President Trump Responds to Judge’s Ruling on SNAP Benefits

essentialsaltes · Monday at 10:15 AM

dogs4thewin said:
except that it is hung up in the senate number one

It depends on what 'it' is. If 'it' is the continuing resolution, that's true, but it expires November 21st, which is rapidly approaching.

If 'it' is the GOP tax plan which requires budget cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and the ACA subsidies (not to mention Trump's controversial use of rescission powers to defund things Congress has appropriated money for) these issues are still alive and unresolved between the parties on the budget.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:20 AM

Servus said:
Here's one of the problems with SNAP (1 minute video):

And of course, no one would ever lie on the internet. Especially not for social media engagement. Right? Right?

I feel like I'm back in the early 2000s with Grandma forwarding me every crazy email she got.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:24 AM

essentialsaltes said:
It depends on what 'it' is. If 'it' is the continuing resolution, that's true, but it expires November 21st, which is rapidly approaching.

If 'it' is the GOP tax plan which requires budget cuts to SNAP, Medicaid and the ACA subsidies (not to mention Trump's controversial use of rescission powers to defund things Congress has appropriated money for) these issues are still alive and unresolved between the parties on the budget.

I was talking about the CR which would in fact fund the government. The fact that it runs out means that MAYBE on that date it would be time to take a fresh look but it has been the DEMOCRATS in the SENATE who have so far held things up NOT REPUBLICANS in the HOUSE or democrats in the house for that matter.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:28 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
And of course, no one would ever lie on the internet. Especially not for social media engagement. Right? Right?

I feel that they should not be able to buy true junk food on SNAP. This would be like candy, cookies, snack cakes things of that sort or soft drinks some people would included processed food in that like frozen dinners and if you wanted to get REALLY strict you could include even canned food. I am not a fan of it being that strict.

MotoToTheMax · Monday at 10:28 AM

dogs4thewin said:
I was talking about the CR which would in fact fund the government. The fact that it runs out means that MAYBE on that date it would be time to take a fresh look but it has been the DEMOCRATS in the SENATE who have so far held things up NOT REPUBLICANS in the HOUSE or democrats in the house for that matter.

That's certainly an overly simplistic view on the situation. As long as it leaves no responsibility left for the party that controls the House, Senate, and Executive; the job is done. Dust off those hands. Job well done.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:31 AM

MotoToTheMax said:
That's certainly an overly simplistic view on the situation. As long as it leaves no responsibility left for the party that controls the House, Senate, and Executive; the job is done. Dust off those hands. Job well done.

BOTH sides do it ( which is why I do not feel republicans should use the nuclear option.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:35 AM

dogs4thewin said:
I feel that they should not be able to buy true junk food on SNAP. This would be like candy, cookies, snack cakes things of that sort or soft drinks some people would included processed food in that like frozen dinners and if you wanted to get REALLY strict you could include even canned food. I am not a fan of it being that strict.

Not sure what this has to do with my post.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:36 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
Not sure what this has to do with my post.

talking about the title of the video mentioning junk food.

JosephZ · Monday at 10:36 AM

dogs4thewin said:
but that is not the type of "emergency" that was meant to address only things that no one could do anything about not things like the government being shut down because BOTH sides will not move In short, this was not meant to address "created" "emergencies" only ones that could not be helped or controlled.

A government shutdown is exactly the kind of emergency the contingency fund can be used for; it has been listed as a means to fund SNAP during a shutdown going back to at least 2018.

Lapse of Funding Plan September 30, 2025

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): OMB’s General Counsel provided a letter to USDA on May 23, 2025 stating that there is a bona fide need to obligate benefits for October – the first month of the fiscal year – during or prior to the month of September, thereby guaranteeing that benefit funds are available for program operations even in the event of a government shutdown at the beginning of a fiscal year. In addition, Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds that can be used for State Administrative Expenses to ensure that the State can also continue operations during a Federal Government shutdown. These multi-year contingency funds are also available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs in the middle of the fiscal year.

Preparations for Shutdown as a Result of a Lapse in Appropriations 2024

Core programs of the nutrition safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Child Nutrition (CN) programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) will continue operations during a lapse in appropriations, subject to the availability of funding. Multi-year carry over funds and contingency reserves would be apportioned by OMB to support program operations during the period of the lapse to the extent such funding exists; funding from continuing resolutions, including the special mandatory payments provision generally included in continuing resolutions, would also be available to support program operations in a lapse the follows the expiration of a continuing resolution

Preparations for Shutdown as a Result of a Lapse in Appropriations 2021

FNS CONTINGENCY PLAN: For Shutdown Due to a Lapse in Appropriations 2018

USDA and OMB have jointly determined that there is Congressional intent that core programs of the nutrition safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Child Nutrition (CN) programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) shall continue operations during a lapse in appropriations. Budget authority including: multi-year carry over funds; contingency reserves; and quarterly apportionment of funds by OMB under the continuing resolutions due standard obligational patterns and the special mandatory payments provision have been apportioned by OMB to support program operations during the period of the lapse.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:41 AM

JosephZ said:
A government shutdown is exactly the kind of emergency the contingency fund can be used for; it has been listed as a means to fund SNAP during a shutdown going back to at least 2018.

