The rules for Food Stamps are going to be changed under a proposed regulation put forth by the Department of Agriculture. Right now, there is a requirement that able bodied adults who are not at home caring for young children or sick relatives must work in order to qualify for Food Stamps once they have gotten the benefit for more than three months in a three year period. Current regulations, however, allow individual states to waive that work requirement in areas where the unemployment rate is at least 20% higher than the national rate. The change being proposed is to allow such waivers by a state for areas that have more than 7% unemployment. If the regulatory change is adopted, it will force about 700,000 people to get work in order to keep getting Food Stamps.
The law already requires that these people work. It also allows the Secretary of Agriculture (whose department handles Food Stamps) to provide for waivers in high unemployment areas. The law does not specify the 20% figure currently being used. That means that it is well within the government's discretion to pick a methodology for setting the waiver requirements.
There is already an outcry about this proposed change. No doubt, some liberal judge will enjoin it at the request of one or another Democrat office holder or advocacy group. The basis for the injunction will be that Congress was presented with, but did not pass a work requirement change in the latest reauthorization of the Farm bill. That is not a valid legal grounds on which the court could act, but that never seems to stop these judges who think of themselves as part of the resistance.
After an appeal the regulation will go into effect. Since the court proceeding will likely be brought in California or Hawaii, the 9th Circuit will affirm the lower court and then be reverse by the Supreme Court. Of course, once Trump leaves office, the next Democrat will likely undo this change.
The law already requires that these people work. It also allows the Secretary of Agriculture (whose department handles Food Stamps) to provide for waivers in high unemployment areas. The law does not specify the 20% figure currently being used. That means that it is well within the government's discretion to pick a methodology for setting the waiver requirements.
There is already an outcry about this proposed change. No doubt, some liberal judge will enjoin it at the request of one or another Democrat office holder or advocacy group. The basis for the injunction will be that Congress was presented with, but did not pass a work requirement change in the latest reauthorization of the Farm bill. That is not a valid legal grounds on which the court could act, but that never seems to stop these judges who think of themselves as part of the resistance.
After an appeal the regulation will go into effect. Since the court proceeding will likely be brought in California or Hawaii, the 9th Circuit will affirm the lower court and then be reverse by the Supreme Court. Of course, once Trump leaves office, the next Democrat will likely undo this change.
No comments:
Post a Comment