Subject: Re: Joe Walsh

Instead, it just means that in January, we're coming back to the question (again) of funding the government going forward...and the Senate has tried to just take SNAP (of all programs) off the table from the January debate.

Yes, that is what the Senate version reportedly does. Doesn't mean a thing unless the House agrees.

Recall the screws the BBB puts to SNAP:

Increases the upper age exception to 65 and older.

Limits the exception based on responsibility to care for a dependent child to those with a child under 14 years of age.

Removes exceptions for homeless individuals, veterans, and those 24 and younger who aged out of foster care.

Establishes new exceptions for “an Indian”, “Urban Indian” and “California Indian” as defined in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act.

https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/...

Under the BBB, an able bodied person is required to work 80 hours/month.

Trump's recent statement:

“When I was president, the number that you’re talking about was a tiny fraction of what it is now. Biden went totally crazy. Gave it to anybody that would ask,” the president claimed. He continued, “Gave it to people that were able-bodied, had no problem. Anybody that would ask….This wasn’t meant for that. It was meant for people that had real problems. In many cases, people that were down and out, people that could be saved. “

https://www.yahoo.com/news/art...

Lord Trump could decide that "able bodied" people should not get SNAP at all. He could demand they go out and work more hours instead. He could require anyone claiming to not be able bodied prove it, the same way people need to prove disability to be on SS Disability.

Steve