetro persistent poverty counties, 267(88.7%) had a poverty rate over 20%.
The Cocklebur covers rural policy and politics from a progressive point-of-view. Our work focuses on a tangled rural political reality of dishonest debate, economic and racial disparities, corporate power over our democracy, and disinformation peddled by conservative media outlets. We aim to use facts, data, and science to inform our point-of-view. We wear our complicated love/WTF relationship with rural America on our sleeve.