In a curiously pointless New York Times op-ed, Missouri Senator Josh Hawley writes that no American should go to bed hungry.
Congress must not let that happen. America is a great and wealthy nation, and our most important wealth is our generosity of spirit. We help those in need. We provide for the widow and the orphan. Love of neighbor is part of who we are. The Scripture’s injunction to “remember the poor” is a principle Americans have lived by. It’s time Congress does the same.
That’s about as deep as a politician proclaiming that he’s for everything good and against everything bad. Of course, it’s not as if this is a priority for the president, who is off jetting around Asia accepting flattery, gold trinkets and trying to fix problems of his own creation, rather than saving Americans from starvation while sending his buddy Milei $40 billion. “America first” might not mean what you think it means.
But how, praytell, does Senator Hawley propose to make this obvious good happen? To his credit, he doesn’t pull a Trump and blame the Democrats for holding out for medical care for illegal aliens and sex change surgery for transgender people.
(Belatedly added.)
Instead, he offers a simple solution.
Congress can still pass legislation during a shutdown, and it should pass my bill to keep SNAP benefits going. Last I checked, members of Congress are still getting paid. Republicans blame Democrats, and Democrats blame Republicans, but all these people have food to spare. One suspects that if senators couldn’t buy groceries, the government would never close down again.
Can Congress pass legislation during a shutdown? You bet it can. But like most simple solutions, this one isn’t going to work. While the Senate remains in session, Speaker Mike Johnson has the House on its now five-week hiatus to avoid swearing in Democrat representative-elect Adelita Grijalva, who would be the 218th signature on the discharge petition for the release of the Epstein files. This also makes it impossible for Congress to have any negotiations over ending the shutdown, since it would require the House to approve and there’s no one in the House.
To be fair to the House, there’s also no president to sign if a deal was reached or the Democrats capitulated and ended the filibuster of a continuing resolution that would allow Obamacare subsidies to end, pretty much ending health insurance for much of America. Speaker Johnson says that’s cool, as Trump has a better, more beautiful plan for healthcare which absolutely nobody knows about, but is ready to go in a day.
It appears beyond question that SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or what used to be called food stamps in simpler times, is of critical importance to a great many Americans, particularly now as food prices continue to rise with no “Day 1” fix in sight. But how?
The Democrats have no leverage to compel the Republicans to do anything beyond the Senate’s use of the filibuster to prevent the CR from passing. Promises of future negotiations are not merely empty, but Trump, through his muse, Russ Vought, has demonstrated that even Congressionally allocated funds mean nothing anymore. Who needs a line item veto when Vought’s OMB just decides to defund programs at will?
Yet, the Democrats could take the position that feeding hungry Americans is so important that it will forego fighting for ACA subsidies lest Americans starve on their way to the hospital. Similarly, the great and powerful Trump could similarly make a show of his benevolence by either directing his congressional minions to enact a law to fund SNAP, or negotiate with the Democrats to end the shutdown, to prove what a kind and generous leader he is.
What should happen? Which should happen? Will anything happen? Josh Hawley writes, “Congress should not let that happen,” as if Trump plays no role in this fiasco, but what can and should Congress do?
*Tuesday talk rules apply.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The optics of passing the BBB for which the substantial majority of the benefits accrue to the wealthy while then saying we can’t afford credits for health insurance are pretty bad IMO.
Also, I think it is ridiculous that they won’t even open up discussion on the issue during the shutdown. It’s one thing to not let the shutdown be used as leverage to be forced into something but its another thing entirely to not even discuss it which they claim to be willing to do.
Trump has no role unless there’s a bill to sign or veto; he can only talk from the sidelines. Congress is to blame, which can override any veto. In particular, Democrat Senators want to push the government to a breaking point for ACA/Obamacare subsidies. Even the largest federal union AFGE recently announced to sign a “clean continuing resolution.” They never mention Trump, but Congress.
https://www.afge.org/article/its-past-time-to-end-this-shutdown/
The union wants the shutdown over by any means necessary. They represent the employees, not the public, not the people on SNAP, not America. That’s their duty, but don’t confuse what the AFGE wants with anything else.
As for Trump, this may come as a shock to you but he exerts a little bit of control over the Republicans in Congress. I know, hard to imagine, but it’s true. If Trump wanted this over, it would be over. Instead, he has more important things to do than prevent Americans from starving. We all have our priorities.
At this point, the prudent course would be to assume probable nonfeasance by Congress, and increase our fall donations to food relief charities.
And your local emergency room which will be treating uninsured patients.
Again we return to the Divine Augustus:
“I had a good mind to discontinue permanently the supply of grain to the city, reliance on which had discouraged Italian agriculture, but refrained because some politician would be bound one day to revive the dole as a means of ingratiating himself with the people.”
from Suetonius, Divus Augustus, paragraph 42. Translation: Robert Graves, 1957.
Is Our Augustus, (Hail Caesar!), making a mistake in this situation? Or else, is there perhaps a grand play here that no one else yet sees?
Trump is choosing to cut off SNAP benefits. The money and authorization is there to continue them. Intentionally depriving food assistance to families to get political concessions is depraved.
This is a manufactured crisis. Both parties are using food as a weapon. The Democrats want to continue spending our tax dollars giving free healthcare to bums and illegals (Obamacare). They are willing to let Americans starve to get their way. Republicans want to slightly reduce the torrent of taxpayer dollars swirling down the Obamacare toilet; they also are willing to let Americans starve to get their way. The Trump administration has more than a billion dollars in SNAP backup funds that are there for exactly this purpose; to cover shortfalls in funding. They are refusing to use these funds because they too are using food as a weapon.
The solution? Stop depending on a corrupt band of cronies to feed your family.
I’m a federal employee, and some of us have been working without pay for almost a month now.
Candidly, I don’t care about ACA subsidies or SNAP benefits. I care that I am forced to work without pay, and that no one seems to care about the millions of us doing so.
I care that cost of living adjustments to my pay has not even come close to keeping up with inflation over the past several years.
I care that I’m forbidden, under threat of criminal prosecution, from striking in protest of not being paid for the labor I provide that is purportedly an essential function of the government.
And we’re apparently the only ones who care about these things. If the public wants employees who provide efficient service, this is not the way to get it. Because we basically are only incentivized to do the bare minimum at this point.