chair stabenow: good morning. let me call the hearing of the u.s. senate committee on agriculture nutrition to order. i would simply say that my eyes are on you from any place in the room, from the portraits. [laughter] [applause] thank you, john, for coming and speaking last night. senator boseman. it is a little weird sitting here. but it is an honor, so. i want to welcome our deputy undersecretary stacey dean, administrator stacey ivanka, thank you for joining us for this really important hearing. we are fortunate to have you here today as we review the farm bill nutrition program in preparation for the 2023 farm bill. last week our hearing, the farm safety net. today, our fifth farm hearing covers the family safety net. these critical programs help people afford their groceries, make healthier choices, find work, benefit farmers, and our entire food economy. and they live to millions of americans out of poverty. the supplemental nutritional assistance program, or snap, helps more than 40 million children, seniors, working adults, veterans, people with disabilities, to buy food to feed their families. these are our friends, our neighbors, relatives who deserve to be able to put food on the table even when they are going through a hard time. like the single mom of two in macomb county who just lost her job and doesn't know how she will pay for rent and feed her kids. or the retired couple in gladwin, michigan who lives on a fixed income and worries about covering the cost of their medication and a healthy diet they need to manage their diabetes. snap reduces food insecurity by 30% and it provides needed benefits to more than one million of our nation's veterans. studies show families who participate in snap are healthier than eligible people who do not. reducing health care costs by as much as $5,000 per person per year. every parent will tell you that a hungry child cannot learn. and we know that eligible children who participate in snap have better educational outcomes, and future participation in the workforce. snap is one of the most responsive and effective economic tools we have at our disposal. for every dollar spent in snap increases the gdp by $1.50, making snap the fastest way to stimulate the economy during an economic downturn, particularly in rural communities. snap is also countercyclical. just as we spend on farm programs, and the spending increases when commodity prices are low, spending in snap increases during economic downturns. as the economy improves and families no longer need snap, snap spending decreases. we witness the program expand and contract based on need during and after the great recession, and most recently during the pandemic. just yesterday, the congressional budget office released their updated budget projections which show the economic challenges that still exist, and that families are still hurting as a result. it's also important to remember, for an individual, for a person, snap is a modest form of help. the average benefit is only about six dollars per person per day. six dollars for all of their meals combined. i am sure there is at least one person in this room right now who has spent more than that on their morning coffee. the bipartisan work we accomplished in the 2018 directed a long-overdue reevaluation of the thrifty food plan, not done since 1975 have we updated the assumptions on which snap is made. this update increases the average snap benefit by less than two dollars a day. a modest increase but one that is estimated to lift 2.4 million people, including one million children come out of poverty. the farm bill also expanded opportunities and partnerships through the snap employment and training program, or snap e& t, including new public funding, private partner ships, evidence-based copperheads of management, and supervised job-search components to e 7t. the farm bill in 2017 invested in snap technology improvements and strengthen the snap quality control system. as we turn to the 2023 farm bill, i look forward to strengthening health outcomes in snap through programs like snap nutrition education and the incentive program that we call double up box. we should continue to support individuals and find long-term employment through snap e&t while rejecting harsh work requirements that only serve as barriers to americans getting temporary help that they need. snap and other nutritional programs that we will consider today like the emergency food assistance program, tfap, the commodity supplement to program, food dissipation program on indian reservations, the fabric of a proven safety net for american families, a safety net we must preserve and protect. and while it is not the topic of today's hearing, i want to commend the usda for announcing their efforts to update the wic food package as well as their proposed rules to make school meals more nutritious through thoughtful, commonsense policies. i look forward to hearing. important feedback from our stakeholders that we will be doing through our subcommittee. with that, i will turn to my ranking member, senator boozman. sen. boozman: thank you, madam chair, and congratulations on the portrait. we had a gathering last night. the chairwoman allows us to have farm groups in the hearing room to meet with. so now, if you are not present, you'll still be present, looking down, making sure i behave. chair stabenow: that's right. [laughter] sen. boozman: as i meet with our kansans, food insecurity is an all-too-familiar experience in rural and urban parts of my state. thankfully, the nutrition programs that this committee authorizes, programs that i've been proud to support, are there to provide help. i have long advocated for domestic and international food assistance programs. in fact, some of the most meaningful accomplishments chairwoman and i achieved in the 117th congress were related to feeding hungry people. as we work our way through the titles of the farm bill, it's important for this committee to review our nutrition programs and make sure they are working as intended and being implemented properly by usda, like every other farm bill program. many do not realize but their nutrition title is by far the costliest title in the bill. yesterday's cbo baseline projections show the farm bill nutrition programs, not the entire farm bill, but the farm bill nutrition programs, will cost more than $1.2 trillion over 10 years, which is greater than 80% of the total cost of the bill. in fact, according to cbo, we will spend more on snap from 2023 to 2033 then we had in the previous two decades combined. since the last farm bill, the cost of the