Mr. President, I rise to waive the point order raised by my colleague from Minnesota. I urge my colleagues to vote to waive the point of order. In 2023, the SNAP payment error exceeded 11 percent--11 percent-- amounting to more than $10…
Mr. President, I rise to waive the point order raised by my colleague from Minnesota. I urge my colleagues to vote to waive the point of order.
In 2023, the SNAP payment error exceeded 11 percent--11 percent-- amounting to more than $10 million in misspent taxpayer dollars. This underscores the need for stronger State accountability in administering this program.
This title incentivizes States to be a better steward of taxpayer dollars to use resources that are prioritized for those most in need. If a State's payment error is below 6 percent, that State is exempt from any share of the cost of SNAP benefits. This is a reasonable approach that will help preserve the integrity and long-term sustainability of the program.
There is ample time for the States to adjust, plan, and budget for this to take effect in 2028. States can also work to lower their payment error rate over the next couple of years so that they would be exempt from the match altogether.
Mr. President, I move to waive the point of order for the consideration of the pending legislation, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
Vote on Motion
Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the motion raised by my colleague from New Mexico.
The agriculture title of this bill takes a practical approach to improve SNAP by reducing waste, enhancing accountability, and encouraging recipients to move toward self-reliance through work and training.
SNAP spending has nearly doubled since 2018, putting this vital program on an unsustainable path, wrought with mismanagement and waste. This program has devolved into viewing ``success'' as enrolling more individuals to be dependent on government assistance. SNAP is long overdue for change.
This motion would jeopardize the ability for the Senate to meet its reconciliation instructions and deliver the President's agenda to the American people.
I urge my colleagues to vote no.
Vote on Motion
Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the motion raised by my colleague from Illinois.
The Agriculture title of the bill empowers individuals to pursue work, education, training, and volunteer opportunities, equipping SNAP recipients to eventually transition off the program through real growth in their income.
It is reasonable to expect SNAP recipients who can work to do so, including parents of school-age children who can work while their children are in school. Any individual who is physically or mentally unfit for employment continues to be exempt from the work requirement.
This motion would jeopardize the ability of the Senate to meet its reconciliation instructions and deliver the President's agenda to the American people.
I urge my colleagues to vote no.
Vote on Motion
Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the motion raised by my colleague from California. The agricultural title of this bill takes a practical approach to improve SNAP by reducing waste, enhancing accountability, and encouraging recipients to move toward self-reliance through work and training.
SNAP spending has nearly doubled since 2018, putting this vital program on an unsustainable path, wrought with mismanagement and waste. SNAP is long overdue for change. This program has devolved into viewing success as enrolling more individuals to be dependent on government assistance.
This motion would jeopardize the ability of the Senate to meet its reconciliation instructions and deliver the President's agenda to the American people.
I urge my colleagues to vote no.
Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by my colleague from Minnesota.
We have amended the State matching funds requirement for SNAP to provide a delay implementation date for States that have extremely high payment error rates. These States will have additional time to plan, to budget, and to adjust. This will help all States be ready for the change. By 2030, all States will have phased in and be subject to the matching funds requirement.
The States involved, if we did fiscal year 2024--again, the key to this is doing it in a fair way. Alaska is one of the States. Maryland is one of the States. Oregon is one of the States. New York is one of the States, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Florida, Georgia, Alaska, and DC--hardly Republican priorities.
As Amy said, I would vote what is important to your State. If you have got a high error rate, this allows you additional time in order to get your house in order so that you will not be penalized.
Vote on Amendment No. 2849
With that, I ask for the yeas and nays and encourage a positive vote--no vote. A positive vote, meaning a no vote.