‘Such cowards’: GOP blasted over bill targeting food aid for the poor

More than a dozen House Republicans are expected to release legislation Tuesday that would impose more harsh work requirements on certain recipients of federal food aid, a clear signal that the GOP intends to target nutrition assistance in critical debt ceiling, budget, and farm bill talks.

Led by Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), the measure would “expand the age bracket for able-bodied [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] recipients without dependents, who have to meet complicated work requirements,” according to Politico, which obtained a copy of the bill ahead of its official introduction.

Johnson’s legislation, which currently has 14 Republican co-sponsors, would broaden the SNAP work requirement age bracket for able-bodied adults without dependents to 18 to 65, adding 16 years to the current age ceiling of 49, Politico reported. Former President Donald Trump previously proposed raising the age ceiling to 62.

Under SNAP rules, people categorized as able-bodied adults without dependents are only allowed to receive federal food benefits for three months during any three-year period when they aren’t employed or taking part in work training, a restriction that experts and advocates have long decried as cruel and punitive.

“Essentially, this is a time limit—which disproportionately affects people of color—that takes SNAP away when people aren’t working, withholding food as a punishment for not having a stable job,” the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities notes.

Most adult SNAP recipients already work, though they are often precarious, low-wage jobs with poor benefits.

While Johnson and other Republicans claim their support for more stringent SNAP work requirements stems from a desire to boost employment, research has repeatedly shown that they are ineffective at doing so. Work requirements do, however, succeed at booting many people off the program.

States are currently allowed to request waivers for the SNAP benefit time limits, but Johnson’s bill would constrain the federal government’s ability to grant such requests, Politico reported.

“These guys talk about states’ rights all the time, except when it comes to poor people,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said in response to the GOP bill.

Johnson’s legislation comes as food insecurity is mounting across the U.S. after emergency SNAP benefit expansions lapsed earlier this month, slashing benefits for tens of millions of people amid high food prices. The cuts—the result of an end-of-year deal in Congress—have been dramatic for many, costing families hundreds of dollars per month in food aid.

“These enhanced benefits were a lifeline for millions—many of whom will now go hungry,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “And Republicans want to cut these programs even further.”

Politico reported that while Democratic lawmakers are publicly voicing opposition to the Republican Party’s latest attack on food benefits, “some House Democrats are quietly raising alarms about their lack of plans to push back on the GOP proposals.”

“We need to be prepared for a showdown on food security—and right now, we’re not ready,” one unnamed House Democrat told the outlet.

Anti-hunger campaigners are pushing Democrats to protect food benefits and fight for a permanent SNAP expansion during upcoming farm bill negotiations.

But as Slate’s Alexander Sammon wrote last week, “the lack of willingness to fight for SNAP when it was already expanded is not a heartening sign.”

Related articles

Chest Fever Returns to Buffalo Iron Works

CLICK HERE TO JOIN US FOR A FREE LIVE...

‘Swarming in lies’: Scholar panics that latest Trump comments show him ‘dangerously unfit’



Donald Trump's recent sit-down with Time Magazine for a wide-ranging interview under the title "If He Wins" provides clues that he has become increasingly "unfit" to hold office again, according to a professor from Arizona State University.

In his Substack column, author and scholar Steven Beschloss claimed every voter should be alarmed by the former president's answers, including suggestions that he is not averse to violence similar to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot if he fails to win re-election in 2024.

Posing the question over whether Trump is "unfit" to serve in the Oval Office again, he added the former president is now "dangerously unfit."

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist reveals how Trump and Biden's cognitive impairments are different

Writing that Trump told Time reporter Eric Cortellessa of his desire to "pardon January 6 insurrectionists, deploy the National Guard in American cities at will, give police immunity from prosecution, close the White House office responsible for pandemic preparedness, and permit red states to monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute abortion ban violators," Beschloss claimed Trump's replies should raise red flags about his mental state.

Noting a close reading of the Time transcript reveals, "a deeply untrustworthy man untethered from reality, swarming in lies, absorbed by grievance, unable to grapple with policy nuance and dependent on empty slogans to motivate himself," he added, "None of this is surprising, but when you read through the hours of interview material, you can see just how shallow his thinking is, how unreliable are his pronouncements and equivocations, how utterly ill-equipped he is to confront the complexities of our modern world — and, really, how crazy it is that serious people are forced to take this man seriously."

According to Beschloss, Trump seems to believe "his rejection of factual reality is a badge of honor."

With that in mind, he warned, "It will take more than divine intervention to ensure a man like this never sees the inside of the Oval Office again. It will take all of us — and tens of millions of others who decide that they will vote and do everything they can to ensure the survival of American democracy, the promise of America, basic human decency and the primacy of factual reality."

You can read more here.

‘David Dennison’: Trump’s use of fake name in Stormy Daniels agreement puzzles experts



Donald Trump's use of a pseudonym in a non-disclosure agreement with adult movie actress Stormy Daniels has left legal experts bewildered.

The fact that he’s identified by the name David Dennison in the paperwork has confused lawyers, particularly as everything in an NDA is confidential — including the identities of those involved.

Daniels is named in the agreement as Peggy Peterson.

The NDA secured the silence of Daniels over a sexual relationship the pair allegedly had. Trump is currently on trial over business fraud allegations concerning a payment he’s accused of making to Daniels to buy her silence.

"It is unusual for a non-disclosure agreement to use pseudonyms as the agreement itself would be subject to the confidentiality clauses within it," New York lawyer Colleen Kerwick told Newsweek.

The NDA lists the fake names throughout, Newsweek reported. The two were only identified by their real names in a section that was meant only for their lawyers to see.

ALSO READ: A criminologist explains how Americans achieve a post-Trump democracy

Daniels’ lawyer, Keith Davidson, gave evidence in Trump’s trial earlier this week that he drafted the agreement, in which he said his client used the name Peggy Peterson, taking P for plaintiff, and he chose Trump's moniker using D for defendant.

The Dennison name came from a high school colleague of Davidson’s, he said.

"Using a John Doe name isn't a crime, but it's a building block for a case about a cover-up,” Kerwick told Newsweek.

“It was never a crime to purchase the intellectual property rights in someone's story. The alleged crime is the falsification of records to cover it up."

The use of the fake name also got attention from MSNBC correspondent Katie Phang, who wrote on X, "Why would Trump use a pseudonym in a confidential settlement agreement unless he was trying to HIDE something?"

Trump has denied all 34 charges against him.

Real 1930 Pic of ‘Hoggie,’ Legendary Hogganfield Loch Monster?

"Finally, something with a mouth bigger than my wife’s," one Threads user commented.