Van Orden's flip-flop on SNAP hurts Wisconsin
When he was campaigning for Congress in western Wisconsin, Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden talked about growing up 'in abject rural poverty,' raised by a single mom who relied on food stamps. As a result, he has said, he would never go along with cuts to food assistance.
'He sat down in my office when he first got elected and promised me he wouldn't ever vote against SNAP because he grew up on it, supposedly,' Democratic U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan said in a phone interview as he was on his way home to Wisconsin from Washington this week.
But as Henry Redman reported, Van Orden voted for the Republican budget blueprint, which proposes more than $200 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in order to make room for tax cuts for the very wealthy.
Still, after that vote, Van Orden issued a public statement warning against reckless cuts to SNAP that place 'disproportionate burdens on rural states, where food insecurity is often more widespread,' and saying it is unfair to build a budget 'on the backs of some of our most vulnerable populations, including hungry children. Period.'
Van Orden sits on the House Agriculture Committee, which was tasked with drawing up a specific plan to cut $230 billion from food assistance to pay for tax cuts. Van Orden reportedly balked at a cost-sharing plan that shifted 25% of the cost of the program to states, saying it was unfair to Wisconsin.
But then, on Wednesday night, Van Orden voted yes as the committee passed an unprecedented cut in federal funding for SNAP on a 29-25 vote.
Van Orden took credit for the plan, which ties cuts to state error rates in determining eligibility and benefit amounts for food assistance. According to WisPolitics, he declared at a House Ag Committee markup that 'states are going to have to accept the fact that if they are not administering this program efficiently, that they're going to have to pay a portion of the program that is equitable, and it makes sense and it is scaled.'
But states, including Wisconsin, don't have money to make up the gap as the federal government, for the first time ever, withdraws hundreds of millions of dollars for nutrition assistance. Instead, they will reduce coverage, kick people off the program and hunger will increase. The ripple effects include a loss of about $30 billion for farmers who supply food for the program, Democrats on the Ag Committee report, and damage to the broader economy, since every $1 in SNAP benefits generates about $1.50 in economic activity. Grocery stores, food manufacturers rural communities will be hit particularly hard.
Wisconsin will start out with a bill for 5% of the costs of the program in Fiscal Year 2028, according to a bill explanation from the Agriculture Committee. But as error rates vary, that number shifts sharply upward — to 15% when the error rate goes from the current 5% to 6%, to 20% if we exceed an 8% error rate, and so on.
And there are other cuts in the bill, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) points out, including stricter eligibility limits, work requirements that cannot be waived in times of economic hardship and high unemployment, and reductions in benefits that come from eliminating deductions for utility costs.
More than 900,000 children, adults, and seniors count on Wisconsin's SNAP program, known as FoodShare, according to an analysis of state health department data by Kids Forward. The same analysis found that covering the costs of just 10% of SNAP benefits would cost Wisconsin $136 million.
Alaska and Texas have higher error rates than Wisconsin, and so they — and their hungry kids — are stuck with the biggest cuts. Even if you accept that that is somehow just, the people who are going to pay for this bill in all the states, including ours, are, as Van Orden himself put it, 'the most vulnerable populations, including hungry children. Period.'
'He says one thing and does another,' Pocan says of Van Orden's flip-flopping on SNAP. 'He's gone totally Washington.'
That's too bad for the people left behind in rural Wisconsin, who will take the brunt of these unnecessary cuts.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
29 minutes ago
- Politico
10 things you need to know about California Democrats' redistricting plan
The Palm Springs portion of Calvert's district, meanwhile, would be tacked onto the seat now held by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, who would suddenly find himself in a district with a four-point Democratic advantage that spans Riverside and San Diego counties. Issa, who lost in the 2018 wave and moved to nab a safer GOP seat in 2020, would find himself once again a target. (More on those races below.) 2. Vulnerable Democrats get some relief Knocking off Republicans is just one side of the coin. Democrats also want to ease the pressure on their frontline members. Democrats in some of last year's toughest campaigns — including Adam Gray in the Central Valley, Derek Tran and Dave Min in Orange County and George Whitesides in Los Angeles County — all would see their districts turn a deeper shade of blue. Gov. Gavin Newsom, eager to maximize the intimidation factor for Texas, told Crooked Media that shoring up those vulnerable Democrats is in itself a net gain for his party. If Texas proceeds with its plan, he said, 'We'll neutralize them and we'll also punch above our weight in those four additional seats.' By that logic, the bluer tinge of the districts represented by Rep. Josh Harder and Mike Levin — two Democrats who are perpetually on the bubble of a serious challenge, but so far have not been marquee races — also add to the Democrats' spoils. Are the seats really 'additional' if Democrats already have them? No, but taking them off the board for Republicans would undeniably be a net positive for the party, allowing them to focus their resources in other tight races in California and throughout the country. 3. Don't count your chickens A lot has to go right for this to work, if 'work' is defined as 'Democrats flip enough seats in California to offset five Texas pickups.' Even if voters approve the new maps, coloring a district bluer on paper guarantees nothing. Just ask the string of Democrats who have tried, unsuccessfully, to oust Valadao from a seat where registered Democrats have for years outnumbered Republicans. The new map adds left-leaning voters to Valadao's district, but he's defied the voter-registration odds before. Meanwhile, some efforts to bolster Democratic incumbents are not guaranteed to work. Gray's Central Valley seat and the Orange County district held by Tran do get marginally more Democratic, but will still likely require Democrats to spend heavily in those races next year to ensure a win. 'I understand that Gov. Newsom is positioning himself as the top opponent to President Trump and the White House. So that's why he has ratcheted up his rhetoric,' said Nathan Gonzales, editor and publisher of Inside Elections, a nonpartisan campaign almanac. 'But he's offering some premature political analysis.' 4. Vibing with the Voting Rights Act Democrats could have sought even more gains but compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act stopped them from fully icing out Republicans on the congressional maps. They say it's a stark contrast to the ongoing, GOP-led redistricting efforts in red states like Texas — where there's little attempt to comply with prior Voting Rights Act requirements that prioritize fair representation of non-white voters through the creation of minority-majority districts and minority 'opportunity' districts.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Leaked chart reveals winners and losers in California's Democratic gerrymander
