Food Stamps

Subterms

    Latest story

    138 Shares116 Views

    Senate Official Rejects Food Aid Cuts Proposed by Republicans in Megabill

    by

    The ruling by the parliamentarian sent G.O.P. lawmakers back to the drawing board to cover the costs of President Trump’s domestic policy bill.A top Senate official on Friday night rejected a bid by Republicans to slash federal food aid payments as part of their sweeping legislation carrying President Trump’s domestic agenda, sending party leaders scrambling to find another way to help offset the massive cost of the bill.The measure passed by the House last month and on track to be considered in the Senate next week would cover part of the cost of extending and expanding large tax cuts by cutting social safety net programs including Medicaid and nutrition programs, including SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.Republicans are moving the bill through Congress using special rules that shield it from a filibuster, depriving Democrats of the ability to block it. But to qualify for that protection, the legislation must comply with a rigorous set of budgetary restrictions meant to ensure that it will not add to the deficit. And the Senate parliamentarian, an official appointed by the chamber’s leaders to enforce its rules and precedents, must evaluate such measures to ensure that every provision meets those requirements.Elizabeth MacDonough, the parliamentarian, ruled that the SNAP measure, which would push some of the costs of nutrition assistance onto the states, did not. That sent Republicans back to the drawing board to find another strategy for covering tens of billions of dollars of the bill’s cost.She also said Republicans could not include a provision that would bar immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents from receiving SNAP benefits, according to Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Budget Committee.The House-passed bill would require all states to pay at least 5 percent of SNAP benefit costs, and more if they reported a high rate of errors in underpaying or overpaying recipients. That provision was estimated to save roughly $128 billion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Millions Could Lose Food Stamp Benefits Under Trump Tax Bill, Analysis Finds

      by

      Others could see their monthly benefits reduced if the bill were to become law, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.Millions of low-income Americans could lose access to food stamps or see reductions in their monthly benefits as a result of House Republicans’ newly adopted tax bill, according to an analysis released Thursday from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.The findings underscore the significant trade-offs in the party’s signature legislative package, which seeks to save money by cutting federal anti-poverty programs in a move that may leave some of the poorest Americans in worse financial shape.To save nearly $300 billion over the next decade, Republicans proposed a series of new rules that would tighten eligibility under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Under their bill, a wider range of aid recipients would be required to obtain work to qualify for federal help.Republicans say the change aims to reduce waste and ensure that the federal government provides food stamps only to the truly needy. They have similarly looked to expand work requirements to Medicaid, which provides health insurance to low-income Americans.Still, the work mandate could reduce participation in SNAP by more than three million people in an average month over the next decade, according to the budget office, which studied a version of the party’s recently approved legislative package.Republicans also proposed to have states assume some of the costs for the federal food stamp program, an idea that has troubled some governors, who say their budgets cannot afford to shoulder the responsibility.As a result, congressional budget scorekeepers estimated the shift could result in an average of 1.3 million people losing access to SNAP. They attributed the reduction to the fact that some states may opt to “modify benefits or eligibility or possibly leave the program altogether because of the increased costs.”Issuing its analysis, the budget office cautioned it could not produce one total, concise estimate of the number of people who could lose anti-hunger aid, given the possibility of overlap and the potential interactions with changes to other federal programs.Still, the budget office estimated that many of Republicans’ proposed changes would reduce eligibility while cutting benefit amounts for those who do remain on the program. A small percentage of households could even see a roughly $100 reduction in their monthly allowance because of a provision that would change how some benefits are computed, according to the analysis. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      In Trump Tax Package, Republicans Target SNAP Food Program

      by

      Limiting funding for SNAP could help defray the costs of President Trump’s tax plans, but could result in millions of low-income families losing access to aid. House Republicans on Monday proposed a series of sharp restrictions on the federal anti-hunger program known as food stamps, seeking to limit its funding and benefits as part of a sprawling package to advance President Trump’s tax cuts.The proposal, included in a draft measure to be considered by the House Agriculture Committee this week, would require states to supply some of the funding for food stamps while forcing more of its beneficiaries to obtain employment in exchange for federal aid. The moves could result in potentially millions of low-income families losing access to the safety net program. But G.O.P. leaders insist that their approach would improve the provision of food stamp benefits while helping to defray the cost of Mr. Trump’s expensive legislative ambitions.House Republicans said in a statement on Monday that their proposal emphasized “reinforcing work, rooting out waste, and instituting long-overdue accountability incentives to control costs and end executive and state overreach.”The Republican overhaul specifically targets the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP With a roughly $110 billion annual budget, it is the federal government’s largest nutrition assistance initiative, providing monthly allotments to an average of 42 million people in the 2025 fiscal year, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which manages the program.Proponents of the food stamp program say that it has long served as a critical lifeline for low-income families by ensuring that they do not experience hunger in a nation where about one in seven reported food insecurity at some point during 2023, according to federal data released in September.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      States Will Be Able to Bar Federal Food Benefit Recipients From Buying Soft Drinks, Kennedy Says

