On the recordJune 19, 2012
I strongly urge a ``no'' vote. We actually rejected this amendment last fall. I ask that we do it again. It is true that food assistance has gone up as the economy has had a rough time. As unemployment goes up, food costs go up. Unemployment is coming down, and in this bill we reflect savings. As the economy is getting better, food help goes down. It is no different than crop insurance helping the farmer in a disaster. This helps families in a disaster. Unfortunately, this amendment would completely change the structure of food help. It would dramatically affect children and families. For example, it would affect someone's ability to get to work because the value of their car would somehow be reflected in a way that would require them to possibly give up their car when they are trying to get to work in order to be able to put food on the table for their families. It makes no sense. This bill has commonsense reforms to make sure every dollar goes where it should. I urge a ``no'' vote. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
