President Trump Responds to Judge’s Ruling on SNAP Benefits

camille70 · Monday at 1:28 PM

dogs4thewin said:
I never once said that people cannot or should not give to the poor or help those who struggle. I said that it is not the GOVERNMENT'S job to do so.

The government is the best entity to do it so fewer people fall through the cracks.

dogs4thewin · Monday at 1:29 PM

camille70 said:
The government is the best entity to do it so fewer people fall through the cracks.

it is not the government's job I would think this would teach people that lesson. When you depend only on the government THEY can take it all away.

camille70 · Monday at 1:31 PM

dogs4thewin said:
sounds like you are still putting things on the government to push for things.

Congress can tax and spend to promote the general welfare of the nation. IMO ensuring citizens are educated and fed comes under that.

Servus · Monday at 1:58 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
I never claimed otherwise, though that does depend on the state.

I think you'll find that SNAP spending looks a heck of a lot like non-SNAP spending: https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/SNAPFoodsTypicallyPurchased.pdf

So that video might as well be real. Meaning there needs to be more restricted controls put into place. As opposed to the liberal free-for-all.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 2:07 PM

Servus said:
So that video might as well be real.

Nope. As I pointed out already, it does not accurately reflect the average purchasing habits of SNAP recipients. Just because something is possible does not mean that it's actually happening.

Servus said:
Meaning there needs to be more restricted controls put into place. As opposed to the liberal free-for-all.

Needs to be? On what grounds?

Servus · Monday at 2:11 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
Nope. As I pointed out already, it does not accurately reflect the average purchasing habits of SNAP recipients. Just because something is possible does not mean that it's actually happening.

Needs to be? On what grounds?

To help prevent tax payer money from going to waste.

JosephZ · Monday at 2:13 PM

dogs4thewin said:
it is not the government's job I would think this would teach people that lesson. When you depend only on the government THEY can take it all away.

The vast majority of SNAP beneficiaries do not depend only on the government.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 2:15 PM

Servus said:
To help prevent tax payer money from going to waste.

If the food is getting eaten, it's not going to waste. Now, you could argue that it's not the best use of taxpayer money, but we're talking small potatoes in the context of the entire federal budget here. There are tons of examples of much larger wastes of taxpayer money - or taxes simply not being collected.

I'm not necessarily against the idea of putting some restrictions on what SNAP benefits can be used for. However, the holier-than-thou preachiness, and the fact that it only comes up in the defense of people trying to eliminate the program altogether makes me doubt the sincerity of the people so stridently calling for it.

Desk trauma · Monday at 2:27 PM

dogs4thewin said:
it is not the government's job I would think this would teach people that lesson. When you depend only on the government THEY can take it all away.

Unlike private charity which isn’t subject to being cut off for any reason.

Servus · Monday at 2:36 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
If the food is getting eaten, it's not going to waste. Now, you could argue that it's not the best use of taxpayer money, but we're talking small potatoes in the context of the entire federal budget here. There are tons of examples of much larger wastes of taxpayer money - or taxes simply not being collected.

Yes, there are lots of areas of waste that exist.

RocksInMyHead said:
I'm not necessarily against the idea of putting some restrictions on what SNAP benefits can be used for. However, the holier-than-thou preachiness, and the fact that it only comes up in the defense of people trying to eliminate the program altogether makes me doubt the sincerity of the people so stridently calling for it.

Most likely eliminating it altogether is a matter of propaganda. Unless that is members of congress and the senate have stated that as their goal.

JosephZ · Monday at 2:57 PM

dogs4thewin said:
What is the point as I read where it could take weeks or even months.

There doesn't need to be a delay, but the Republicans evidently don't care if Americans don't receive food assistance. The reason for a delay is because the states have to recode their eligibility systems with only partial funding.

SNAP could be fully funded today and without any delays if the Republicans wanted to do so. All it would take is for a standalone bill to fully fund SNAP to be brought to the floor, Republicans in Congress to vote yes, and then it moves to the Senate, where Republicans vote yes, and then on to Trump to sign it. There have already been two attempts to do this, once by a Democrat bill in Congress and a bill introduced by 15 Republicans in the Senate, but the Republican leadership refused to allow a vote on it. All 47 Democrats and 2 independents agreed to vote yes. They, along with the 15 Republicans, would have allowed SNAP to be funded before November even got here, and Americans who receive SNAP wouldn't have seen a lapse in their benefits on November 1st.

There has never been a lapse in SNAP benefits during previous shutdowns, and Republicans and the Trump administration are 100% to blame for it happening during this shutdown.

Say it aint so · Monday at 3:10 PM

Valletta said:
It's not humane to exploit people under the guise of asylum. The abuse of the system and abuse of the border laws that took place under the Biden administration must never be allowed to happen again.

How in the world is allowing people from Hatti going through war to seek asylum "exploiting?"
How in the world is allowing people from Venuzelua going through the chaos there to seek asylum "exploiting?
And you STILL didn't answer my question. But I don't expect you to, because obfuscation is how you roll.

eleos1954 · Tuesday at 11:46 AM

essentialsaltes said:
They did already. It's in a passed law. The judiciary interprets that law when there are disagreements (as here between the states and the executive).

well ... I guess we will wait and see what the ruling is.

Belk · Tuesday at 1:19 PM

dogs4thewin said:
I never once said that people cannot or should not give to the poor or help those who struggle. I said that it is not the GOVERNMENT'S job to do so.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

That is exactly the governments job.

Pommer · Tuesday at 2:56 PM

Servus said:
To help prevent tax payer money from going to waste.

Restraint-of-trade?
Methinks Frito-Lay would file suit.

Servus · Tuesday at 6:42 PM

Pommer said:
Restraint-of-trade?
Methinks Frito-Lay would file suit.

RFK says 'bring it on'.

dogs4thewin · Wednesday at 8:45 AM

JosephZ said:
The vast majority of SNAP beneficiaries do not depend only on the government.

then they should have very little issue with losing the benefit.

essentialsaltes · Thursday at 3:59 PM

Judge orders Trump administration to fully fund SNAP benefits by Friday, rebukes Trump

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to make a payment to fully fund SNAP for the month of November by tomorrow.

abcnews.go.com

GoldenBoy89 · Thursday at 6:50 PM

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.

Say.... what happened with the totally for sure real tiktok campaign of people promising to storm grocery stores when their SNAP benefits get cut? There must be hundreds of videos coming out of every major city across the country confirming this by now.

GoldenBoy89 · Thursday at 7:00 PM

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

The onus is on the one making the positive claim that the video is true.

President Trump Responds to Judge’s Ruling on SNAP Benefits

Newbie

dog lover

Newbie

<><

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

<><

Well-Known Member

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

[redacted]

<><

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

God is Love

Senior Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

<><

dog lover

Fact-Based Lifeform

We're Still Here

We're Still Here

Similar threads