House Ag nutrition subcommittee hearing signals difference on SNAP
February 27, 2015 |02:28 PM
Opening statements by House Agriculture Nutrition Subcommittee Chairwoman Jackie Walorksi, R-Ind., and ranking member Jim McGovern, D-Mass., before the subcommittee's first hearing on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Thursday signaled that there are major differences in the approach Republicans and Democrats will take to what House Agriculture Committee Chairman Michael Conaway, R-Texas, calls a "top-to-bottom review" of the program.
The Republicans appear to be starting from the position that SNAP, better known as food stamps, should do more than feed people, while the Democrats are focused on ending hunger.
Rep. Jackie Walorksi, R-Ind.
In her opening statement, Walorksi said SNAP is “the largest welfare program in both the number of recipients and the amount of spending, yet the program lacks a clear mission and the data reveals that it is not helping lift people out of poverty.”
“The SNAP program does not function by itself and many other factors contribute to its ultimate success,” Walorksi said.
“That’s why it’s so important that this subcommittee focus our efforts on understanding how SNAP can best serve families and children across the United States.”
“What’s very clear to me, and what I hope becomes clear to you in the coming months, are the many layers of bureaucracy that exist within SNAP,” she said. “Currently 18 different programs provide food assistance, and while many of them do not fall within this committee’s jurisdiction, they do serve SNAP recipients.
“In addition, a range of low-income benefit programs are offered at the local, state and federal levels. On top of that, a web of nonprofits and community service providers exist to provide assistance.”
Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.
McGovern thanked Walorksi “for reaching out to me beforehand and setting up a time for us to get to know each other and chat.”
But he added, “I’m a little surprised that we’re starting the first ‘top-to-bottom’ review of programs within this committee’s jurisdiction with SNAP, a program whose caseloads and spending are going down, according to [the Congressional Budget Office].”
“I hope we exercise the same rigorous oversight on farm subsidies to big agribusiness — payments that CBO projections indicate could end up costing nearly $5 billion more than expected in the farm bill.”
McGovern said he wanted to be sure that his colleagues “remember just how poor you must be to qualify for SNAP.”
“Approximately 92 percent of SNAP benefits go to households with monthly incomes below the poverty line, and 57 percent go to households with incomes below half the poverty line,” he said.
“For a family of three, the poverty line is about $1,650 per month. That’s not a lot of money. SNAP eligibility requirements are tough, even if you are poor. And, the program has one of the lowest error rates of any federal program. The bottom line is that SNAP works.”
McGovern also said that he hopes the subcommittee addresses the issue of the “so-called ‘cliff.’”
“This happens when someone gets a job but earns so little they lose their benefits and end up worse off. And, if we really want to move people out of poverty for good, we need to raise the minimum wage.”
McGovern agreed that many of the issues are outside the purview of the House Agriculture Committee, and noted that he has been asking the White House to arrange a conference on food and nutrition that would “bring people together from different federal agencies, business, nonprofits, faith organizations, beneficiaries and so on to come up with a holistic plan to end hunger.”
The subcommittee heard from a series of researchers about the characteristics and dynamics of people who receive SNAP benefits.
Walorksi noted that over the coming months, “our review will include a range of stakeholder perspectives, including current and former recipients; non-profits, states and localities, the food industry, and nutrition experts to name a few.”
Walorski and McGovern did not issue a joint news release after the hearing.
Four witnesses presented testimony on the characteristics of SNAP beneficiaries and how their application and recertification processes are handled.
Summaries of the witnesses’ testimonies and some of their exchanges with Walorski and McGovern may be found at Farm Policy. The House Agriculture Committee has also posted the archived webcast of the hearing.
The Republicans appear to be starting from the position that SNAP, better known as food stamps, should do more than feed people, while the Democrats are focused on ending hunger.
In her opening statement, Walorksi said SNAP is “the largest welfare program in both the number of recipients and the amount of spending, yet the program lacks a clear mission and the data reveals that it is not helping lift people out of poverty.”
“The SNAP program does not function by itself and many other factors contribute to its ultimate success,” Walorksi said.
“That’s why it’s so important that this subcommittee focus our efforts on understanding how SNAP can best serve families and children across the United States.”
“What’s very clear to me, and what I hope becomes clear to you in the coming months, are the many layers of bureaucracy that exist within SNAP,” she said. “Currently 18 different programs provide food assistance, and while many of them do not fall within this committee’s jurisdiction, they do serve SNAP recipients.
“In addition, a range of low-income benefit programs are offered at the local, state and federal levels. On top of that, a web of nonprofits and community service providers exist to provide assistance.”
McGovern thanked Walorksi “for reaching out to me beforehand and setting up a time for us to get to know each other and chat.”
But he added, “I’m a little surprised that we’re starting the first ‘top-to-bottom’ review of programs within this committee’s jurisdiction with SNAP, a program whose caseloads and spending are going down, according to [the Congressional Budget Office].”
“I hope we exercise the same rigorous oversight on farm subsidies to big agribusiness — payments that CBO projections indicate could end up costing nearly $5 billion more than expected in the farm bill.”
McGovern said he wanted to be sure that his colleagues “remember just how poor you must be to qualify for SNAP.”
“Approximately 92 percent of SNAP benefits go to households with monthly incomes below the poverty line, and 57 percent go to households with incomes below half the poverty line,” he said.
“For a family of three, the poverty line is about $1,650 per month. That’s not a lot of money. SNAP eligibility requirements are tough, even if you are poor. And, the program has one of the lowest error rates of any federal program. The bottom line is that SNAP works.”
McGovern also said that he hopes the subcommittee addresses the issue of the “so-called ‘cliff.’”
“This happens when someone gets a job but earns so little they lose their benefits and end up worse off. And, if we really want to move people out of poverty for good, we need to raise the minimum wage.”
McGovern agreed that many of the issues are outside the purview of the House Agriculture Committee, and noted that he has been asking the White House to arrange a conference on food and nutrition that would “bring people together from different federal agencies, business, nonprofits, faith organizations, beneficiaries and so on to come up with a holistic plan to end hunger.”
The subcommittee heard from a series of researchers about the characteristics and dynamics of people who receive SNAP benefits.
Walorksi noted that over the coming months, “our review will include a range of stakeholder perspectives, including current and former recipients; non-profits, states and localities, the food industry, and nutrition experts to name a few.”
Walorski and McGovern did not issue a joint news release after the hearing.
Four witnesses presented testimony on the characteristics of SNAP beneficiaries and how their application and recertification processes are handled.
Summaries of the witnesses’ testimonies and some of their exchanges with Walorski and McGovern may be found at Farm Policy. The House Agriculture Committee has also posted the archived webcast of the hearing.
TESTIMONY
- Karen Cunnyngham, senior researcher, Mathematica Policy Research
- Gregory Mills, senior fellow, Urban Institute
- James P. Ziliak, founding director, Center for Poverty Research, University of Kentucky
- Stephen Tordella, president, Decision Demographics