      by

      Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced on Friday that the Trump administration will begin allowing states to bar recipients of federal food assistance from using the money to pay for soft drinks — a core component of his “Make America Healthy Again” agenda.Mr. Kennedy announced the change to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, in Martinsburg, W.Va., where he appeared with Gov. Patrick Morrissey, who recently signed legislation banning foods containing most artificial food dyes and two preservatives — the first state to do so.The health secretary is talking to 15 other governors about similar moves, according to Calley Means, a health food entrepreneur who recently joined the White House to help carry out Mr. Kennedy’s agenda. Mr. Kennedy told the audience in West Virginia that the food companies had used science to make their products addictive, just as tobacco firms had.“Food is medicine,” Mr. Kennedy told a group of teachers, children and parents in the gymnasium of a local school. He added: “It treats our health. It treats our mental health.”Mr. Kennedy’s appearance, with a Republican governor, speaks to a pronounced cultural change in the politics of food and health, as Republicans join the health secretary’s “make America healthy again” movement. But in a decidedly Republican twist, Mr. Morrissey also announced new “work, training and educational requirements” for SNAP participants.The governor also announced a new statewide exercise initiative, and said he intended to “start shedding a few pounds” himself.Mr. Morrisey announced he would seek the required waiver to bar soft drink purchases using SNAP, along with other initiatives intended to promote exercise and to encourage West Virginians to become healthier. The state has one of the highest obesity rates in the nation. He introduced Mr. Kennedy as one of “the most talked about, vilified men in America” and “a warrior for children.”Mr. Kennedy does not have authority over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which falls under the Agriculture Department. But Mr. Means said that the agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, has agreed to grant the waivers. More

    • 50 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The First Post-Reagan Presidency

      by

      Credit…Timo LenzenSkip to contentSkip to site indexOpinionThe First Post-Reagan PresidencySo far, Joe Biden has been surprisingly progressive.Credit…Timo LenzenSupported byContinue reading the main storyOpinion ColumnistJan. 28, 2021, 8:50 p.m. ETDuring Donald Trump’s presidency, I sometimes took comfort in the Yale political scientist Stephen Skowronek’s concept of “political time.”In Skowronek’s formulation, presidential history moves in 40- to 60-year cycles, or “regimes.” Each is inaugurated by transformative, “reconstructive” leaders who define the boundaries of political possibility for their successors.Franklin Delano Roosevelt was such a figure. For decades following his presidency, Republicans and Democrats alike accepted many of the basic assumptions of the New Deal. Ronald Reagan was another. After him, even Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama feared deficit spending, inflation and anything that smacked of “big government.”I found Skowronek’s schema reassuring because of where Trump seemed to fit into it. Skowronek thought Trump was a “late regime affiliate” — a category that includes Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover. Such figures, he’s written, are outsiders from the party of a dominant but decrepit regime.They use the “internal disarray and festering weakness of the establishment” to “seize the initiative.” Promising to save a faltering political order, they end up imploding and bringing the old regime down with them. No such leader, he wrote, has ever been re-elected.During Trump’s reign, Skowronek’s ideas gained some popular currency, offering a way to make sense of a presidency that seemed anomalous and bizarre. “We are still in the middle of Trump’s rendition of the type,” he wrote in an updated edition of his book “Presidential Leadership in Political Time,” “but we have seen this movie before, and it has always ended the same way.”Skowronek doesn’t present his theory as a skeleton key to history. It’s a way of understanding historical dynamics, not predicting the future. Still, if Trump represented the last gasps of Reaganism instead of the birth of something new, then after him, Skowronek suggests, a fresh regime could begin.When Joe Biden became the Democratic nominee, it seemed that the coming of a new era had been delayed. Reconstructive leaders, in Skowronek’s formulation, repudiate the doctrines of an establishment that no longer has answers for the existential challenges the country faces. Biden, Skowronek told me, is “a guy who’s made his way up through establishment Democratic politics.” Nothing about him seemed trailblazing.Yet as Biden’s administration begins, there are signs that a new politics is coalescing. When, in his inauguration speech, Biden touted “unity,” he framed it as a national rejection of the dark forces unleashed by his discredited predecessor, not stale Gang of Eight bipartisanship. He takes power at a time when what was once conventional wisdom about deficits, inflation and the proper size of government has fallen apart. That means Biden, who has been in national office since before Reagan’s presidency, has the potential to be our first truly post-Reagan president.“Biden has a huge opportunity to finally get our nation past the Reagan narrative that has still lingered,” said Representative Ro Khanna, who was a national co-chair of Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign. “And the opportunity is to show that government, by getting the shots in every person’s arm of the vaccines, and building infrastructure, and helping working families, is going to be a force for good.” More