« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Agriculture Committee Voting Report on Farm Bill

Last week, the House Agriculture Committee marked up the preposterous $957 billion farm/food stamp bill (H.R. 6083).  Despite the media reports about severe cuts to the food stamp program, this bill actually locks in the appalling levels of spending established in the Obama-era.  In many respects, the committee votes from last week shed light on the problem we have with many red state statists within the Republican Party.

Once again, we put together a voting record spreadsheet of the major committee votes on the bill at ConservativeVoting Records.com (download spread sheet here).  This will become a regular feature for major committee markups.  Here are the amendments we scored:

  • Rep. Bob Goodlatte amendment to phase out sugar price supports and import restrictions, which increase the cost of most food products while enriching a few special interests.  It was defeated 10-36.
  • Rep. Bob Goodlatte amendment to strike a New Deal-style program that limits dairy production when prices drop below a specific level.  Even John Boehner called this a “Soviet style” price support program.  It was defeated 17-29.
  • Rep. Tim Huelskamp amendment to cut an additional $35 billion from food stamps.  These cuts were actually already approved by the committee in the spring as part of the House GOP effort to replace the sequester, pursuant to the reconciliation instructions prescribed in the Ryan budget.  Nevertheless, this effort was defeated 13-33.
  • Rep. Martha Roby amendment that would require food stamp beneficiaries to provide proof of payment of utility bills in order to be eligible for the income deduction that lowers the threshold of income to be eligible for food stamps.  At present, many states mail out small cash assistance payments for utilities in order to lower the income of those recipients and sign up more people for food stamps.  This is a no brainer provision that Senator Sessions tried to slip in the Senate bill, but was rebuffed by Democrats.  One would expect that with a 26-20 Republican majority on the committee, commonsense would prevail.  But 7 Republicans joined with Democrats to defeat it 17-27.

The final bill passed overwhelmingly 35-11, with just 4 Republicans voting no.  Thank you to Bob Gibbs, Bob Goodlatte, Tim Huelskamp, and Marlin Stutzman for voting against the bill.  A special thank you to Reps. Goodlatte and Huelskamp for voting the right way on all the amendments.

We urge Speaker Boehner not to bring this bill to the floor.

COMMENTS

  • edintexas

    “…require food stamp beneficiaries to provide proof of payment of utility bills…” AND “…many states mail out small cash assistance payments for utilities in order to lower the income…”.

    So this amendment would have required proof of paying utility bills. And many states give people on food stamps cash payments to help them pay their utility bills.

    1. Seems to me these people would have proof that they paid utility bills; and,

    2. How does giving the food stamp recipient cash lower their income?

    I’m confused.

    • http://madisonproject.com/ Daniel Horowitz

      Basically, Fifteen states are using a loophole in order to get more food stamp dollars from the federal government. They do this by mailing a very small check?less than a dollar a month?under the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Anyone who receives that check, which may be as little as a few dollars a year, becomes eligible to claim a lower income on the basis of home energy expenses?even if they don?t pay those expenses.

      • davenj1

        a few years back. In order to qualify for more Food Stamp dollars from the federal government, the state mailed 250,000 $1 checks to somehow increase their reported number of people “in poverty” by 250,000. Like the LIHEAP scheme, it reflects the ridiculous formulas the government cooks up to qualify for dollars.

        Agricultural bills are a huge pet peeve of mine and a great place to start when it comes to budget cuts and deficit reduction. It is another example of the government interfering in the free market,, and farm subsidies artificially inflate food prices domestically and are a main point of contention keeping our agricultural products out of new markets. Simply, our current agricultural spending and policy is remnant of the New Deal that calls for fundamental reform based on the reality of 2012, not the reality of 1932.

        • http://madisonproject.com/ Daniel Horowitz

          That’s exactly the problem. They are stuck on the same price supports paradigm of the ’30s. The special interests are trying to keep it that way.

  • renny

    and the support portions should be their own bills and Food Stamps sould be its own bill, etc..

    No bill should be over 8 pages, the size of the orig. Civil Rights bill of 1964. These 1000+ pages omnibus bills are rife with unrelated amendments, pet projects, unknowns, and confusion.

    Bills should be posted so we can read them, if we are so inclined.

    • norris

      bills that can not be explained by one person without notes are hiding places for special interest legislation .

    • renl57

      As I told you before.

      Thomas.loc.gov has the text of bills from draft form through amendments through final markup.

  • davenj1

    especially the so-called Tea Party Republicans should be held acccountable for their votes.

  • freemanja1991

    It forbids states from regulating the means of production in other states unconstitutionally. And was a blow to the radical environmentalists.