I know there's presidential race going on, but the government is still at work (ostensibly). And Thursday, during what could have been another business as usual Senate Agriculture committee vote, there was an under-reported, and probably under-appreciated, far-too-rare moment and of awesomeness in Washington, D.C.
Fortunately, it was taped, and now lives on the intertubes in perpetuity, so we can enjoy it today on Sunday.
It seems the Senate Agriculture committee passed a half-trillion dollar farm and food plan. The five-year plan is designed to cut the federal deficit by $23 billion. It passed from committee 16-5, and is headed to the Senate floor.
Voting in dissent: Sens. Thad Cochran (R-MS), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and John Boozman (R-AR).
And also, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-D).
If that strikes you as the proverbial "odd bed fellows" of politics, it should. Their concerns did not converge. The southern Republicans feared for the impact the bill would have on farmers of cotton, rice and peanuts that do not benefit from crop insurance.
Gillibrand, however, had serious objections to cuts made to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) aka, "food stamps."
Transcript starts at 1:57:
"Under this current draft, families in New York will lose about $45 a month in their food stamps, which means in the third week of the month, many families' children will go to school hungry and that's a high concern for me as a mother.
Now, not every state has the population that New York state has. We have 20 million people in our state. That means under this draft bill 300,000 families are going to be affected. That's 300,000 families that may be more food insecure now than they were before and that means less food on a kitchen table for children.
So I have very grave concerns about what that tells about us, and what we're going to do forward.
I want to bring up three issues about food stamps. First, it is such an extraordinary investment. For every dollar that you put into the SNAP program, you get out $1.79, that is a statistic from the USDA.
Second, there is so little fraud in food stamps, it's less than one percent. A dollar, one cent for every dollar. This is not a place where people are taking advantage, this is a place where families needs these resources.
And third, as a mother, our children need food to grow. It is the most simple, elemental thing that a family must provide for their children. They need food to grow, they need food to learn. They need food to reach their God-given potential.
So I urge my colleagues who are looking for places where we need to tighten our belts, please do not ask that of hungry children. it is the one place where we should not be tightening a belt. These are children who need this food.
I've been to food pantries, I've been to food banks, I've been to food kitchens, and I can tell you, they say the increase is with families with children.
And so when we are looking at these balancing issues, we should be making the choice to increase our investment in food stamps.
With every bit of belt tightening we do, and we are all very proud of the fact that this bill is doing deficit reduction, I urge you this is the one place we should not increase our cuts. For every senator that has an amendment to increase cuts, this is the wrong priority for America, this is the wrong priority for our future."
Watch the face of committee chair Sen. Debbie Stabenaw (D-MI) at 4:05. Gillibrand clearly made an impact on her.
It's really quite refreshing to see one of our leaders using their pulpit to stand up for the "little people," don't you think? Gillbrand breaks down a half-trillion dollar five-year bill that is sailing out of Washington into its direct impact of taking $45 a month out of the hands of 300,000 of her poorest constituents, and that means food runs out sooner.
It's refreshing to see that while there are high-profile people in politics that are working tirelessly to turn "food stamps" into a dirty word, there are still people willing to fight for them and say, "No, these programs are more than just the right thing to do, they are efficient and essential to our country's future growth."
And you know, Democrats voting against something because the GOP made it suck really bad for the poor, that's kind of cool too.
There will be the opportunity to amend the bill on the floor, for what it's worth. Will there be the votes to restore those cuts that threaten 300,000 New York families, and God knows how many nationally? If they can be found, my senator may have a lot to do with it.
PS: When does the "Family Values" crowd weigh in on the impact these cuts will have on American families?
I'm not seeing anything at American Family Association, Family Research Council or Focus on the Family websites. I'll keep checking back. I'm sure, like Sen. Gillibrand, they are deeply concerned about the effect these food stamp cuts will have on families whose values they are the tirelessly self-appointed champions of.
Some food policy people took notice: