22 Democrats voted to block $4.5 billion in food stamp aid, 22 Democrats,

[DainBramaged]

guaranteed profit is more important

Shame on them all

Half of the food stamp beneficiaries are children, 17 percent are seniors, and unfortunately now 1.5 million households are veteran households that are receiving food stamps," Gillibrand said, referring not just to heat-and-eat participants, but the broader population of food stamp recipients.


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=2&vote=00135

Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Franken (D-MN)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)

[clang1]

1. re: 22 Democrats voted to block $4.5 billion in food stamp aid, 22 Democrats

22 people that only call themselves Democrats. Usual names here.

It is 1 in 7 Americans on SNAP. 1 in 7.

[goclark]

2. Terrible

[spanone]

3. k&r...

[matmar]

4. I thought Al Franken was a liberal along the lines of a Paul Wellstone?

Oh well.

I'm thinking of just saying fuck it all, I quit.

[LynneSin]

11. They were proposing cuts to farmers to pay for the food stamps

I suspect that any senator in a state with alot of farmland & farmers probably would vote against it.

There are other places they could get the money.

[cali]

36. my two senators didn't vote against it

and yes, Vermont has lots of farmers- of course they're mostly not fucking industrial corporate farm fucks.

[kenfrequed]

43. Agreement.

Unusual that I am in agreement again.

Had it just been Klobuchar I would have written it off as her supermoderate posturing, but Franken is a good stand up guy. If he voted against it there are reasons. It might have been farming subsidies or there may be more to it.

This bill was a typical republican false-choice that seems like something out of a comic book. "Choose Democrat! You may either save your girlfriend or your trusty sidekick. Mwahahahahaha"

Why don't we ever make them make hard choices?

[savannah43]

46. Like fairly taxing the 1%, maybe?

[LynneSin]

54. I could vote for that

seriously!

[shcrane71]

65. Harkin and Franken voted against it... What assholes.

I could care less if farmers aren't getting their subsidies. Most farming people that I know got out of farming a generation or two ago (forced out). The only farmers that I know of now are rather wealthy.

[jwirr]

68. In Iowa yes, but not in Minnesota - there are a lot of small farmers here yet. Especially in the

northern parts where the soil is not so good and it has to be farmed the old fashion way to produce anything substancial.

[Bluenorthwest]

84. Oregon is filled with small farms and our Senators did not take food from the mouths of children

Al I like as a person, as a Senator he is a centrist piece of jelly.

[jwirr]

86. You are welcome to your opinion.

[jwirr]

67. Thank you. That explains a lot. Actually it is a smart move - rethugs liked this so that the

farmers would stay on their side. Food stamps can always be increase when we win but if we do not win they are definitely going to go down.

[warrprayer]

87. Al Franken???

I can't believe it. I just can't.

[SoutherDem]

5. Just wondering

Was this the only thing on the bill? Did the GOP hang a poison pill on it so they would also be voting for something which would have gotten the same OP stating what horrible thing they did.

I was just wondering. Too often these shameful votes are tied to something else.

If not I agree this is wrong.

[elleng]

26. Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012

Ag bill FULL of stuff, this is just one of many issues. Gives us an idea about difficulty dealing with ag subsidies, etc.

Certainly ARE tied to something else, you're quite right.

[freshwest]

81. NONE of these things ever stand alone, there are 100s of things in these.

But these Democrats should be contacted about how they intend to take up the slack. My people are not on the list, but those in those states need to email, write and call their offices to see what the facts are on this. And then kindly report back.

[dkf]

6. Is this the bill that republicans offered which reduces aid?

"The farm bill being debated in the Senate reduces funding for food stamps and is finding support from both sides of the aisle as lawmakers look for ways to cut the nation's rising debt in an election year."

"The bipartisan bill making its way through the Senate would trim benefits by about $90 a month for about 500,000 households, the budget office said, largely by eliminating automatic enrollment for some households receiving nominal aid under federal home-heating assistance programs."