More details on California Democrats' proposed overhaul to the state congressional map are coming to light in advance of the official release of the new boundaries. State lawmakers were briefed Wednesday evening on the expected partisan tilt of all 52 congressional districts, providing the clearest view yet of which Republican districts they are targeting. The changes, which are not yet final, were detailed in a chart obtained by POLITICO and confirmed by multiple legislators and staffers. CD-1, the rural northeastern corner of the state represented by Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-3, a sprawling district along California's eastern border represented by GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley, goes from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-9, Democratic Rep. Josh Harder's northern Central Valley district, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-13, a Central Valley seat narrowly won last year by Democratic Rep. Adam Gray, changes from lean Republican to safe Democratic CD-27, a northern Los Angeles County seat held by Democratic Rep. George Whitesides, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-41, a battleground seat held by GOP Rep. Ken Calvert, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic CD-45, which Democratic Rep. Derek Tran won last year in the most expensive race in the country, goes from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-47, an Orange County district represented by Democratic Rep. Dave Min, moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic CD-48, which spans Riverside and San Diego counties and is held by GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, changes from safe Republican to lean Democratic. The new maps could also see more Democrats added into the Central Valley district of GOP Rep. David Valadao, who has already been able to defy gravity in a seat with a Democratic registration advantage. Gov. Gavin Newsom, speaking to reporters after he kicked off the campaign to give voters final approval over the still-unreleased districts, teased their imminent debut. "People are eager to see the maps,' he said. 'We anticipate that these maps will completely neuter and neutralize what is happening in Texas." Republicans are already denouncing the move. The nine-member California Republican House delegation released a joint statement Thursday pointing to the newest POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab survey which found strong bipartisan majorities prefer district lines be drawn by an independent commission than lawmakers. 'Governor Newsom is trying to grab power away from the citizens on the commission and give it to Sacramento politicians to gerrymander their own districts,' the statement said. 'Our delegation will stand with the citizens of California and defend their rights as they stand today in our state constitution by opposing Newsom's ballot measure. All Californians, regardless of their political affiliation, should vote NO on this attempt to eliminate the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission's ability to draw fair congressional districts.' The unveiling of the maps as soon as Friday sets the stage for a week-long sprint through the Legislature. Legislators must approve a constitutional amendment to be approved by the voters, as well as companion bills to put the maps in statute as well address the cost of the special election and other logistics. The bills are expected to be heard by the elections committees in both houses on Tuesday and appropriations committees on Wednesday before final floor votes Thursday. The breakneck speed means that none of the measures can be amended without facing a delay under the 72-hour rule.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democrats release proposed new California congressional map
Democrats on Friday released a proposed new California congressional map as they aim to counter Republican-led redistricting efforts in Texas. The proposal was submitted to the state legislature on behalf of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and comes as the latest development in an intensifying redistricting fight. 'Earlier today, the DCCC submitted a proposed congressional map to the legislative public portal with collaborative input from stakeholders and legislators. We anticipate this proposal will have widespread support both among California office holders and various stakeholders across the state,' executive director Julie Merz said in a release. 'We will not stand by as Republicans attempt to rig the election in their favor and choose their voters.' California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is vying to hold a special election this fall on a ballot measure that would suspend the state's independent redistricting commission until the end of the decade in an effort to keep up with Republican gerrymandering. Newsom has stressed that bypassing the commission, which Californians approved back in 2008 and 2010, would be temporary, and that redrawing the lines would only be triggered by redistricting in red states. Democrats in the California legislature are expected to move the measure forward when they reconvene next week, teeing up a November special election. The proposed maps are expected to effectively neutralize the would-be gains in Texas, where a plan backed by President Trump could net five GOP House seats, by creating five blue districts in California. The Republican incumbents effected by the new map are Reps. Kevin Kiley (R), Doug LaMalfa (R), Darrell Issa (R), Ken Calvert (R) and David Valadao (R). 'They do five seats, we do five seats,' Newsom has said. Democrats in the Texas state legislature fled earlier this month in a desperate bid to stall the GOP plan from moving forward, but they've signaled they could return if, among other conditions, California introduced its maps to counter the Lone Star State. 'I love my current congressional district, but I understand the stakes. Democracy is on the line,' Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said on X as news of the map broke. 'When this new map is approved by voters, I look forward to running in the new 42nd district, made up of my hometown of Long Beach, coastal OC, Costa Mesa & South Santa Ana. Let's go!' The National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC) backed the maps, calling California's plan a 'measured response' to counteract Trump's 'blatant power grab in Texas. The Republicans' congressional campaign arm blasted the redistricting moves on Friday, arguing Newsom 'is shredding California's Constitution and disenfranchising voters to prop up his Presidential ambitions.'