Ahead of Wednesday’s House vote on the debt ceiling deal, progressive lawmakers have introduced a pair of amendments to remove provisions that would hurt the nation’s most economically vulnerable populations.
On Tuesday, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Massachusetts) filed an amendment to the legislation that would strike a provision buried in the bill that would restart student loan payments at the end of this summer and prohibit the Biden administration from further extending the pause.
“The student loan payment pause has been an essential lifeline for workers and families struggling to make ends meet,” Pressley said in a statement on the amendment. “Republicans continue to play games with our economy, with disregard for our most vulnerable families.”
Pressley’s proposal is popular among the public. According to polling released by the Student Borrower Protection Center and Data for Progress on Tuesday, 61 percent of voters say that the payment pause should be extended if the Supreme Court strikes down Biden’s cancellation plan, which it appears poised to do.
“The pause on student loan payments remains one of the most durably popular pieces of economic policy because the American people recognize what Washington has long struggled to understand: the student loan system is broken and the burden of student debt creates a barrier to economic opportunity for all of us,” said Student Borrower Protection Center executive director Mike Pierce in a statement. “The debt limit deal raises the stakes even higher for millions of working people with student debt.”
Also on Tuesday, Representatives Cori Bush (D-Missouri) and Barbara Lee (D-California) introduced an amendment to the debt limit bill that would remove an expansion to work requirements for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps.
Republicans have proposed extending the age range in which people have to prove that they’re working in order to receive SNAP benefits — which are already notoriously hard to receive — from 49 years to 54 years old. The proposal has been harshly criticized by progressives and anti-hunger advocates, who say that such a proposal could leave thousands of people to experience food insecurity just because Republicans didn’t think they deserved to eat.
“Republicans’ insistence that the federal government rip food from vulnerable people’s mouths in order to solve their manufactured crisis is despicable and frankly outrageous,” said Bush and Lee in a joint statement about their amendment. “Work requirements are ineffective at best, and deadly at worst. Allowing people to starve and children to go hungry is not a solution to any problem — it’s racist, classist, and inhumane.”
The amendment has been cosponsored by Representatives Jamaal Bowman (D-New York), Gwen Moore (D-Wisconsin) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan).
The debt ceiling deal struck between House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-California) and President Joe Biden furthers Republicans’ objective of weakening SNAP and reducing the number of recipients through more work requirements, though the GOP says their goal is to reduce government spending.
A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report out Tuesday night found that, contrary to Republicans’ supposed fiscal responsibility, the SNAP changes would actually end up costing $2.1 billion more within the next ten years, while an estimated 78,000 more people would be eligible for SNAP benefits, due to new exclusions to work requirements like for veterans and people experiencing homelessness. (Bush and Lee’s amendments are targeted at getting rid of the age hike and would keep the new exclusions.)
But CBO’s findings may be overly simplistic, progressives and experts have said. The finding is “HIGHLY theoretical,” wrote The American Prospect executive editor David Dayen on Twitter on Wednesday. “There’s no funding to identify eligible people without benefits or to help them apply or find the necessary documentation. I obviously haven’t seen the model but it seems like wishful thinking to me.”
Dayen further pointed out that it is highly unlikely that SNAP would be able to inform all unhoused people, for instance, that they were newly eligible for the program, and that it could distribute and process all the paperwork necessary to prove their eligibility.Lawmakers have also expressed skepticism over the CBO finding. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Massachusetts) told Politico that kicking hundreds of thousands of people aged 50 to 54 off of SNAP couldn’t be balanced out with the new work requirement exclusions. “This is a food benefit. So moving the deck chairs around and saying, you get food, but you don’t — that’s not a very convincing argument to me,” McGovern said.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.