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-food-stamps-20120620,0,2117959.story

[RC]

22. Let The Damn Bu$h tax cuts expire, why don't cha!

"The farm bill being debated in the Senate reduces funding for food stamps and is finding support from both sides of the aisle as lawmakers look for ways to cut the nation's rising debt in an election year."

Think that might help? Nothing else they have done has.

[jeff47]

7. Should probably include all of what the amendment would do

To strike a reduction in the supplemental nutrition assistance program and increase funding for the fresh fruit and vegetable program, with an offset that limits crop insurance reimbursements to providers.

That offset is kind of a big deal. Especially as our weather gets more "wacky" due to global warming.

[LynneSin]

12. Yep. You see someone like Franklin voting against Food Stamps you know there is time bomb in there

I would like to think the Democrats will find a way to save the Food Stamp cuts without affecting farmers.

[clang1]

13. re: Yep. You see someone like Franklin voting against Food Stamps you know there is time bomb in the

Exactly what farmers are you talking about? These generally be corpo farmers my friend. Not your family farmers down the road.

[snappyturtle]

15. As one third owner of a family farm, trust me, farmers could better

absorb some cuts rather than food stamp recipients. imho

[jeff47]

16. Yes, family farmers are Burkean superheroes who pull themselves up by their bootstraps

They'd never depend on crop insurance to save their farm. Only giant companies that can absorb the losses without crop insurance would benefit!

[clang1]

30. re: Yes, family farmers are Burkean superheroes who pull themselves up by their bootstraps

Yep. My family has a 100 year old barn

[Thav]

8. It looks like they were voting on an amendment to the bill

I'm not quite fluent in legalese, but it looks like this was just a set of amendments to the bill. As I was looking through the documents, I found a few things that made me go "WTF?":

SEC. __. LIMITATION ON FOREIGN ASSISTANCE TO PAKISTAN.

No amounts may be obligated or expended to provide any direct United States assistance to the Government of Pakistan unless the President certifies to Congress that--

(1) Dr. Shakil Afridi has been released from prison in Pakistan;

(2) any criminal charges brought against Dr. Afridi, including treason, have been dropped; and

(3) if necessary to ensure his freedom, Dr. Afridi has been allowed to leave Pakistan.

What does that have to do with a US agriculture bill or SNAP?

Anyway, the vote was on the amendment, not the actual bill itself.

[clang1]

14. re: It looks like they were voting on an amendment to the bill

I have no problem with this legislation, re: LIMITATION ON FOREIGN ASSISTANCE TO PAKISTAN.

[deaniac21]

9. I'll have to quit

mailing my food.

[Doctor_J]

10. OUr government, and our nation

are in an extremely bad condition. I feel something really ugly coming on, unless we just give up and hand it over to the teabaggers

[Arkana]

17. Harkin and Franken are on that list--there was a poison pill in the bill

that stopped them, I know it.

[mopinko]

79. and dick durbin

[Teamster Jeff]

83. Social Security and Medicaid to follow

The march to the right continues

[USD79]

18. I suggest that such blind condemnation of these 22 is wrong

I further suggest that they had valid reasons for their vote. I note that most, if not all, of the Senate Dems from the upper plains states (farm country), including my Sen. (Johnson - SD), support the farm bill. As I know nothing about the bill, I do not know their reasons for supporting it. Nor have any reasons been suggested in the above posts, yet the posters are willing to cry treason. I respectfully suggest that there is no basis for the blind condemnation at this time. This may change, however, as more facts come forth.

[Swede]

19. USD79,welcome to DU!

I agree,let's wait and see what this is about.

[geardaddy]

24. +1000

Franken supports the Farm Bill, but I'm guessing there was a poison pill in there.

[SlimJimmy]

27. This could have also been a stumbling block for the Democrats. Legal residence should

not be an impediment to assistance.

(4) PROVISION OF BENEFITS ONLY TO CITIZENS AND LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES.--The certification shall certify that the State will--

(A) only provide supplemental nutrition assistance to citizens and lawful permanent residents of the United States; and

(B) take such action as is necessary to prohibit supplemental nutrition assistance benefits from being provided to any individual or household a member of which is not a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States.

