I believe tonight the case has been made against H.R. 4, particularly the case of the provision to eliminate nutritional programs. We are more than Members of Congress. We are actually public servants and we must remember that our first responsibility is not to the parties that we are members of but to the people we represent. At the end of each day, we must be honest with the facts, who have we helped and who have we harmed. Have we helped the few or have we helped the many? I think President Kennedy had it right 34 years ago when he stated, 'A country that cannot help the many who are poor cannot protect the few who are rich.' No party or no person has an exclusive on family values and personal responsibility. Those are standards that each of us hold absolutely dear. And if we do, we care about children.
Eva M. Clayton: “I believe tonight the case has been made against H.R. 4, particularly the case of the provision to eliminate nutritional…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about H.R. 4 and its impact on nutritional programs.
Share
More from Eva M. Clayton
tomorrow this body will take up the reauthorization of the 1996 welfare law. Much has been said about this bill and no doubt debate will go on for some time. However, remarkably little has been said about one aspect of it, the rural…
I was about to ask the gentleman if he is suggesting that he would be willing to restate it, all the legal immigrants, plus your provision, if they had some standard? Is that a 5-year standard, a 4-year standard?
I want to use this time as we consider the supplemental to raise an issue that I think has tremendous emergency potential, but it has great implications for us as a Nation as we respond internationally and as we are trying to bring…
I am very appreciative of what the gentleman has done. I am only saying as a rural-urban allocation, those of us who live in rural communities do not benefit from the program in the same way. I urge the gentleman to work with us during the…





