Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Washington will be postponed. The Chair understands that amendment No. 194…

Mr. Chairman, I would simply request that my opposition, my colleague, double check his facts. This is well-documented. This is effective. It is cost saving, and the costs have already been paid by the energy sector. This is something that…

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

The cost of that is that kids and low-income working families may not get the food that they need in school, at home, or over the summer.

The cost of closing this so-called loophole, which isn't really a loophole--this is just eliminating paperwork--we already know, because we heard in this Committee, that the fraud rate in this program is less than one percent.

Broad-based categorical eligibility helps more than 38,000 families in Washington meet eligibility requirements for SNAP.

I challenge some of my colleagues who are so reluctant to close loopholes in a Tax Code that gives tremendous benefit to the wealthiest and to corporations.

I would think that having conversations about the specifics of the test, if those were bad, if those were wrong, let's have that conversation.

If you don't close those loopholes, then people can get a hold of a gun who could do our children harm or do themselves harm.

what is the cost? If you don't close those loopholes, then people can get a hold of a gun who could do our children harm or do themselves harm.

How is it fair for folks in Massachusetts to make 200 percent of poverty and folks from Texas make only 160?