WV organizations urge Justice to speak against proposed cuts to SNAP program
U.S. Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV) speaks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on March 25, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images)
As legislation cutting a food assistance program that helps feed thousands of state residents makes its way through Congress, several advocacy groups, businesses and organizations are calling on West Virginia Sen. Jim Justice to speak against the plan.
'Given that SNAP is the most effective anti-hunger program in the state, we ask that you oppose structural changes, cuts and efforts to weaken SNAP,' an open letter to Justice reads. 'Cutting SNAP would have devastating consequences for the 278,978 children, parents, older adults, veterans, people with disabilities and others in our state who rely on the program to keep hunger at bay.
'The research is clear: SNAP improves health outcomes, reduces child hospitalizations and developmental delays and supports educational success. It also decreases health care spending and helps stabilize families during times of crisis and job loss,' they wrote.
The letter from the American Friends Service Committee Wednesday is signed by nearly 60 West Virginia food banks, small businesses, congregations and organizations.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill last month that would cut the Supplemental Food Nutrition Program by $300 billion through 2034 and push a portion of the cost of the program to the states to backfill. The program currently is funded solely by the federal government. States split the cost of administering the program with the federal government.
The Senate Agriculture Committee, of which Justice is a member, this week took up its portion of the Republican tax and budget reconciliation legislation. The bill has yet to be voted on by the full Senate. If the Senate passes the bill, the House of Representatives would need to sign off on any changes the Senate makes.
The latest version of the legislation would still push some of the cost of SNAP onto the states, but would penalize states less harshly than the version the House of Representatives passed last month.
Under the House bill, the federal government would shift between 5 to 25% of the cost of SNAP benefits to state governments beginning in 2028 depending on their payment error rate. That version of the bill could put West Virginia on the hook for $28 million and up to about $141 million, depending on the state's error rate.
In the Senate Agriculture Committee's version, most states would be required to pay between 5 and 15% of the food benefits program beginning in 2028. Only those with an error rate of 6% would have to pay for the program, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The Senate proposal would have West Virginia paying up to $84 million, according to the analysis.
'The cuts and cost shifts in the House bill would lead to greater food insecurity and place even greater pressure on our food banks and charities, which already struggle to meet demand,' the letter says. 'For every one meal provided by a food bank, SNAP provides nine. Our state's charitable food system cannot fill the gap that would be created by the magnitude of these cuts.'
Justice this week told a reporter that cutting SNAP could cost Republicans' their supermajority.
'If we don't watch out, people are going to get hurt, people are going to be upset. It's going to be the No.1 thing on the nightly news all over the place,' Justice said in an interview with Politico Tuesday. 'And then, we could very well awaken to a situation in this country where the majority quickly becomes the minority.'
When a West Virginia Watch reporter asked a Justice spokesman for comment on the letter, he referred her to Justice's comments to Politico.
The Senate bill also makes changes to the work requirement exceptions. Historically, SNAP recipients with children have not been subject to work requirements for the program. The House version of the bill expanded work requirements to parents of children age 7 and up. In the Senate version, parents of children age 10 and up are subject to the requirements, said Kelly Allen, director of the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy.
The Senate bill also gets rid of work requirement exemptions for people including veterans, homeless people and gives states more flexibility to issue exemptions on a case by case basis, Allen said.
Overall, the Senate agriculture committee is just 'tinkering around the edges' with the bill that passed in the House last month, Allen said.
