"Schumer jumped in: It is not wait a minute! excuse me, it is not a dispute! It is fact they can use it, and the Republicans say it. Napier, unfazed, continued to try and ask her question: Okay, but there is only $5 billion-$6 billion, and SNAP costs $8 billion monthly just to administer. If anything, it would only last Schumer cut her off again and said Republicans would rather fund their own projects than pay for hungry food stamp recipients."
"It does not cost $5 billion-$6 billion to administer. There's enough money to start feeding people right away, Schumer said. $6 billion is a lot of money and they're using it for other things $20 billion for Argentina, hundreds of millions for Kristi Noem's plane. who are we kidding here? What happens once it runs out?"
"The bottom line is, they can fund it just as in 2019, just as in other shutdowns, for a long period of time, Schumer said, before smacking the podium with his palms. He then let Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who was flanking him, step forward and rip Republicans for a moment. Klobuchar said the $6 billion would at least cover nearly a month of SNAP benefits, and then at that point, she said congressional Dems were ready to support legislation from Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) or Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) to"
Sen. Chuck Schumer confronted a Daily Caller reporter over Republican refusal to fund SNAP benefits, calling the tactic hostage-taking and insisting USDA contingency funds can be used. The reporter contrasted $5–6 billion in contingency funds with roughly $8 billion monthly SNAP costs; Schumer countered that $6 billion could immediately start feeding people and accused Republicans of redirecting money to other priorities, citing $20 billion for Argentina and spending on Kristi Noem's plane. Schumer emphasized past practice of funding SNAP during shutdowns. Sen. Amy Klobuchar said $6 billion would nearly cover a month and signaled Democratic support for legislative options.
Read at www.mediaite.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]