Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Farm bill deal would cut food stamps by 1 percent
Associated Press ^ | Jan 27, 2014 9:20 PM EST | Mary Clare Jalonick

Posted on 01/27/2014 7:37:56 PM PST by Olog-hai

A House plan to make major cuts to food stamps would be scaled back under a bipartisan agreement on a massive farm bill, a near end to a more than two-year fight that has threatened to hurt rural lawmakers in an election year.

The measure announced Monday by the House and Senate Agriculture committees preserves food stamp benefits for most Americans who receive them and continues generous subsidies for farmers. The House was expected to vote on the bill Wednesday, with the Senate following shortly after.

The compromise was expected to cut food stamps by about $800 million a year, or around 1 percent. The House in September passed legislation cutting 5 percent from the $80 billion-a-year program. The House bill also would have allowed states to implement broad new work requirements for food stamp recipients. That has been scaled back to a test program in 10 states. …

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: farmbill; foodstamps; horsetrading; liberalagenda

1 posted on 01/27/2014 7:37:56 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
1%!?!?!?!???

A billion American children will starve!!!!

2 posted on 01/27/2014 7:43:49 PM PST by null and void (We need to shake this snowglobe up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Is this more baseline BS? Meaning the rate of increase is only 6% not the usual 7% baseline increase, then term the whole thing as a Draconian 1% “cut”?


3 posted on 01/27/2014 7:47:12 PM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Do it!


4 posted on 01/27/2014 7:47:48 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

An $800 million cut in food stamps, or 1% of an $80 billion boondoogle, from Zer0’s program that has increased 50% in the past 4 years.

Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee, and I love’s that Obama!


5 posted on 01/27/2014 7:50:22 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The idiot GOP just gave the Dems an election year gift. They pass a non-cut cut, which will allow the Dems to scream “The evil Republicans keep cutting aid to the poor!!!”


6 posted on 01/27/2014 7:51:13 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle

The Dems would scream that anyway. The answer would be to get no cuts at all?


7 posted on 01/27/2014 7:54:28 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
The right way to cut food stamps is to raise the import tariffs and put Americans back to work.

Cutting it by reducing the appropriation in a bill, just gives the democrats the opportunity to say the GOP is against the poor.

8 posted on 01/27/2014 7:54:46 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
The right way to cut food stamps is to raise the import tariffs and put Americans back to work.

Cutting it by reducing the appropriation in a bill, just gives the democrats the opportunity to say the GOP is against the poor.

9 posted on 01/27/2014 7:54:46 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Spend, spend, spend. Invest in guillotines.


10 posted on 01/27/2014 7:56:12 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; Cementjungle

Furthermore, the GOP-e keeps treating policy like a popularity contest. Maggie Thatcher’s last advice to David Cameron was “be more unpopular”; if the GOP would follow that, they would get somewhere.


11 posted on 01/27/2014 7:56:13 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Already told you that by itself will not put more Americans back to work.


12 posted on 01/27/2014 7:57:24 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Furthermore, the GOP-e keeps treating policy like a popularity contest. Maggie Thatcher’s last advice to David Cameron was “be more unpopular”; if the GOP would follow that, they would get somewhere.

I'm afraid that the GOP is now just a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC.

13 posted on 01/27/2014 8:02:31 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
"Already told you that by itself will not put more Americans back to work."

You're still wrong.

14 posted on 01/27/2014 8:04:27 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

No. We’ve never had such a regulatory and corporate-taxation environment as this, especially during the time when the federal government’s primary source of revenue was tariffs on imported goods; and we certainly never had the kind of bloated welfare state we now are saddled with. Those has to come down before we can even think of raising tariffs, or else no businessmen will dare to invest in the country.

Look at New York state, attempting to attract business back in by—doing what?—offering tax breaks. Not that it’s working too well, for a myriad of other reasons, those being regulatory—and the federal government is no help either with its piling on.


15 posted on 01/27/2014 8:08:57 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
"Furthermore, the GOP-e keeps treating policy like a popularity contest."

Popular to whom? A 1% cut isn't satisfying to anybody.

People like me, that think fixing the economy will automatically cut food stamps, don't want to see support pulled before the economy is fixed, and think the cut just feeds the democrats propaganda against the GOP.

And people who (wrongly) think the jobs are out there and the aid is a major disincentive to go to work, want to see a lot more than 1%.

Nobody is going to be satisfied by this, except the democrat anti-GOP spin machine.

16 posted on 01/27/2014 8:09:53 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
"Furthermore, the GOP-e keeps treating policy like a popularity contest."

Popular to whom? A 1% cut isn't satisfying to anybody.

People like me, that think fixing the economy will automatically cut food stamps, don't want to see support pulled before the economy is fixed, and think the cut just feeds the democrats propaganda against the GOP.

And people who (wrongly) think the jobs are out there and the aid is a major disincentive to go to work, want to see a lot more than 1%.

Nobody is going to be satisfied by this, except the democrat anti-GOP spin machine.

17 posted on 01/27/2014 8:09:53 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Yes, and that’s part of the GOP establishment helping the cause of the liberal left. Bipartisanism exists only to serve the left these days.


18 posted on 01/27/2014 8:11:44 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: null and void
A billion American children will starve!!!!

At least!

19 posted on 01/27/2014 8:11:59 PM PST by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
You can eliminate all regulations and all taxes and you still can't compete with the wage differential with China. The wage differential dwarfs the cost of regulation.

