Farm Bill Fails in the House

I guess the TeaPublicans couldn't get their $20 billion in food-stamp cuts through the House... Even 62 Republicans couldn't make themselves cut and take away the food from 2 million children, seniors, disabled and military families just so they could give billions in subsidies to prop up the prices for Big Agri-Business... (Must have been "RINOs".) Boehner proves once again that he is the most ineffective, worst Speaker in the history of the Congress.

A good day for the Do-Nothing House....

1) Bernanke says the economy is doing better and is slowing QE.
2) Sequestration, remember that?
3) Food Stamps have increased exponenetially, time to pull back?
4) Unemployment rate has started to fall according to Team Obama, less need for food assistance.

And consider this, why are food stamps part of the farm bill? Time to vote on those seperately.

Who's cutting what... ?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House is threatening to veto the House version of a massive, five-year farm bill, saying food stamp cuts included in the legislation could leave some Americans hungry.

The House is preparing to consider the bill this week. The legislation would cut $2 billion annually, or around 3 percent, from food stamps and make it harder for some people to qualify for the program. Food stamps, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, cost almost $80 billion last year, twice the amount it cost five years ago.

The Senate passed its version of the farm bill last week with only a fifth of the amount of those cuts, or about $400 million a year, with the support of the administration. [/b][/i]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... e/2432849/

Complete with Lady Jazzer outrage 150 sized fonts.

FredHayek wrote: 1) Bernanke says the economy is doing better and is slowing QE.
2) Sequestration, remember that?
3) Food Stamps have increased exponenetially, time to pull back?
4) Unemployment rate has started to fall according to Team Obama, less need for food assistance.

And consider this, why are food stamps part of the farm bill? Time to vote on those seperately.

1) So you admit that the economy is doing better... Good...It's about time.

Why, yes, the economy HAS improved...Mostly for the top 1-2%:



The bottom 50+ % ... Not so much.... Imagine my surprise...

2) Sequestration?...Why yes, I remember that... The cuts in programs for HeadStart, Hot-lunch programs, Hot-meals-for-Seniors, is what is causing the jump in food-stamp assistance requests... TeaBaggers taking away with the Right hand, and then realizing they should take away with the left hand too, since they haven't done enough damage to the 47%.

3) Food Stamps have increased [sic] exponenetially, time to pull back?...
NO... (I think you mean "exponentially"...) Since it's the cuts in all of the other unemployment-benefits, and cuts to other social safety-net programs that has caused the increase, the TeaLiban shouldn't cry "It's time to cut more."

4) For those who have found jobs and no longer qualify for food-assistance, that's great... For people, (like Wal-Mart 'screwees') who are working, but still fall under the poverty line for food assistance, and for those like seniors, children, disabled, and veterans on disability who CAN'T work, it's still necessary, and this is nothing more than the usual Randroid/Libertarian/sociopathic punitive-punishment knee-jerk reaction...

But thanks for playing.

Very true, so many of the poor, due to ACA, are seeing hours cut and medical insurance premiums rising.

Since that part of the ACA hasn't kicked in yet, then that's a lie...But you knew that.

And which, conveniently, doesn't address any of the other FACTS...

[whirr][click]....What?

Insert "last word" here: ________________________

Did you just deflect your own thread? :faint:

So the Senate, House, & President have all agreed to cut funding for SNAP and want to starve the working poor, they just disagree about how much to starve them by?

FredHayek wrote: So the Senate, House, & President have all agreed to cut funding for SNAP and want to starve the working poor, they just disagree about how much to starve them by?

Gee, since the President's Budget proposes an INCREASE:

President's FY 2014 Budget Proposal Restores SNAP Benefits
04.10.2013 by Alexis Fernandez

4.10.2013 This morning President Obama released his FY 2014 budget proposal. The proposal includes several key commitments to the federal nutrition programs; strengthening their role in improving low-income household’s access to nutritious, affordable food. In particular, CFPA is pleased to see restoration of the scheduled November 2013 cut to SNAP benefits. The budget proposal also includes funding to support the Women’s, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, and supports continued implementation of the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act. In contrast to the President’s budget proposal the House Republican proposal would cut nutrition funding by $135 billion.

If not restored the drop in SNAP benefits would result in a loss of about $20-$25 per month for a family of three according to the Congressional Budget Office. This is a significant benefit cut for families already struggling to put enough food on the table.

USDA’s Office of Budget and Program Analysis has posted a budget summary.

We thank the President for his support of the federal nutrition programs. As the Farm Bill is taken up we must continue to push for similar support among Members of Congress. Negotiations thus far have included proposals to preserve and protect SNAP, as well as drastically cuts benefits and change the program’s current structure. The Senate Agriculture Committee plans to mark up the latest version of the Farm Bill this month, creating several opportunities for Members of Congress to express their interest in reducing the occurrence of hunger and supporting low-income families by opposing cuts and structural changes to SNAP.

http://cfpa.net/calfresh/presidents-fy- ... p-benefits
http://frac.org/leg-act-center/budget-a ... -analysis/

...I guess that would make you a liar...again...

Unless, of course, you have a SOURCE for your assertion that the "President [has] agreed"...

Oh, wait... You don't do "sources"... :rofllol :rofllol

And, I guess the TeaPublicans couldn't get their $20 billion in food-stamp cuts through the House... Even 62 Republicans couldn't make themselves cut and take away the food from 2 million children, seniors, disabled and military families just so they could give billions in subsidies to prop up the prices for Big Agri-Business... (Must have been "RINOs".)

You should stop digging, Fred...

Obama's budget "proposal". How naive and gullible! Looks like the POTUS is already agreeing to the Senate reduction in SNAP so his budget is as real as unicorns and the tooth fairy.

Still waiting for that SOURCE, Fred...

You let me know when you find a SOURCE that the President "AGREED" to SNAP reductions...

(Hint: It's probably hiding in the same place as the source for Bradley Manning's 'outting of covert agents'...)

:rofllol :rofllol

You should stop digging, Fred...