largest of these programs is supplemental nutrition assistance program or snap, has grown by 94%, from 65 billion dollars annually in 2018 to an expected $127 billion in 2023. the pandemic and inflation drove some of these cost increases, but let there be no doubt, the largest driver was the decision by the leadership of the food, nutrition, and consumer services missionary to abandon 40 years of precedent and increase snap benefits by 21% to record high levels, levels that are unsustainable. some will cynically point to the provisions to update the thrifty food plan and the 2018 farm bill as the basis for usda's action. but congress never agreed to permit a quarter of a trillion dollars, a quarter of a trillion dollars spending increase. as gao recently documented, they used a sloppy process with an accelerated schedule. usda new the outcome it wanted and then backed into it. because of these actions, fncs' political appointees have made passage of the 2023 farm bill much more difficult. because they showed a lack of good judgment and a gross abuse of discretion. by leaning on the scales, they chose to disrupt the delicate balance of the farm bill coalition and severely eroded the trust that is crucial to legislate and to govern. when one program constitutes more than 80% of the spending in the next farm bill, thereby effectively crowds out the ability to make crucial investments in every other title, is there really any room for farmers and traditional farm bill coalition? as a reminder, snap is intended to supplement a beneficiary's monthly grocery budget. it was not created to serve as the beneficiary's monthly grocery budget. snap is available to anyone who qualifies because of the entitlement program. there is no participation caps. there are however specific requirements to receive benefits. one of those requirements is related to work. to qualify for benefits, participants must work 20 hours a week or be in job training. i think most would agree that 20 hours a week is equal to part-time work. for nearly three years, snap participants have been exempted from work requirements. it is time for this exemption to end. it is time for usda to get serious about enforcing work requirements. states should no longer be allowed to game the system. good jobs are plentiful. there are more than 11 million jobs open across the country, equivalent to more than two job openings for every unemployed person. approximately 5 million of those job openings are in 25 states and territories that are not enforcing work requirements. this job gap pushes labor costs higher, slows supply chains, delays economic recovery from the pandemic and importantly is a large contributor to the historic inflation facing our nation. so why is the biden administration not promoting work? study after study proves work equals dignity, a culture of dependence weakens our community and country. snap is a valuable program but it should lead to self-reliance, not generational dependence. if someone who is consistently supporting snap, wic, school nutrition programs, i cannot overstate how damaging fncs conduct has been. i'm deeply disappointed in leadership. this is why oversight is so necessary, because at the end of the day, what fncs is weak in the program supposedly was trying to help. that unfortunately you will be the legacy of this decision. madam chair, i request inclusion in the hearing record the report conducted by the gao on the thrifty food plan, gao determination that usda failed to submit the thrifty food plan food basket increase to congress as required by the congressional act, and the updated baseline by cbo yesterday which showed an increase in snap outlays from 2023 to 2032 by $93 billion, in large part due to usa having the ability to increase the cost of the food basket under the thrifty food plan again in 2027, 2031. chair stabenow: so ordered, without objection. sen. boozman: thank you. i think the chairwoman for holding this important hearing. look forward to our witnesses. chair stabenow: thank you so much. we will now turn to our deputy undersecretary dean. we are so glad to have both of you with us. stacy dean is deputy undersecretary for food, nutrition, and consumer services at the u.s. department of agriculture. prior to this role, she served as vice president for food assistance policy at the center of budget and policy priorities. she earned her undergraduate and masters degrees of the university of michigan. i will not hold that against you as a michigan state university grad. we are so glad to have you here. we are also glad to introduce cindy long, who serves as administrator for the food and nutrition service program at usda. she most recently served as acting administrator for fns, deputy administrator for child nutrition programs. welcome to both of you. we will ask you to proceed. >> thank you so much, chairwoman stabenow, ranking member boozman , for giving us the opportunity to be here today. you have introduced us, so i will not take time doing that, but i will flag that administrator long and i were remarking. we started our work on federal nutrition programs when chairman lugar was leading the committee. we went through and had a story about all of the chairs. look forward to adding you to our story to list. it is wonderful to be here. in my role at usda, i've had the privilege to see the farm bill's nutrition programs in action across our country, in big cities and small rural towns, tribal communities, job training centers, grocery stores, farmers markets, and food banks. i've seen firsthand the critical role our policies play in reducing poverty, supporting the local economy, and promoting food and nutrition security. as we look ahead to strengthen our programs, we at usda are looking at how best to advance food and nutrition security, modernize the programs particularly with respect to delivery, steward them with integrity, and integrate an equity lens into our work. secretary vilsack has charged us to help all americans achieve not only food security but also nutrition security. nutrition security means having consistent and equitable access to healthy, safe, affordable food essential to health and well-being. snap, the cornerstone of the farm bill's nutrition title, is one of the most effective tools to help low income households achieve nutrition security. the chairwoman did a far better job than i, but it reduces poverty and food hardship, it's a lifeline for its 41 million participants. about four out of five participants households include a child, utterly individual, or individual with a disability. by infusing food