And the fact is, we don't want to compete with countries like China on lack of environmental or worker safety regulations. Free trade is a race to the bottom for wages, to the bottom for environmental regulations, to the bottom for social support programs.

We don't want to go there, and the way to stop China from dragging us there, is to charge them a good tariff for admission to our consumer market.

20 posted on 01/27/2014 8:13:40 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

No, that’s not true at all. It’s the regulations, taxation, borrowing and (welfare and other pork) spending that create the “wage differential” by pushing down the value of the US dollar; the money printing is a symptom of all that as well as a contributing cause the higher the debt rises. Without getting rid of those (which are all leftist causes anyhow), all that raising tariffs will do is create a trade war in which the USA is already critically hobbled; nobody will reinvest in the USA, and nobody can make anyone do it.


21 posted on 01/27/2014 8:29:22 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT

Right, base line math means a 6% spending increase can be called a 1% reduction. One percent? More could be saved by just checking income eligibility as about 8% of the EBT card holders are bogus or over the income standard. This “Farm Bill” is so bogus!


22 posted on 01/27/2014 9:01:47 PM PST by RicocheT (Where neither their property nor their honor is touched, most men live content, Niccolo Machiavelli)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
"It’s the regulations, taxation, borrowing and (welfare and other pork) spending that create the “wage differential” by pushing down the value of the US dollar;

That doesn't make sense. Our regulations don't create a wage differential relative to another country. And if the regulations did have an impact, it would be to lower our wages relative to another country, not increase them. If the value of the U.S. dollar is "being pushed down" by regulations, then fixing the regulations would cause the dollar to rise and the wage differential would increase even more. Which would result in even more off-shoring.

the money printing is a symptom of all that as well as a contributing cause the higher the debt rises.

No the money printing didn't really start until 2008 with the banking crisis. Before that the FED didn't own much treasuries. The money printing is in response to the high unemployment. By law the FED is to focus on full employment, a stable dollar and low interest rates.

"all that raising tariffs will do is create a trade war in which the USA is already critically hobbled;"

What do you mean we are hobbled? We export 1/4 of the trade goods we import. A trade war is going to hurt China a lot more than it's going to hurt the U.S. And in case you haven't noticed, we are already in a trade war. We just aren't fighting back.

"nobody will reinvest in the USA, and nobody can make anyone do it."

You have it backwards. Nobody wants to invest here now, because it's only a matter of time before a competitor off-shores and drives the American business out of business. We have the largest consumer market. If we raise the import tariffs, so that American businesses have an advantage or at least an equal footing, then American businesses will be a great investment.

We have the largest consumer market now. But if we don't act to protect the industries that made us wealthy in the first place, we won't have one much longer. 24% of Americans are unemployed and aren't consuming much any more, no matter how cheap the imports are. That number will rise, until we are all out of funds, and the great American consumer market will be a thing of the past.

23 posted on 01/27/2014 9:09:57 PM PST by DannyTN (A>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

24 posted on 01/27/2014 9:17:56 PM PST by Veggie Todd (I don't always talk to Obama voters, but when I do I ask for Large Fries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Start with a cut of 50% this year and another 50% every year until they don’t exist!!!

Make your own way in this world or croak!


25 posted on 01/27/2014 9:18:50 PM PST by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

How can we have “the largest consumer market” when the consumerism is driven by borrowing and a sizable chunk of the consumers are unemployed or on welfare (or both)? How can the money used to buy all that “stuff” really be worth anything?

What, pray tell, will induce businesses to reinvest in the USA with the (leftist) regulations, taxation and welfare state intact after tariffs go up? And did you understand what I meant by “hobbled”?

Like you pointed out, we are in a cold trade war with Red China. Making it heat up will not hurt China one iota (they have plenty of alternate markets, including themselves), because we are too dependent on their manufacturing base and nobody will magically make our manufacturing base reappear upon said trade war heating up—because of the conditions that made the manufacturing flee in the first place remaining in place.


26 posted on 01/27/2014 9:19:37 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

“GOP is against the poor.”

I won’t speak for the party but I despise the poor and don’t think they should get one cent.


27 posted on 01/27/2014 9:21:05 PM PST by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

The right way to cut food stamps is to raise the import tariffs and put Americans back to work.

Cutting it by reducing the appropriation in a bill, just gives the democrats the opportunity to say the GOP is against the poor


If we had tariffs we would not need the farm bill. The ChiComs would not be able to dump ag products in the US at a price lower than what it costs US farmers to produce.

Seems the more we get away from tariffs...the more we have in subsidies


28 posted on 01/27/2014 9:24:31 PM PST by SeminoleCounty (Amnesty And Not Ending ObamaCare Will Kill GOP In 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Veggie Todd

Classic!


29 posted on 01/27/2014 9:24:53 PM PST by Jet Jaguar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

Don’t see how tariffs by themselves would help. The whole leftist system has to go, subsidies, regulations, taxes and all. And we shouldn’t be trading with a non-market economy (Red China) to begin with.


30 posted on 01/27/2014 9:26:32 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Since the government can (and did) take 1% away from retired military folks, I’d say this is just fine. In fact, it’s my chief complaint that so far, that we only seem to see military folks as the patsies for government cuts. If we all share the pain, it takes the sting out of the disrespect. All in all, it’s something I’d like to see extended to all areas of the budget, both discretionary and entitlement.


31 posted on 01/27/2014 9:28:46 PM PST by Greenpees (Coulda Shoulda Woulda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greenpees
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

32 posted on 01/27/2014 10:52:43 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson