Veterans’ food aid sparks debate over $300B Farm Bill cuts
[May 23, 2025]
By Catrina Barker | The Center Square contributor
(The Center Square) – The U.S. Farm Bill, advancing with $300 billion in
food aid cuts, is facing pushback as an Illinois congressman warns
veterans could go hungry. A state legislator urges a focus on mental
health instead.
Illinois U.S. Rep. Eric Sorensen, D-Rockford, asked on social media,
“How could anyone vote against a bill that ensures our veterans have
food to eat?”
“It’s not a rule in Congress that members of Congress have to go and do
anything for veterans. But there are a lot of folks that put on campaign
ads that talk about how they support veterans but do they do anything,”
Sorensen said in committee during debate on the measure. “For many
veterans who have served our country it’s the only meal that they get in
that one day.”
Illinois state Rep. David Friess, R-Red Bud, is also a veteran. He said
he thinks that most of the federal funding for veterans should be put
into mental health services.
“Not that vets don't go to that [food assistance] facility and they may
be fed at that facility, but I think that really is a distraction from
what veterans really need. If they're homeless and they’re going without
food, it's because they have PTSD, they've done and engaged and saw
things that are extremely traumatic,” Friess told The Center Square.
Illinois U.S. Rep. Nikki Budzinski, D-Springfield, told Brownfield Ag
News late last month that many Democrats voted against the draft of last
year’s Farm Bill because it included potential cuts, even though those
cuts were much smaller.
Budzinski and Sorensen voted for an amendment introduced by U.S. House
agriculture committee Democrats. All the Republican members of the
committee voted, “no.”
[to top of second column]
|
U.S. Rep. Eric Sorensen, D-Ill
BlueRoomStream
“Have you talked to veterans who get one meal a day? How could
anyone be against this amendment? Especially if anybody is going to
run an ad to say they support our veterans,” said Sorensen. “Let be
clear, this is exactly what this amendment says: ‘this bill will not
result in reduced participation for veterans or surviving spouses or
children of service members or veterans who die during active
service or due to service-related disability.’”
Proponents of the cuts argue that they target specific programs tied
to the Inflation Reduction Act, such as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Fund, which allocated $27 billion in subsidies to corporate
agribusinesses.
The fund aims to boost public and private investment in clean energy
and climate projects, including those benefiting agricultural
producers.
Friess expressed support for agriculture but acknowledged that it
has become a large industry. He explained that programs like the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are valuable but suffer
from fraud and abuse, much like other federal programs.
“Just because you have a cut in a program doesn't mean that the
veterans within that program, if they are getting some assistance,
are going to be negatively impacted by it,” said Friess. “It's
really frustrating that we have accepted this big, bloated
bureaucracy to try and administer these programs.”
|