Lapse of Funding Plan September 30, 2025

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): OMB’s General Counsel provided a letter to USDA on May 23, 2025 stating that there is a bona fide need to obligate benefits for October – the first month of the fiscal year – during or prior to the month of September, thereby guaranteeing that benefit funds are available for program operations even in the event of a government shutdown at the beginning of a fiscal year. In addition, Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds that can be used for State Administrative Expenses to ensure that the State can also continue operations during a Federal Government shutdown. These multi-year contingency funds are also available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs in the middle of the fiscal year.

Preparations for Shutdown as a Result of a Lapse in Appropriations 2024

Core programs of the nutrition safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Child Nutrition (CN) programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) will continue operations during a lapse in appropriations, subject to the availability of funding. Multi-year carry over funds and contingency reserves would be apportioned by OMB to support program operations during the period of the lapse to the extent such funding exists; funding from continuing resolutions, including the special mandatory payments provision generally included in continuing resolutions, would also be available to support program operations in a lapse the follows the expiration of a continuing resolution

Preparations for Shutdown as a Result of a Lapse in Appropriations 2021

FNS CONTINGENCY PLAN: For Shutdown Due to a Lapse in Appropriations 2018

look Trump has the right to appeal if the higher courts find he cannot do it then so be it. It is not good to depend 100% on the government anyway A it says as much in the name what does the S stand for? and B just like this if you depend on them for your needs they can take it away same applies to section 8 and social security for that matter. The ONLY people the government is 100% liable for their needs are people in government custody ( and yes some people turn to that option and I understand that.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:42 AM

dogs4thewin said:
talking about the title of the video mentioning junk food.

My post was pointing out this this was just some random TikTok video - it seems presumptuous to assume that it's true.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:46 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
My post was pointing out this this was just some random TikTok video - it seems presumptuous to assume that it's true.

everything is I understand that not everyone buys only junk food with SNAP I just noticed how you pointed out ( I understand as a joke that people do not lie on the internet and was saying that not only do I feel that they should not have a full haul of junk food but none at all ( at least nothing that is pure junk food not anything and everything known to be unhealthy.

JosephZ · Monday at 10:49 AM

dogs4thewin said:
Look Trump has the right to appeal if the higher courts find he cannot do it then so be it.

It doesn't bother you that the Trump administration had to be sued and literally fought in court to block funds from being used to provide food to low-income Americans?

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:50 AM

JosephZ said:
It doesn't bother you that the Trump administration had to be sued and literally fought in court to block funds for a program that provides food to low-income Americans?

nope in fact I feel that that the states should not have sued ( for the other reason).

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:57 AM

dogs4thewin said:
everything is I understand that not everyone buys only junk food with SNAP I just noticed how you pointed out ( I understand as a joke that people do not lie on the internet and was saying that not only do I feel that they should not have a full haul of junk food but none at all ( at least nothing that is pure junk food not anything and everything known to be unhealthy.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but again, my point was that:

1) We have no way to determine whether any (let alone all) of the food that she was showing off was actually purchased with SNAP benefits.

and

2) We have no way of knowing that the amount of money she claimed to have on her card was truthful.

Posts like that are purely ragebait.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 10:58 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but again, my point was that:

1) We have no way to determine whether any (let alone all) of the food that she was showing off was actually purchased with SNAP benefits.

and

2) We have no way of knowing that the amount of money she claimed to have on her card was truthful.

Posts like that are purely ragebait.

OH I see your pint

JosephZ · Monday at 11:04 AM

dogs4thewin said:
nope in fact I feel that that the states should not have sued ( for the other reason).

The USDA wrote in its September 30th shutdown plan: “Multi-year contingency funds are…available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs.” Two weeks later it was deleted, and the fund was suddenly “not legally available.” Why would the Trump administration now say it's "not legally available" when it was legally available just weeks earlier, according to the administration, and also during the previous shutdown under Trump during his first term? You don't find this administration's actions to be vindictive and cruel?

Servus · Monday at 11:05 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
And of course, no one would ever lie on the internet. Especially not for social media engagement. Right? Right?

I feel like I'm back in the early 2000s with Grandma forwarding me every crazy email she got.

Go ahead and prove what was shown in the video can't and doesn't happen.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 11:07 AM

JosephZ said:
The USDA wrote in its September 30th shutdown plan: “Multi-year contingency funds are…available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs.” Two weeks later it was deleted, and the fund was suddenly “not legally available.” Why would the Trump administration now say it's "not legally available" when it was legally available just weeks earlier, according to the administration, and also during the previous shutdown under Trump during his first term? You don't find this administration's actions to be vindictive and cruel?

nope I find that they are forcing people to treat SNAP as what the S was meant to be treated as in the first place. Along with healthcare by the way the money at issue was meant to be extra and not intended to be the case forever. However, the healthcare issue is not the issue of this thread.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 11:08 AM

Servus said:
I've seen it myself. Druggies stocking up on junk food at 7-Elevin using EBT. One can get all the junk food they want.

I think her point was we have no way of knowing that everything purchased ( or anything being purchased for that matter is being purchased with SNAP/

President Trump Responds to Judge’s Ruling on SNAP Benefits

Fact-Based Lifeform

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

dog lover

dog lover

Well-Known Member

dog lover

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

dog lover

Well-Known Member

dog lover

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

dog lover

Well-Known Member

dog lover

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

dog lover

Well-Known Member

<><

dog lover

dog lover

Similar threads