Sen. Bennet, Colorado advocates slam GOP-proposed cuts to food assistance
Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet joined a roundtable Thursday with Coloradans who would be hurt by proposed cuts to federal food assistance. They ranged from a grocery store manager in rural Baca County to a farmer from Wellington, north of Fort Collins.
The conversation comes as Congress considers billions of dollars of cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which provides monthly support for low-income families to buy groceries.
'(Cuts) would have a material effect on communities throughout Colorado, both urban and rural,' Bennet said. 'It's going to affect everybody, no matter where they live, and at a time when they need, desperately, help to just feed their families.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The House narrowly passed its version of the GOP tax and spending bill last month, which for the first time would require states to shoulder some of the cost of SNAP — up to 25% — starting in 2028. Members of Colorado's House delegation voted along party lines for the bill, with the GOP in favor and the Democrats opposed. Senate Republicans are pushing for more moderate SNAP cuts compared to their House counterparts.
'These cuts would be devastating,' Bennet said during the remote roundtable. 'Now we know what the scope of the Senate cuts are versus the House cuts, and in either case, it's the largest cuts that have ever been proposed.'
On Wednesday, Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman said the Senate GOP plan would result in federal savings of '$52 or $53 billion.'
Both chambers' plans would tie the percent of the cost burden of SNAP on a state to the rate of that state's payment errors. Under the Senate plan, states with error rates at 5% or lower would continue to pay nothing for SNAP, while states with error rates at 10% or higher would pay for 15% of benefits, Boozman said. The Senate plan would also create two levels for states with error rates between 5% and 10%.
Colorado's SNAP payment error rate is 8.61% as of 2023, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This puts Colorado on a better track than the national average, which is 11.7%.
Laurel Smith, a farmer in Larimer County, said any SNAP cuts would mean a significant loss of revenue and 'a reduced quality of life for the community.'
'For my farm stand and my farmers market booth, 65% of my revenue comes from SNAP sales, that's how much our community members desire SNAP,' said Smith, who herself used SNAP benefits when she was in her 20s to supplement her food budget.
Libby Triebel, a single mother of four who lives in Colorado Springs, said she often 'barely scrapes by,' even with SNAP, which gives recipients an average of $6.16 per day for food.
'I do my best, and I make sure (my kids) don't go a day without having their stomachs full,' Triebel said. '(Cuts) would be harmful, on these families out here that are just making it by to survive, and these kids don't deserve that.'
About 159,000 Coloradans could lose SNAP benefits under House Republicans' tax and spending bill, according to an analysis released Thursday by the left-leaning Center for American Progress.
SNAP cuts are largely unpopular among Colorado voters, though many want to see lower error rates. Just 19% of Colorado voters want to see Congress decrease spending on SNAP, while 46% want to see it increase, 29% want it to stay about the same and 6% are unsure, according to a poll released Tuesday by Healthier Colorado.
During the roundtable, food bank leaders warned that any cuts to SNAP would add a greater burden on their organizations, which are already stretched thin. For Thai Nguyen, the founder of Kaizen Food Rescue, feeding Coloradans is deeply personal.
Nguyen, who was a refugee and homeless in her youth, knows what it's like to not have access to healthy, fresh produce. Through her organization, she works to pay forward the help that she received from SNAP. Kaizen Food Rescue has served food to more than 57,000 people in the Denver metro area so far this year.
'We're trying to just pretty much empower our communities and create a sense of belonging,' Nguyen said.
Regardless of potential SNAP cuts, Kaizen Food Rescue is already reeling, after a $20 million Environmental Protection Agency grant it had been awarded for an on-site farm was recently revoked, according to Nguyen.
As congressional budget negotiations continue, Bennet urged the roundtable members to continue to push for the nutritious food support they want to see for their communities.
'Please continue to lead this fight, to champion this fight,' Bennet said. 'It's a fight worth having.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Federal authority over DC is nothing new, and it is needed again
President Trump this week moved from rhetoric to action in his push for more federal control of Washington, D.C. Citing a ' public safety emergency,' he is deploying National Guard troops to support federal officers already in place, taking direct control of the city's police department under a provision of the 1973 Home Rule Act, and pledging to 'get rid of the slums.' Democrats' reaction has been swift and condemnatory. They cast the move as the latest instance of his authoritarian overreach. 'This is what dictators do,' California Gov. Gavin Newsom proclaimed on X. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said the move had ' no basis in law.' The New York Times ran the headline: 'Trump threatens federal takeover of Washington after Member of DOGE is Assaulted.' In reality, the Constitution not only allows this but anticipates federal intervention in the capital's affairs, at least in some circumstances. That's because the District of Columbia was created precisely so that the seat of government would not depend on any state for its security, funding or order. Washington is not a state and never has been. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution grants Congress the power to 'exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever' over the District. This is a sweeping authority that has been used repeatedly. Local self-government in D.C. is a modern experiment, not an inalienable right. Until the 1973 District of Columbia Home Rule Act, the city was run directly by federally appointed officials. The 1801 Organic Act placed Washington under congressional control; in the 1870s, Congress briefly allowed a territorial-style government, but after mismanagement and debt spiraled, it reimposed direct federal rule. Even under home rule, Congress has retained authority to override local laws, control the District's budget, and, in emergencies, reassert direct control, as it did from 1995 to 2001 through a Financial Control Board during a local fiscal crisis. A president cannot unilaterally abolish home rule, but he can press Congress to act, and he can invoke his existing emergency powers. Trump's actions pursue those avenues and certainly don't defy the Constitution. For example, the Home Rule Act explicitly allows the president to assume control of the police if 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist.' Trump's order triggers that provision. Although Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser argues those conditions do not exist, the statute leaves it to the federal government's discretion. The case for intervention is straightforward: D.C. has an image problem utterly unfit for its role as the nation's capital. It consistently ranks among the most dangerous cities in America. Annual homicides were just under 200 last year and more than twice their level in 2012, despite Bowser's rote claims of 'declining crime.' What decline there is mostly reflects the nationwide post-COVID drop in crime rather than any uniquely successful policy. High-profile incidents underscore the issue. Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) was carjacked at gunpoint near Capitol Hill. Around the same time, the Secret Service vehicle assigned to Naomi Biden — the granddaughter of the then-president — was broken into in Georgetown, which is arguably the nicest part of the city. Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) was assaulted by a homeless man in the elevator of her apartment building. Federal employees, foreign diplomats and tourists face the same risks as residents. Many residents and much of the press speak as if the city belongs exclusively to its 700,000 inhabitants and their mayor. But the capital was never meant to be insulated from national accountability. Congress intended the District to be a showcase of national governance, and the question is whether the current model of home rule without meaningful federal oversight is meeting that standard. Such disorder compels one to ask whether Congress's responsibility to 'exercise exclusive legislation' has been neglected. Precedent shows that when D.C. cannot ensure stability against, as Trump described Monday, 'crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse,' federal reengagement is both lawful and at times necessary. If opponents reject Trump's vision for federal involvement, they should make the substantive case for how home rule can be reformed to meet the moment. But it is disingenuous to suggest the Constitution forbids such intervention. If Congress refuses to act, the city's fate will rest on whatever limited tools the executive already possesses. As for Newsom's lecture on 'what dictators do,' perhaps the first governor to lock down his state during COVID and the last to reopen schools — the man who turned the nation's largest state into a poster child for woke dysfunction — should sit this one out. Trump has answered the question of whether he'll use his constitutional tools. The progressive left must now decide whether to produce a plan for home rule that works or just keep shouting 'authoritarian' while the capital continues to decline.
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Trump looks to extend DC police takeover beyond 30 days
President Trump on Wednesday said he'll seek 'long-term extensions' from Congress to extend his federal takeover of the Washington, D.C., police amid his crackdown on crime in the nation's capital, declining to rule out the possibility of a national emergency. 'Well, if it's a national emergency, we can do it without Congress,' Trump said, when asked about whether he's talked to the House and Senate about extending the takeover. He added that he expects to be before Congress 'very quickly' and snag Republican support. Trump on Monday put the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) under federal control and activated National Guard troops, painting the district as being ravaged by violent crime. To do so, he invoked an emergency provision of the Home Rule Act, which lets the president take temporary control of the District's police in emergency conditions. Congress must pass a joint resolution to extend it beyond 30 days. Speaking to reporters at the Kennedy Center on Wednesday, Trump said he's aiming to go before Congress with a crime bill that will 'pertain initially to D.C.' but serve as a 'very positive example' for elsewhere. 'And we're going to be asking for an extension on that, long-term extensions, because you can't have 30 days. Thirty days is, that's, by the time you do it — we're going to have this in good shape. … We're going to do this very quickly, but we're going to want extensions,' Trump said. 'I don't want to call a national emergency. If I have to, I will. But I think the Republicans in Congress will approve this pretty much unanimously.' D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) has hit back at Trump's move, calling it an 'authoritarian push' by the administration. The Democratic Mayors Association called it a 'political charade' that doesn't match up with the actual crime statistics in the District.
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Virginia police group splits ticket, backing Spanberger and down-ballot Republicans
The Virginia Police Benevolent Association split their endorsement ahead of the state's elections in November, backing Democratic gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger, Republican lieutenant governor candidate John Reid and incumbent Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) on Wednesday. 'Abigail Spanberger grew up in a law enforcement family and is a former federal law enforcement officer herself, so she understands the responsibility of putting on the badge,' said the group's president Joe Woloszyn in a statement. 'As a Member of Congress, she repeatedly voted to increase funding for local police departments and sheriff's offices — and she was relentless in pushing her bipartisan Social Security Fairness Act across the finish line to secure the earned benefits of thousands of Virginia's retired police officers,' he continued. The endorsement is a blow for the GOP gubernatorial candidate, current Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R), who received the group's backing in 2021 when the group backed the entire Republican ticket. The development comes amid concerns from Republicans about Earle-Sears's strength at the top of the ticket. According to Decision Desk HQ, Earle-Sears has not led in a single poll this year. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates the race as 'lean Democratic.' 2024 Election Coverage Spanberger also appears to be leading in the fundraising race as well. Last month, Spanberger also reported a massive second-quarter fundraising haul of $10.7 million. Earle-Sears's campaign announced that Thursday marked its 'best single fundraising day' since its launch in September, but it did not publicly disclose how much it had raised. According to the latest campaign finance data from the Virginia Public Access Project, Spanberger has raised $27 million since she jumped into the race in November 2023 and has more than $15 million in the bank. Earle-Sears has raised more than $11 million since launching her campaign and has more than $4 million cash on hand.