'It's still the largest cut to SNAP in history,' she said. 'It's still a dramatic expansion of bureaucratic barriers that will result in people losing food assistance, including households with children. And it still abandons that commitment to federally funding SNAP benefits and likely creates pretty significant burden for state lawmakers in the state budget at a time when the state budget is already crunched.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
38 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
US strikes 3 Iranian nuclear sites, inserting itself into Israel's war with Iran
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The United States attacked three sites in Iran early Sunday, inserting itself into Israel's war aimed at destroying the country's nuclear program in a risky gambit to weaken a longtime foe that prompted fears of a wider regional conflict. Addressing the nation from the White House, President Donald Trump asserted that Iran's key nuclear sites were 'completely and fully obliterated.' There was no independent damage assessment. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed that attacks took place on its Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz sites, but it insisted that its nuclear program will not be stopped. Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog said there were no signs of radioactive contamination at the three locations. It was not clear whether the U.S. would continue attacking Iran alongside its ally Israel, which has been engaged in a war with Iran for nine days. Trump acted without congressional authorization , and he warned that there would be additional strikes if Tehran retaliated against U.S. forces. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he said. Iran's top diplomat, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, warned in a post on X that the U.S. attacks 'will have everlasting consequences' and that Tehran 'reserves all options' to retaliate. Hours later, Iranian missiles struck areas in northern and central Israel, according to an Israeli rescue service. United Hatzalah said it was dispatching first responders, but here was no immediate word on casualties or damage. The US helped Israel strike Iran's toughest nuclear site Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Tehran is not actively pursuing a bomb. However, Trump and Israeli leaders have claimed that Iran could quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, making it an imminent threat. The decision to directly involve the U.S. in the war comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel that significantly degraded Iran's air defenses and offensive missile capabilities, and damaged its nuclear enrichment facilities. But U.S. and Israeli officials have said American B-2 stealth bombers and the 30,000-pound (13,500-kilogram) bunker-buster bomb that only they have been configured to carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground. Trump appears to have made the calculation — at the prodding of Israeli officials and many Republican lawmakers — that Israel's operation had softened the ground and presented a perhaps unparalleled opportunity to set back Iran's nuclear program, perhaps permanently. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump said in a post on social media, using common alternate spellings for two of the sites. 'All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home.' Trump added in a later post: 'This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!' Israel announced Sunday that it had closed its airspace to both inbound and outbound flights in the wake of the U.S. attacks. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately elaborate on the operation. U.S. military leaders are scheduled to provide a briefing at 8 a.m. Eastern. The attack used bunker-buster bombs on Iran's Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant that is built deep into a mountain, a U.S. official said. The weapons are designed to penetrate the ground before exploding. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations. In addition, U.S. submarines launched about 30 Tomahawk missiles, according to another U.S. official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. The International Atomic Energy Agency wrote on X that there has been 'no increase in off-site radiation levels' after the strikes. 'The IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,' it said. The 'IAEA will provide further assessments on situation in Iran as more information becomes available.' Trump's turn to strikes departs from some previous statements The strikes are a perilous decision for Trump, who won the White House on the promise of keeping America out of costly foreign conflicts and scoffed at the value of American interventionism. But Trump also vowed that he would not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and he had initially hoped that the threat of force would bring the country's leaders to give up its nuclear program peacefully. For months, Trump said he was dedicated to a diplomatic push to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. And he twice — in April and again in late May — persuaded Netanyahu to hold off on military action against Iran and give diplomacy more time. After Israel began striking Iran, Trump went from publicly expressing hope that the moment could be a 'second chance' for Iran to make a deal to delivering explicit threats on Khamenei and making calls for Tehran's unconditional surrender. He has bristled at criticism from some of his MAGA faithful who have suggested that further U.S. involvement would be a betrayal to supporters who were drawn to his promise to end U.S. involvement in expensive and endless wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack in a video message directed at the American president. 'Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history,' he said. Netanyahu said the U.S. 'has done what no other country on earth could do.' The military showdown with Iran comes seven years after Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the 'worst deal ever.' Fears of a broader war U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the 'dangerous escalation' of American strikes. