House bill would cut food stamps, farm subsidies

A social worker with the Cooperative Feeding Program displays a Federal food stamps card that is used to purchase food, Feb. 10, 2011 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. / Joe Raedle/Getty Images

(AP) WASHINGTON - The House Agriculture Committee on Thursday unveiled its approach for a long-term farm and food bill that would reduce spending by $3.5 billion a year, almost half of that coming from cuts in the federal food stamp program.

The legislative draft envisions reducing current food stamp spending projections by $1.6 billion a year, four times the amount of cuts incorporated in the five-year, half-trillion-dollar farm bill passed by the Senate last month.

Food stamps, formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, look to be the most contentious issue when the Agriculture Committee begins voting on the bill Wednesday and when the full House begins debating it in the future.

Conservatives in the Republican-led House are certain to demand greater cuts in the food stamps program, which makes up about 80 percent of the nearly $100 billion a year in spending under the farm bill. Senate Democrats are equally certain to resist more cuts in a program that now helps feed 46 million people, 1 out of every 7 Americans.

"Underfunding this critically important program when families temporarily rely on it to put food on the table in a tough economy is irresponsible and inhumane," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., a food stamp advocate in the House. The Agriculture Committee said its bill would strengthen the program's integrity while better targeting assistance to those in need of it.

The House proposal, like the Senate measure that passed on a bipartisan 64-35 vote, also does away with the much-criticized direct payment system whereby farmers get federal assistance even when they don't plant a crop. Both put greater emphasis on crop insurance to help farmers get through natural disasters and falling prices.

The House bill differs, though, in giving farmers a one-time choice between a revenue loss program to cover shallow losses before insurance kicks in and a new target price program to see producers through deep, multiple-year price declines. The Senate bill contains only the revenue loss program, overriding the objections of Southern rice and peanut growers who have traditionally relied more heavily on price support programs.

The two chambers are in a race to reach a compromise before Sept. 30, when the current farm bill expires.

House GOP leaders have shown little enthusiasm for taking up the farm bill because of resistance from conservatives to the bill's price tag, but the Agriculture Committee's chairman, Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and top Democrat, Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota, stressed its importance.

Lucas said the bill, the result of two years' work, "is reform-minded, fiscally responsible policy that is equitable for farmers and ranchers in all regions." Peterson said that by failing to act before the September deadline, "We jeopardize one of the economic bright spots of our nation's fragile economy."

Sen. Debby Stabenow, D-Mich., the chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said the Senate bill "represents the most significant reform of American agriculture policy in decades" and that she was "very concerned" about some of the differences between the Senate and House legislation.

Stabenow cited the food stamp issue, saying the House bill "takes far greater cuts in food assistance by changing eligibility rules so that some people truly in need will not receive the help their family needs."

The legislation, in addition to setting commodity support and nutrition policy, also authorize conservation, trade, foreign food aid, rural development, forestry and energy programs.

While the bills cover five years, the Congressional Budget Office measures their effects over 10 years, and in that time period the House bill would save taxpayers more than $35 billion, the Senate bill $23 billion. The House savings come from trimming about $14 billion in the commodity support programs, $6 billion by consolidating 23 conservation programs into 13 and $16 billion from food stamps. Savings in the Senate bill are similar for commodities and conservation but $12 billion less from food stamps.

The Senate derives its food stamp savings mainly by cracking down on fraud and on a practice of some states of giving households as little as $1 a year in heating assistance, even when they don't directly pay for heating, to make them eligible for increased food benefits. The House also stops this practice while restricting a system wherein states can provide food benefits to those whose assets exceed legal limits for food stamps as long as they receive some other welfare benefit. It ends Agriculture Department bonus payments to states that increase food stamp registrations.

The Congressional Budget Office, in its analysis of the Senate bill, estimated that the $4.5 billion saved over 10 years by curbing the heating assistance link to food stamps would result in nearly 500,000 households each year having their monthly food stamps reduced by an average of $90, nearly one-third of what they receive.

