Rep. Johnson Takes Part in First SNAP Hearing as Ranking Member
“Work has dignity. Work is opportunity. Work is not a dirty word. Able-bodied adults cannot be kept on the sidelines while we witness historically low unemployment and a record-high seven million open jobs.”
Washington, D.C. – Today U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) took part in his first hearing as Ranking Member of the House Agriculture Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations Subcommittee. The hearing focused on the Trump administration’s proposed rule to ensure Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) waivers from work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) are being utilized by areas that truly need them.
“Work has dignity. Work is opportunity. Work is not a dirty word. Able-bodied adults cannot be kept on the sidelines while we witness historically low unemployment and a record-high seven million open jobs. I appreciate the administration’s work to ensure these waivers are preserved for those who truly need them and I look forward to continuing to work with them to realize our shared goals of employment, self-sufficiency and prosperity for SNAP recipients,” said Subcommittee Ranking Member Dusty Johnson.
“Leading up to the 2018 Farm Bill, this committee held 21 hearings on SNAP – of which, fourteen were dedicated to examining the ABAWD population. For years, we’ve heard members on the other side of the aisle, including the chairman, complain about eligibility and the state abuses of the waiver process. We attempted to address it in the farm bill, and then were repeatedly told by Democrats that Congress didn’t need to act because the administration already had the flexibility to address the problem. So, here we are with a solution proposed by USDA, and not one Democrat offered a suggestion beyond asking the Secretary to withdraw this proposal. It is time Democrats to stop talking out of both sides of their mouth,” said Ranking Member K. Michael Conaway (TX-11).
Background:
An ABAWD is an individual between the ages of 18 and 49 who has no children or dependents and is not disabled. The bipartisan Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 requires that ABAWDs only receive SNAP benefits for three months within three years unless they meet certain work requirements. The three-month limit does not apply to individuals unable to work due to physical or mental health reasons, pregnancy, or caregiver obligations. States may request to waive the three-month time limit if States can demonstrate an unemployment rate above 10 percent.
States have abused waivers by combining counties and cities with lower unemployment with those areas facing higher unemployment to form single “areas” for waiver purposes. This loophole has allowed states to waive the work requirement for more than 2.8 million able-bodied adults who have the ability to work, train, or volunteer, but are not.
###
Rep.Dusty is so well-spoken. What stood out to me was how many times in the 5min34secs he said “American”. He wants to improve the lives of Americans, but has yet to address how much of the 80billion is used to improve the lives of illegal aliens. I’m excited for him to address that issue.
SNAP is nothing more than corporate welfare. Why do you think the SD retailers association wants to keep the data a secret on where those dollars end up? Keep SNAP and put in restrictions like on WIC and we can watch the abuse stop and also watch the corporations who rely on it to go bust. There is a reason why big business will never allow it to end.
Can Rep. Dusty get that data available for the public to view?
I always thought it was strange Papa Murphy’s accepted ebt cards.
Papa Murphy’s wouldn’t exist without EBT. Lots of gas stations survive off it as well. These leeches probably want it more than the citizens getting the cards. Much like everything else that defrauds our country, they will never acknowledge it. It’s like yelling about illegal immigration and then doing nothing to employers who employ them or even as going so far that Trump pardons them. Every politician in govt is bought and paid for. Democrats, Republicans, all of them.
There are some employers who are charged and fined for employing illegals. I know it’s difficult when illegals are using stolen information. Meat packing plants are one of the worst. I’ve also seen many gas stations found guilty of SNAP fraud.
Every politician in govt is bought and paid for. Democrats, Republicans, all of them…. true that!
SNAP should only be used for basic food items. No pop, chips, cookies, lobster, etc. Also, if people receiving SNAP benefits have smart phones, cable TV, smoke, drink, or aren’t employed, they can cut the frills first and then qualify.
I’d argue that a cell phone is a necessity these days. Maybe not a smart phone, but a cell phone in general.
Then argue it. We have one cell phone and it goes with my husband. Cell phones and internet service are not a necessity.
Anonymous at 3:36 if your husband has the only phone with him, how do you contact him when he is away? How can he get in touch with you?
If you leave the house, and your car breaks down, do you hope somebody comes along to help or do you just start walking back to town? I remember life before cell phones, flagging down passing cars asking for rides, being unable to contact my husband while he was on the road, that sort of thing. It really stunk.
I also remember trying to find a job when I didn’t have a phone. Forget it. Employers want to call you back and you have no number to give them.
I said he has the only “cell” phone, not the only phone. I don’t generally call my husband when he’s at work or away (whatever that means), he’s busy and if it’s not an emergency, I can wait. Big girl here. If he needs to get in touch with me, he calls the phone that’s attached to the wall here in our home.
We maintain our cars, so I don’t fear driving mine around. I don’t live out of city limits, so again, I don’t foresee the scenario you put me in taking place. I too grew up without cell phones. Before we left, we told people where we were going and then touched base with when we arrived at our final location.
Employers cannot discriminate if you don’t have a phone. If you apply at the location, you tell them the situation and return a few days later to see if they’re interested. Good grief I can’t imagine the stress you endured without a phone on you at all times. Did you hear that? It’s the ding indicating you got a Facebook like, better go check!!
Anonymous at 1:04 you have a landline? Why? Attached to the wall? I haven’t seen a phone like that for years. Seriously. How quaint.
I remember the days of filing your travel plans with somebody who cared.
