Patrick Leahy: “there is much in this amendment that sounds appealing until you look at it. I have to say I strongly, strongly oppose…”

“there is much in this amendment that sounds appealing until you look at it. I have to say I strongly, strongly oppose the idea of the amendment. It would be a major, significant change in our food stamp legislation. It would be done without any debate, really--15 minutes on the floor, no hearings, without going through the committee of jurisdiction, without looking at the complexities of it. At a time when 1 out of every 10 Americans are on food stamps, when the budget is being stretched, this makes no sense at all. In fact, many of the families who are on food stamps today find they run out of food by the end of the month. Adding other things they could purchase is not going to help. In the 1991 publication of the National Academy of Sciences, they said food, rather than vitamin and mineral substances, should serve as the sole source of nutrients to meet the dietary needs. This is not asking food stamp purchasers to go on a yuppie diet fad of the moment that somehow they can just have vitamin pills, whether they work or not--expensive, they should work--whether they work or not and substitute it for food. We are facing potential food stamp cuts as it is. To cut even more of the amount of money available to food makes very little sense to me.”