"America's children, seniors and 1.5 million veteran households facing a constant struggle against hunger deserve better from Congress," Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., who led Senate efforts to block food stamps cuts, said of the House bill.

The House measure, like its Senate counterpart, leaves intact a program that protects sugar producers from foreign competition and creates a new subsidized insurance program for cotton. It does not include several amendments attached to the Senate bill, including one that required those getting subsidized crop insurance to comply with conservation requirements and another that reduce by 15 percentage points the share of crop insurance premiums the government pays for farmers with adjusted gross incomes of more than $750,000. Currently the government bears an average 62 percent of crop insurance premiums.

The House bill also contains a provision, passed separately by the House last year, that eliminates a requirement that farmers obtain additional pesticide application permits under the Clean Water Act.

[occupy_cbs]

drf_1: "The problem is free stuff...This is what collapsed the economy in 2008".


======
audemus: You do realize don't you, that if you really believe that "free-stuff" is what caused the economic melt-down of 2008, you're just one of the blind many that have been duped into believing the big lie by this new breed of contemptible conservatives ? I'll offer the same advice that Eisenhower once gave another rather confused and easily led citizen. "THINK FOR YOURSELF."
=====




Yes audemus, "this new breed of contemptible conservatives," have proven they cannot 'think' for themselves in the least, and continuously parrot the latest fox/rush republican talking points from the best propaganda machine we've ever seen in America!

This "new breed of contemptible conservatives" don't really care about the TRUTH, about the real drivers of our deficits and debt, and that this insane neocon imperialistic republican attitude has grown our government into exactly what Eisenhower had warned us about!

[occupy_cbs]

RepubsAreFiscallyLiberal: "Agreed, raptor - Boeing, Halliburton, Xe, etc. are all having banner fiscal years".

"Eisenhower was correct in his warnings".




Yes, our congresscritters continue to protect these "defense contractors" with tons of MONEY and tax breaks, and anyone that keeps parroting the silly line that "government does not create jobs," is past delusional and knows nothing about expenditures at a time of record low revenue from record low taxes!

[drf_1]

I apologize for not being able to dumb it down enough for liberals to understand, however I will try again. Those on the take from the govt. whether corporate thieves or welfare bums, have exceeded what the middle class is able to pay while supporting themselves,so much so that the govt. must borrow 40 cents of every dollar it spends from our enemies.
I do think for myself, and I suggest that you go to your local community college and take macroeconomic and microeconomic classes and learn how to think for yourselves.

[drf_1]

The problem is free stuff. Free stuff can be anything from welfare to corporate subsidies. The people getting free stuff want more free stuff, so they elect people who promise more free stuff. The people paying for the free stuff can no longer pay for the free stuff and their own stuff too. This is what collapsed the economy in 2008. The unmarried mother of 4 illegitimate kids and the multinational agro companies need to take responsibility for themselves. Cut the subsidies, tax credits, section 8 housing, food stamps, free cell phones and every other give-away program leave what I earn alone.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Don't forget to cut the tax cuts for the rich and the corporate welfare! Matter of fact, how 'bout we Start there!

[audemus]

You do realize don't you, that if you really believe that "free-stuff" is what caused the economic melt-down of 2008, you're just one of the blind many that have been duped into believing the big lie by this new breed of contemptible conservatives ? I'll offer the same advice that Eisenhower once gave another rather confused and easily led citizen. "THINK FOR YOURSELF."

[freeamerica31]

Before you cut food to lower income individuals first cut the tax subsidies to major corporations. You can start with the oil industry!

Then raise the taxes back to a progressive tax rate based on WWII levels so we can pay off the deficit.

You do those two things and then I might agree to cutting other programs. Republicans I'm an Independent and I'm saying unless you start making sense and do what's right for everyone then I'm not voting Republican and I'm an easy vote to get because I'm no President Obama fan but then again you make it difficult nowdays to vote Republican.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Before you cut food to lower income individuals first cut the tax subsidies to major corporations. You can start with the oil industry!

Then raise the taxes back to a progressive tax rate based on WWII levels so we can pay off the deficit.

You do those two things and then I might agree to cutting other programs.
----------------------
AMEN!

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_d9mntKvGM

Really Catchey Tune! : )

[RollotheNorman]

Well, lots of posts since CBS put this up.
I am just going to make one.
How typically RepubliCON. Stomp on the poor while they are down. One thing I can't understand is how the urban RepubliCONs are going to justify this in the fly over states. A big part of their income is Agribusiness after all.

[RollotheNorman]

There is class warfare and the uppers are winning. Kind of like Charlie Sheen behind closed doors. "Winning." Like I said though, they will walk this back, the farmers will be really pissed.

[Rafterman11]

And yet our grotesquely bloated defense budget remains untouched.

[RollotheNorman]

Paging EmpireGeorge, Paging EmpireGeorge, please tune into Rush Monday morning so you won't run out of really stupid stuff to say.

[SocialWrkrKP]

"Underfunding this critically important program when families temporarily rely on it to put food on the table in a tough economy is irresponsible and inhumane," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., a food stamp advocate in the House.

The problem is, they're not on the program "temporarily", they are staying on it for years and years. I directly work with this population and I've worked with families who have not just gotten food stamps for years, but GENERATIONS! THAT is the problem, at least in Maryland.

[foo8259]

Same here in Texas, and they drive new SUV's full of their kids.

[skeezix06]

The House Agricultural Committee proclaims their extreme dislike for poor people in America.

[ObamasGuppies]

Great news!!!! There's so much fraud that it needs to be eliminated. Obama's supporters on Welfare treat it like an entitlement so eliminate it. All social programs should be eliminated along with unions.

[skeezix06]

Yep. Better to let several thousand hungry adults and children starve than accidentally pay for a one cheater. ...A law of the jungle/informal euthanasia policy.

[IPonUall]

You are a victim.

[raptor-022]

collie61 July 6, 2012 10:14 AM EDT
"Hey Al Gore II. It was hotter then this in the 1920s. Check the records."



Hey lord monckton jr, if you're going to use one of the debunked skeptic arguments, at least get the decade correct, since they use 1934 for comparison, not the 1920s.

The year 1934 was a very hot year in the United States, ranking third behind 2006 and 1998. However, global warming takes into account temperatures over the entire planet. The U.S.'s land area accounts for only 2% of the earth's total surface area. Despite the U.S. heat in 1934, the year was not so hot over the rest of the planet, and is barely holding onto a place in the hottest 50 years in the global rankings (today it ranks 47th).

Globally, the ten hottest years on record have all occurred since 1998, with 2005 and 2010 tied as the hottest, and 2011 as the 9th hottest on record. We'll just have to wait to see about 2012....


State of the Climate, Global Analysis
May 2012

This places May 2012 as the second warmest May in the 133-year period of record, falling 0.05°C (0.09°F) short of the record warmth of 2010.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2012/5

****************

U.S. completes warmest 12-month period in 117 years

As far back as records go (1895), never has the U.S. strung together 12 straight months warmer than May 2011 to April 2012 according to new data released today by NOAA's National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/us-completes-warmest-12-month-period-of-record/2012/05/08/gIQAgsmmAU_blog.html

*********************

2012 is USA's warmest year on record, so far
May 8, 2012

The nation's unusual warmth keeps on rolling: Through April, the USA is experiencing its warmest year on record, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced on Tuesday, with a national average temperature of 45 degrees.

This is 5 degrees above the long-term average.

So far this year, more than 15,000 record high temperatures have been set across the nation.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2012/05/climate-weather-warmest-year-on-record-/1#.T_cruJHhfpw

****************************

Extreme Heat Breaks More Than 3,000 Records This Week

A scorching heat wave is gripping much of the eastern two-thirds of the nation, setting an astonishing number of temperature records.

More than 3,000 temperature records have been shattered in the U.S. this past week, from June 28-July 4, 2012, according to NOAA.

http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/more-than-3000-temperature-rec/67593

*******************************