dollars into the economy, snap also benefits retailers, grocery store employees, truck drivers, food manufacturers, and of course the hard-working farmers who grow and produce our food. as it is designed to do, snap participation expanded early in the pandemic and respond to sudden increase need. congress also took action to strengthen snap even more on providing a temporary boost to benefits, and providing new flux abilities that enable the program in states running it to adapt to evolving and uncertain conditions. as that temporary help and flux ability now ends, we will return to a new normal. in that new normal, snap participants will receive a stronger benefit to flex our adjustment of the current cost of a budget conscious healthy diet, a directive from the 2018 farm bill. we are also working to modernize program delivery and strength and integrity. program integrity efforts include enhancing fraud detection, conducting more robust oversight, data collection, and minimizing improper payments and administered of errors. two modernize the programs, we are making it easier to enroll and participate. we are also expanding online shopping with a focus on smaller, independent retailers. snap participants, no matter where they live, can access the same services available to all shoppers. and we are strengthening snap employment and training programs, consistent with the 2018 farm bill. congress directed us to work with states to develop evidence-based practices, match participants with the right services, and partner with state workforce systems, all aimed to help the skills employers need in today's economy. finally, we are focused on increasing equity across our programs. for example, we are expanding the reach of the emergency food assistance program, tfap, into underserved areas, including remote, rural, and tribal communities, so that communities that have long faced systemic barriers to participating in this program an opportunity can have a reliable access to when they need it most. our equity efforts also include furthering tribal involvement in our nutrition programs, and these include the farm bill 2018's self-determination project, food distribution programs on indian reservations, which supports tribal food sovereignty by allowing tribes to procure their own food for their people from tribal producers. and we are providing tribal communities with new resources to develop and deliver culturally tailored attrition will education. it's worth noting that through our food and nutrition security efforts, we are also working to support another sec. vilsack's key goals, and that is the support of more and better markets and improving the resilience of u.s. agriculture. specifically working to strengthen connections between farmers, ranchers, and our nutrition programs. the upcoming farm bill is an important opportunity to build on the remarkable success of our federal nutrition programs and we stand ready to stand with you. thank you and i look forward with our conversation today. chair stabenow: thank you very much. we will be in questions now. appreciate very much both of your responding. first, let me say, let's talk more about the thrifty food plan update. this was a conscious effort put into the farm bill because there had not been an update since 1975 on the basic assumptions on which we provide help in terms of the food programs. things like how people prepare food, other things had not been looked at. certainly, there have been many changes since 1975. this was an effort to do a real analysis. challenges, questions raised by gao that we would like you to respond to, but also the results provided really a modest but meaningful increase to benefit millions of people across the country. as i indicated, about two dollars a day, because of the comprehensive update of assumptions that were made in 1975. at this point, could you talk about how the usda conducted their review, and more about what this really means to real people? rather than big numbers, talking about what this means to an individual person, individual family, as they are trying to get some help to feed their family. >> thank you. we appreciate the opportunity to talk about the reevaluation. i just want to say that we stand by the process. it was a sound process, robust and evidence-based. as you say, resulted in the first increase in real purchasing power of the benefit and over 45 years. but that amount ended up being $.40 per person per meal. so there is of course an aggregate, it was a significant increase, but it also very clearly puts healthy food within reach for tens of millions of americans. just to comment briefly on the process, as you pointed out, the farm bill language directed us to reevaluate and essentially update our estimate of the cost of a budget conscious healthy diet. it was very specific to do that update with four particular criteria. current prices, the new dietary guidelines, the nutrients in food, and to consider the foods that americans eat, what types of foods they buy. the idea was to balance all of those things, optimize them, within our existing thrifty food plan model. i think it's important that everyone here understands, we did not take the approach from 2020 and rebuild it from the ground up. we took the model that had been the basis for the thrifty food plan, going back decades, and updated it to the four parameters which you all directed us to do. we have deep after tees on the food plan in the department, so we worked with our colleagues there. it was a robust effort. i would argue a very conservative effort. gao pointed out several areas where there was evidence but it was not in our minds clear and convincing evidence to make a change. the areas they suggested had we made a change would have increased the earthy further. we just wanted to make, follow the four specific areas and update where there was clear and compelling evidence. the primary place where there was evidence, and gao commended our change there, was to use new price data, instead of using households regulation of how much they paid. we have the ability to pull the scanner data and price data off of the store shelves. that change was the primary result and why benefits increased, although there were a few others. as you said, it resulted in a modest per household change, but it did put healthy food within reach for millions of struggling americans. chair stabenow: thank you very much. i think it's also important to note, just as any increases that come in the commodity title or crop insurance because of conditions, it is built into the baseline. now this is built