One night 40 years ago we had to take our baby to the hospital ER. It was well below zero. The car was only a year old. We told the hospital we were on our way.
Halfway between McLaughlin and Ft Yates the fuel injection system froze. The engine died.
It was cold in the car. After 45 minutes the only other vehicle on the road showed up: a USPS truck. The driver gave us a lift to the hospital, where we were told “we were thinking we should send someone out to look for you.” They were still just thinking about it? It was in the negative teens, we had a gravely sick infant, and they were still only thinking about it?
I have used my cell phone to make 911 calls from locations away from home since then.
As for spouses getting in touch with each other, the convenience of being able to contact each other and ask for something to be picked up on the way home can’t be beat.
And just yesterday we were already in town when we got a call from a business there telling us a pick up was ready. If that call had gone to a landline at our house we would not have received the message until we had gone all the way home.
Cell phones are a necessity. They save lives, time, gas, and money. The only reason to rely on a landline is if you never leave the house.
You may be living your life based on convenience, but I wasn’t raised that way. My family taught me to be a self-sufficient warrior and pioneer.
You want to see a landline phone, there are thousands of SD residents listed in the phone book, maybe one of them would let you take a look. Or when you go into any business you could look around and see one. How would you contact a doctor if the office didn’t have a landline? Maybe you could convince them landlines aren’t necessary, good luck with that.
Cell phones are necessary for you. Others are able to survive without one. Landlines save lives and money too, you didn’t make a very strong case against not having one.
I agree s cell phone is necessary. I do not agree that an expensive smart phone and the accompanying charges are necessary.
Why do you agree a cell phone is necessary?
Cell phones are necessary Because when you are driving across the state in the winter in a $2000 car, you need to have a cell phone.
You also need a phone if you are looking for a job.
What is unnecessary are the landlines.
Why, because you say so? I lived in MT for many years and drove back and forth countless times without a cell phone and to boot I took Route212. Guess what, I survived.
You don’t need a cell phone if you’re looking for a job. Most hiring is now done online and if they need to call me, I have a landline.
If landlines are unnecessary why is it that the most recent phone book is full of residents still currently using them? How would you contact a business or restaurant or hair salon or daycare or school without them having a landline?
Most people on SNAP already have jobs. The reason they are on SNAP is because they don’t make enough.
If Dusty really wanted to solve the SNAP issue he would quit being a yes man for corporate America.
Many people on SNAP have jobs, yes. Many who take advantage of the system make enough to also have smart phones, own a car, spend money at the bar. I’ve met plenty, at the bar I work at, who are on SNAP and spend money all night on gambling, alcohol and take many smoke breaks.
There should be stricter qualifications.
#SweepingGenerality
It sounds like you have a job at a bar, because it has patrons who can spend money there. So you are on SNAP too, but you don’t know it; and so is the owner of the Bar, too.
Dusty’s obsession about SNAP speaks to how the GOP speaks to the emotions of voters and not really their pocketbooks. If they really cared about taxpayers, they would care about what they make and how most people should be making more in a world where billionaires are created evey minute.
They don’t pay me with their SNAP benefits, but I see what your getting at. I do know some have given out their ebt card in exchange for more money than what’s on the card.
It’s rare to find a politician who truly cares about the taxpayers.
I don’t doubt your contention about people giving “out their ebt card,” but my point is, that right or wrong, SNAP empowers peoples’ spending power to buy a drink at a bar – a bar that employs people and enriches the owner.
#WeAreAllInThisTogether
Buy “a” drink? Oh, JKC, you seem to be out of touch with what’s going on with many people who are granted SNAP and other welfare benefits.
We are not all in this together.
Outside of metro areas, a car is a necessity. We live in rural America where we have winter. I don’t think that should be a disqualifier. Very few places have public transportation around here.
If I was speaking about people who live outside the city I would’ve addressed them, did you notice I didn’t? If you are able to purchase a new car, you should be able to buy your own food, that could very well be a disqualifier.
So if they are driving a 2003 cavalier worth $1500 and have 3 kids running on an income of $24k with no father due to him being dead or in jail, they should not be eligible until they get rid of the car? I hope you realize you are just going to cause more issues which will probably lead to them losing their job or cause issues with child care which will cost us more in the end. Your generalities aren’t going to work if you are looking to solve the problem.
Are the children of the dead father receiving SS benefits? There’s child care benefits too, heating benefits, all sorts of welfare people take advantage of.And, did you notice I said “new” car?
As much as I appreciate your sad scenario, I don’t have much sympathy for people on benefits because I see the abuse first hand.
Do you know how many single people are on benefits? Can you make up a sad scenario for them too?
No one on SNAP is buying a new car. Im sure there is abuse but you are taking it to an entire new level of generalization. Even if they are driving a newer car, do you even know if it is theirs? I can tell, you don’t have any sympathy. Just wait til Obamacare gets removed and you get sick and go bankrupt. You will be right there with those people asking for help.
Sure, the all-knowing Anonymous knows, for a fact, no one is buying a new car and receiving welfare at the same time.
I don’t have sympathy for people who break the law, maybe that’s something you have, not me.
You too seem to be a decent person. You don’t know me or how I provide for my family. I don’t take from or ask the govt for help, it’s a trap and keeps you in a cycle of poverty. I see the destruction govt hand-outs cause when I return to the rez. No thank you.
Bring back the unions so taxpayers don’t have to supplement the Walmarts.
SD has never had a freshman as a chair or ranking member before. I hope he does a good job.
Politics are dirty!