[barbtries]

31. they'd just let people starve i guess.

getting meaner by the minute, this country.

[elleng]

28. Right, and welcome!

Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012
HUGE bill, dealing with MANY issues, some discussed in this thread.

[bigwillq]

34. Hello

Welcome to DU!

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. Oh I don't know. Something about not wanting to feed hungry kids sends me over the edge.

[DainBramaged]

38. There is NO good reason to remove support for the poor, NONE NONE NONE

give me a break with your rationalization

[jeff47]

41. This amendment would remove support for the poor.

It would require proving citizenship or legal residence to use food stamps. Thus it would remove support from the poor.

The amendment would also pay for the increased cost by hurting farmers via crop insurance changes.

Make it an amendment that pays for the costs by taxing the rich, and I'm there with you. Pay for it via deficit spending, and I'm still with you.

An amendment that takes away food from the hungry in the name of giving food to the hungry, and attacks farmers in order to avoid taxing Wall Street? Not so much.

[treestar]

62. Welcome to DU

One thing you will find is that the willingness to jump to the most negative conclusion on the least possible facts is quite common!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

80. Agreed. While an ostensible $4.5B cut in food stamps is horrible, food stamps running out

food stamps running out entirely would be much much worse.

How would the House respond to Gillenbrand's amendment had it passed the Senate?

Something needs to get to the President's desk ASAP to keep food stamp money flowing. Cuts now could be restored later should Democrats take back the House.
Gillenbrand fought the good fight, but politics is "the art of the POSSIBLE".

The presence of staunch Democratic Senators such as Durbin, Franken, Binghaman, Stabenaw, and Klobuchar on that list of "NO' voters reassures me that this vote was just a way to move the bill along to the President for signature and continued funding for Food Stamps.

[BlueToTheBone]

20. I called Pryor and told him to join the repuke party

because he isn't a democrat. 22% of the children in our state go to bed hungry every night.

FUCK YOU MARK PRYOR GET OUT OF OUR PARTY YOU LYING HYPOCRITICAL BASTARD.

[Wellstone ruled]

21. Wow!!! another Dino on the board

trying to screw up a 2 car funeral. This is what happens when stupid amendments are tacked on. What should be dome is expose the author of the stupid amendment and then take the sucker down big time. You know this list will be reprinted in every right wing rag around the country for political hay. You have to give people the whole story and not the Fake News version.

[DainBramaged]

37. I'm a Dino?

You have no clue..........

[Fuddnik]

44. Yeah, it took 35,000 posts,

But Sherlock Holmes finally nailed you.

[DainBramaged]

53. And 11 years

Last edited Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Just call me Dino Boy.....

[DainBramaged]

77. It used to be you couldn't get away with callng one of us a DINO

And if you think I'm a DINO, I don't think you're one of us, not by a long shot.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

23. shameful :(

.

[judesedit]

25. There must have been something else in this bill that was unethical or undesirable

I can't see all of these democrats voting against the same constituents that will be voting to keep them or lose them. Let's see the whole bill.

[elleng]

29. Yes, bill FULL of stuff,

some discussed up thread.
Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. And we can't stop those farm subsidies

Too many corporate farmers need that money!

[elleng]

39. Yeah, they're just starving!

[proud2BlibKansan]

50. My dad's family was in western Kansas. We used to drive across the state every summer to see them.

As we passed by wheat field after wheat field after wheat field, my dad used to point out the window and say "See that kids, it may look like wheat to you, but it's really money!"

Now when you drive across the state, those wheat fields have oil wells in them. And there's natural gas underground too. I have lots of friends who grew up on Kansas farms where crops are no longer planted. The farmers collect agricultural subsidies AND get checks from oil companies. One of my friends gets at least $100,000 in 'gift money' from her family every year.

[elleng]

69. And 'we' still haven't been able to change the subsidy rules!

avoiding the puke, cause its icky.

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Shame Shame Shame

That's repulsive.

[wwytchwood]

40. shush please

the rules here say "don't criticize Dems"!

[coalition_unwilling]

42. This is a highly misleading and deeply inflammatory OP and, thus,

deserves extra scrutiny.

