Sign up for our newsletter

Below is a report that DML News gives a 3 OUT OF 4 STARS trustworthiness rating. We base this rating on the following criteria:

  • Provides named sources
  • Reported by more than one notable outlet
  • Does not insert opinion or leading words
  • Includes supporting video, direct statements, or photos

Click here to read more about our rating system.

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News offers the following information published by WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM:

Senate Republicans are battling over whether a bill reauthorizing the nation’s food stamp program should boost work requirements for recipients.

The Senate-passed farm bill reauthorizes agriculture and nutrition assistance programs for five years. But the legislation does not include House-passed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, otherwise known as food stamps, that would broaden work requirements and make it more difficult for states to waive them.

The article goes on to state the following:

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, on Thursday called on negotiators working on a House-Senate compromise to include the work requirements in the final version, going against Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas.

“I think having the work provisions is really important,” Cornyn told reporters Thursday. “Able-bodied people, people who can’t work, can train, can do community service. People who can’t should be exempted from that. I think the House got that right.”

He added, “I hope they move closer in the House’s direction.”

But Roberts has advocated for the Senate-passed version of the food stamp reauthorization provision. He and others worry that enhanced work requirements are guaranteed to draw Democratic opposition and even GOP opponents who fear backlash in their states.

“We think we have a pretty good bill,” Roberts said of the Senate-authored version, which passed the upper chamber by a vote of 86-11 in June.

“It’s much more pertinent to what we all want to do which is make sure the help is going to people who need it but also do the necessary reforms,” Roberts told the Washington Examiner. “That will be a subject we have to come to agreement on. We haven’t yet.”

To weigh in on this information provided by WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM, engage in our LIVE CHAT below. Scroll down.

Sign up for our newsletter

Click here to join the comments

Previous articleREPORT: Passenger convicted of sexually assaulting 22-year-old woman on flight
Next articleCLAIM: NYT Says Cohen Being Investigated for Bank Fraud in Excess of $20 Million


  1. What is so hard about creating a bill that requires people who can work to go to work, get training to get a job, go to school, or volunteer? Most of the changes that states have wanted to make all have exemptions for single parent families with small children from those requirements, the elderly and the disabled. People that work at least 20 hours a week would still qualify for benefits and in most cases those benefits wouldn’t go down either but at the people would be working and putting some money back into the program. The training is a really good thing because it would help people to get jobs that would allow them to get off of welfare altogether. The volunteer thing is something that I personally don’t think a person should do to get welfare, because if they are able to go volunteer they should be able to train or have a job. I think with the Medicaid program that it should be the samething because in almost all cases working 20 hours wouldn’t change their ability to be covered. Why people have a problem with this blows my mind. There is talk about how there are now more jobs than people to fill them so why is it that people are still on welfare when there are jobs for them? It sounds like those that don’t want to have something like this are looking to keep the illegals in the country so that there is cheap labor, or to keep the big donors happy by bringing in the visa workers.

Comments are closed.