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region and the world,' he said in a statement. Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said they would resume attacks on U.S. vessels in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joined Israel's military campaign. The Houthis paused such attacks in May under a deal with the U.S. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the United States on Wednesday that strikes targeting the Islamic Republic will 'result in irreparable damage for them.' And Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei declared 'any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region.' The Israeli military said Saturday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, while Iran's foreign minister warned before the U.S. attack that American military involvement 'would be very, very dangerous for everyone.' Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 865 people and wounded 3,396 others, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists. The group said of those dead, it identified 363 civilians and 215 security force personnel. Trump's decision for direct U.S. military intervention comes after his administration made an unsuccessful two-month push — including with high-level, direct negotiations with the Iranians — aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its nuclear program. ___ Madhani reported from Morristown, N.J. Associated Press writers Nasser Karimi and Mehdi Fattahi in Iran, Lolita Baldor in Narragansett, Rhode Island, Samy Magdy in Cairo, contributed to this story. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘Just wrong': Oregon advocates say SCOTUS decision targets transgender youth
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Oregon groups and lawmakers are responding to a Supreme Court ruling made Wednesday that restricts access to gender-affirming care for minors. The , along with three families and a physician, who claimed a Tennessee law violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. Travis Decker, accused of murdering 3 daughters, may have changed appearance: Here's how The found the law does not discriminate against transgender youth based on their sex and is constitutional. It will effectively protect Republican-led state governments that are rolling back protections for transgender people from any future legal challenges. U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) said the 'life-altering decision lays out the playbook for extremist politicians to continue their crusade against trans people and further exclude them from daily life.' Meanwhile, to call the ruling a 'landmark victory for Tennessee in defense of America's children.' BLM warns of 'aggressive' mountain goats along Oregon river According to the Oregon Nurses Association, puberty blockers and hormone therapy is 'endorsed by every major medical organization in the U.S.' and has shown to significantly reduce depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts among transgender youth. 'ONA believes that all young people deserve access to medically necessary care, free from political interference,' their statement read. 'Today's decision is not based on science, public health, or the well-being of children; it is rooted in ideology, and it places vulnerable youth at serious risk.' Basic Rights Oregon called the ruling 'a devastating outcome for transgender people, our families and our medical providers.' However, Oregon law still protects access to gender-affirming care on a state level. 'Gender affirming care is still legal in Oregon, and Oregon law prohibits discrimination against people based on their gender identity or sex, including from healthcare providers,' ACLU litigation manager Eri Andriola said. The decision comes as local activists campaign for an Equal Rights for All ballot measure in 2026. As proposed, the ERA would guarantee equal rights 'regardless of one's sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation' and create certain protections in the Oregon Constitution. These protections include the right to abortion, contraception and IVF, transgender health care, and same-gender marriage. Oregon lawmakers consider strengthening National Guard oversight Sen. Merkley's full statement can be read below: 'Access to medically-necessary care for trans youth saves lives, and the U.S. Supreme Court's callous decision puts trans youth and their families at risk. 'MAGA extremists across the nation will not stop at banning medically-necessary gender-affirming care for trans youth. The Court's life-altering decision lays out the playbook for extremist politicians to continue their crusade against trans people and further exclude them from daily life. And this is just the beginning—this decision opens the floodgates for MAGA extremists in state legislatures and Congress to ban medically-necessary care, from gender-affirming care to abortion access. 'This is just wrong—everyone should have access to the care they need, when they need it. No exceptions. 'Let's get politicians out of the exam room. We will continue to fight these divisive policies in communities nationwide to fully realize the vision of America as a land of freedom and equality for all, and I won't rest until my Equality Act is signed into law to deliver on this fundamental promise.' Stay with KOIN 6 News as we continue to follow this story. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers respond to U.S. launching strikes on 3 Iranian nuclear facilities