First of all, 22 Democratic Senators did NOT vote "to block $4.5 billion in food stamp aid" as the OP's headline baldly states.

The 22 Senators voted against New York Senator Gillibrand's proposed amendment (S. 2156) that restored full food stamp funding to the Senate bill (S. 3240) by cutting crop insurance payments to farmers.

To recap, there is an Agriculture bill before the Senate (S. 3240) that proposes to reduce nutrition assistance. Senator Gillibrand's propsoed amendment (s. 2156) would have stricken the reduction, i.e., kept current funding, BUT paid for maintaining funding by REDUCING PAYMENTS TO FARMERS.

So why couldn't the OP's headline have read "22 Democratic Senators voted against cuts to farmers"??? Because that's not nearly as inflammatory a post.

None of these 22 Democratic Senators have voted to cut food stamps. Not one.

I'm calling "foul" on this OP and asking respectfully that it be substantially re-worded or withdrawn.

N.B. I grew up on a farm in southwest Missouri but I left there 34 years ago and have never returned to farm life.

[SidDithers]

45. Good post...

Sid

[hahahareally]

48. the cutting of food stamps may not have been what they voted against,

but none the less they did vote to cut food stamps.

[coalition_unwilling]

49. Actually, they voted against cutting aid to farmers as a way

to pay for not cutting food stamps.

Here are some other ways to pay for not cutting food stamps that do not penalize farmers:

1) Cut the defense budget by 50%
2) Raise taxes on the top 10% of earners
3) Raise the capital gains tax rate
4) Raise the inheritance tax rate

And that's just for starters.

Do you really think Al Franken would vote 'no' on an amendment that preserves food stamp funding by raisng taxes on the top 10%? Put another way, why must farmers be penalized so that the poor have enough to eat?

[hahahareally]

52. all great ideas, but out of the realm of reality.

we are not dealing with la la land, we are in reality.

[coalition_unwilling]

55. Speaking of the land of reality, do you or anyone really

expect Senators from the Plains States to vote to cut aid to farmers????

FWIW, I live in 'La La Land' (Los Angeles

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. Because the farmers getting these subsidies are NOT starving, but kids on food stamps are.

It's not that hard to grasp.

[coalition_unwilling]

59. Agreed on both points (farmers not starving and hungry children). But

this amendment proposed that food stamp funding be borne soley by cuts in aid to farmers. Don't think I need to point out that there are many other ways to fund the food stamp program that do not involve cutting aid to farmers.

OTOH, not sure whether you intended to respond to me with your post. I merely wanted to point out that the 22 Dem Senators did not vote to cut food stamps. This was not a vote on the bill proper (which does propose cuts in food stamp program), but on an amendment to said bill that proposed that cuts in aid to farmers fund the maintenance of said food stamp program.

I'm not usually a policy wonk and not used to diving into legislative details, so I apologize if I have unfairly mus-characterized the essence of what is happening here or have failed to consider important details contained herein.

[midnight]

47. So nice that both sides of the elite in Washington can't find the resources to feed our poor,

but trillions to feed the pigs on Wall Street... That's bipartisan politics and it works really will for the monied folks....


Wisconsin: Johnson (R-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay

[lovuian]

56. if you want starving riots in the streets

then you will have it

the food stamp program was started because riots began in the Great Depression

if you want a socialistic revolution then you will get what you voted for 22 Democrats

[coalition_unwilling]

61. None of these 22 Dems have voted to cut food stamps. They have

voted to prevent cuts in aid to farmers from being used to pay for the food stamp program.

FWIW, government aid to farmers also began during the Great Depression as a way to provide pricing stability so that farmers could make a living.

[jwirr]

73. Food stamps were not around until the late 50s. What we had before then were commodities. Food

that was raised in the USA and handed out once a month by the county social workers and included things like cheese, canned vegetables, rice, etc. That program was replaced by food stamps but still exists on some Reservations.

The food stamp program was also begun to help farmers who grow the food stay in business. I remember the farmers who were in trouble dumping milk rather than selling it when their parity was threatened. As the daughter of a small farmer who did go broke sometimes those subsidies you all seem to hate was the only thing that kept us going. Can you imagine what the farm vote would look like if they were told that they were going to have to pay for the food stamp program? They already wonder if it helps anyone.

[LaydeeBug]

57. damn!!! al franken. smh. where was HE for that recall? I hardly heard a word. nt

[LaydeeBug]

58. Since I am sort of against censorship, unless some typo, I don't edit, so I will

respond here to say I now see Franken's motive for his vote.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

60. HAGAN (NC)

I'd hardly call that woman a Democrat. She's Republican to the bone. So sick of her.

[jwirr]

64. What in the hell are they thinking? Kohl, Klobuchar, Harkin and Franken? Was there something wrong

with this bill? I can see some of them but those four?

[shcrane71]

66. And Herb Kohl too!!! He's retiring...

what a sell out.

[Mass]

70. Here is an explanation by Stabenow.

Not sure I buy it, but ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/food-stamps-vote-senate-kirsten-gillibrand_n_1610590.html

The cuts target the so-called heat-and-eat initiative in which 14 states automatically make families eligible for more food aid if they receive even $1 in help paying their utility bills. The Congressional Budget Office estimated the decrease would amount to about $90 a month for an affected family, representing a quarter of its food budget.

...

"Here's what's going on: In a handful of states, they found a way to increase the SNAP benefits for people in their states by sending $1 checks in heating assistance to everyone who gets food assistance," said Stabenow. She allowed that heating costs are properly a factor in determining the need for aid, but said that states like New York and Massachusetts are going too far.

"Sending out $1 checks to everyone isn't the intent of Congress," Stabenow said. "For the small number of states that are doing that, it is undermining the integrity of the program in my judgment. This is about accountability and integrity."

So, in some states, they try to help poor people? How is it shocking?

[OhioChick]

71. Utterly shameful n/t

[Zorra]

72. Good grief! Even Joe Lieberman voted like a traditional, real Democrat. nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

75. And Franken didn't.

That should tell you something is up in this story. I trust Franken.

[Mass]

76. and not Sanders?

This seems to be a regional issue: Senators from the NE and West voted YES, Senators from the MidWest, SouthWest, and South voted NO.

I have no idea if the reason they voted NO is a good reason or a bad one.

[urlnts1]

74. Republicon Lite is a lousy plan!

Beside Kucinich and Sanders are there any real Progressives "left" on the "left"?If not for Liberal policies like Social Security and Medicare this entire country would be like the teeming slums of Rio de Janeiro or Mumbai!

[Blue Owl]

78. In order to do one good thing to help farmers...

we have to do a bunch of bad things to hurt others.

That's our government!

[williesgirl]

82. Shit - both of my VA Senators voted against it. That sucks big time. Why don't these folks act

like Democrats. That's why we elected them. Good riddance to Webb this year. rec'd

[sarcasmo]

85. 22 Democrats who should be Republicans.

[Arkansas Granny]

88. I haven't read the bill, but if so many Democrats voted against it, there must have been

some things in there that were very undesirable.

Here is Mark Pryor's statement about why he voted against it:

Jun 21 2012
Statement by Senator Mark Pryor On Voting Against the Senate Farm Bill
Agriculture in our country is an important economic force, but each region and industry has its own specific challenges. This farm bill fails to recognize the differences, and I’m concerned that its policies will undermine the stable, safe and affordable food supply we have come to expect in our country.

For example, the bill fails rice farmers by employing an unworkable crop insurance program. This plan will compromise tens of thousands of jobs in Arkansas and billions in economic activity. I am also frustrated that the bill no longer contains an important safety inspection measure meant to protect Americans from contaminated catfish imported from overseas. Not only does this action put our safety at risk, it allows contaminated and cheaper imports to disrupt the Arkansas catfish industry.

Fortunately, Senate passage of this bill is not the end of the road. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate and House of Representatives to improve this bill as it advances through the legislative process.

http://www.pryor.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ContentRecord_id=e97273db-0b5a-4f14-9657-4aa8162ef6ea