Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act

Floor Speech

Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, when the voting took place for H.R. 3102, the Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act of 2013, unfortunately, I was unable to be present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted no for the following reason:

The bill, H.R. 3102, would cut $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which will adversely affect poor people and lower benefits to households with children. Seventy-six percent of SNAP's recipients are households with children. SNAP is an anti-hunger program that is immensely effective in providing assistance to a minimum of 47 million individuals and families across America. In addition to food benefits, SNAP educates people on ways as to how one may use food dollars wisely and live a healthier lifestyle by promoting the importance of nutrition. A key component of SNAP is their ``No Kid Hungry'' campaign, which, aims at fighting against childhood hunger in America by partnering with communities to enroll eligible families with half of the program recipients being children. Reducing spending over the next few years by billions of dollars will affect the lives of Americans who depend on these programs to help put food on the table for their families.

The current legislation under consideration for today would deny food benefits to least 4 million low-income Americans and make certain working adults with an average income of about $2,500 per year and no guardianship of children ineligible to receive food benefits. This may include our veterans, Native Americans and many individuals that live in areas where there is chronically high unemployment. H.R. 3102 is a bill that is unreasonable and beneath the conduct of a Congressional body to impose such a policy initiative that will not help the poorest and neediest Americans among us.

Additionally, H.R. 3102 contains language that permanently bars formerly incarcerated individuals convicted of certain federal or state crimes and their families from receiving full SNAP benefits. As you may know, SNAP is about children and helping the poor and the needy. Why should anyone think that children should be denied adequate food and nutrition just because of the sins of the father or mother or caregiver, especially after they have paid their debt to society and reentered into normal community life? If this bill becomes law, it would restrict and deny the basic needs of children based on the parentage's criminal history of certain crimes and not on the essential eligibility requirement of income resulting from their financial status. As a result, H.R. 3102 would develop unintended consequences resulting in ancillary hardships to our neediest population. Given our nation's economic recovery, high unemployment rate, and the wide prevalence of food insecurity among children, all are directly problematic to the SNAP program. Every $1 in SNAP new benefits would generate up to $1.80 in economic activity. Every time a family uses SNAP benefits for healthy food on the table, it benefits the store and the employees where the purchase was made including the truck driver who delivered the food, the warehouses that stored it, the plant that processed it, and the farmer who produced the food. Each $1 billion increase in SNAP benefits is estimated to create and maintain 18,000 full time jobs including 3,000 farm jobs. SNAP benefits have a powerful anti-poverty effect that the Census Bureau reports would lift 3.9 million Americans--including 1.7 million children--out of poverty. SNAP
alleviates hunger and improves nutrition by increasing the food purchasing power of low-income households, enabling them to obtain a more nutritious diet that contributes to the prevention of obesity, diseases, and food insecurity.

Cutting funding is a threat to SNAP's mission to alleviate the health problems many children face in America. Studies indicate that children who are provided with healthier food are less likely to develop health problems and more likely to excel better in school. Sixty-two percent of teachers in a survey said that they have children in their classrooms that come to school hungry regularly because they are not getting enough food to eat at home.

Source