Washington — Lawmakers across the political aisle offered a mixed response Saturday following President Trump's announcement that the United States launched strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. Immediately following Mr. Trump's announcement, Congressional Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. Ted Cruz, backed Mr. Trump's actions, while a number of leading Democrats condemned his decision to launch the attack without consulting Congress. In a televised address Saturday night, the president described the strikes as a "spectacular military success" and said "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." He warned of "far greater" attacks if Iran does not "make peace." "There is not another military in the World that could have done this," Mr. Trump said in a social media post. "NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!Thank you for your attention to this matter." Here's what lawmakers are saying: Many Republican lawmakers back U.S. strikes in Iran, but not all "Good. This was the right call. The regime deserves it. Well done, President @realDonaldTrump," Sen. Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said on X. House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a social media post that "the military operations in Iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says." "The President gave Iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but Iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement," Johnson said in the post. "President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision, and clarity." Texas Sen. Cruz, who has backed of Israeli strikes against Iranian targets, said in a statement: "As long as Iran was able to access and conduct activities at Fordow, they could still rush to build a nuclear arsenal. Tonight's actions have gone far in foreclosing that possibility, and countering the apocalyptic threat posed by an Iranian nuclear arsenal." Rep. Rick Crawford, Republican chair of the House Intelligence Committee, praised Mr. Trump in a statement and said, "I have been in touch with the White House before this action and will continue to track developments closely with them in the coming days." The strikes announced by Mr. Trump Saturday evening further escalated the conflict between Iran and Israel that started June 13. Mr. Trump, on Wednesday, was still mulling over whether the U.S. military would join Israel's ongoing attacks on Iran. Before the announcement of the strikes, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was among the few Republicans who opposed the U.S. action, arguing on social media, "This is not our fight." "Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war," she said in a post on X. "There would not be bombs falling on the people of Israel if Netanyahu had not dropped bombs on the people of Iran first." Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, reshared Mr. Trump's post on the strikes with a terse comment: "not constitutional." Massie introduced a resolution on Tuesday to prohibit U.S. involvement in the conflict. A few days earlier, He pointed out that the power to authorize use of military force rests with Congress, and said of the Israel-Iran conflict on X, "This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Some Democrats say U.S. strikes in Iran are unconstitutional House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other Democrats agreed with Massie that the president should have consulted Congress, and on Saturday demanded that lawmakers be "fully and immediately" briefed on the attacks in a classified setting. "President Trump misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East," Jeffries said. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also called for Congress to enforce the War Powers Act. "President Trump must provide the American people and Congress clear answers on the actions taken tonight and their implications for the safety of Americans," Schumer said in a statement. "No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy. Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased." Sen. Mark Warner, vice chair of the Select Committee on Intelligence, said that while there is "no question that Iran poses a serious threat to regional stability," the president's actions threaten to drag the U.S. into an open-ended conflict "without consulting Congress" and "without a clear strategy." Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California, who cosponsored Massie's resolution seeking to limit Mr. Trump's war powers, said in a statement early Sunday that Congress "needs to come back to DC immediately to vote" on the resolution "to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." "Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," Khanna said. Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts called on Congress to return to Washington to vote on Massie's legislation "to stop this madness." Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called Mr. Trump's decision to bomb Iran without congressional authorization "is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers." "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations," the New York Democrat wrote. "It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been trying to limit Mr. Trump's ability to order U.S. strikes on Iran amid its ongoing war with Israel, emphasizing that only Congress has the power to declare war under the Constitution. The extent of the president's authority to enter foreign conflicts without the approval of the legislative branch has been questioned in recent years. The last time Congress authorized the use of military force was in 2002, against Iraq. A year earlier, days after the 9/11 terror attacks, Congress passed a bill approving the use of military force against nations, organizations or individuals the president determines "planned, authorized, committed, or aided the 9/11 terrorist attacks." Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan urged Democratic colleagues in a post, "Don't make another mistake in dragging our country into another war," and added, "You can stop the President and the war mongers in Congress by signing on to our War Powers Resolution." In contrast to other Congressional Democrats, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania said he fully supports the U.S. strikes on Iran. "As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS," Fetterman said in a social media post. "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world." Sen. Bernie Sanders, who's on a tour this weekend in red Southern states, announced the news of the U.S. attacks on Iran to his supporters and was met the chants of "no more war" from the crowd. "It is so grossly unconstitutional," Sanders said. "All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right." Sneak peek: The Life and Death of Blaze Bernstein Some key Democratic congressional leaders left out of Trump's Iran attack plans Netanyahu reacts to U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites
