To the editor:
Allen Quist's July 13 letter (Walz embarrasses us on the farm bill) was a breath of fresh air to many of us in the greater Mankato area.
Over here one letter to the editor suggested the reason the original Republican sponsored House farm bill failed was because Republicans (62) voted against it. The actual vote count on the bill shows 171 Republicans voted for the bill while 172 Democrats voted against the bill.
The bill included 79.2 percent ($743.9 billion) spending for food stamps and nutrition. Yet another letter suggested Democrats were justified in voting against the bill because it cut money for food stamps, while adding provisions for drug testing and modest work requirements or enrollment in a work training program for able bodied people, in order to qualify for food stamp benefits.
Over the past five years spending on food stamps has about doubled. About 47.3 million Americans now receive food stamps.
Something is wrong with our economy. The way I see it allowing more able bodied people to become dependent on government with no restrictions, is not the solution.
The Journal welcomes letters to the editor. All letters must be signed, and address and telephone number are required for verification purposes. We will not publish letters without the names of the authors. We do not accept letters that were printed in other papers, or mass-mailing letters. The Journal reserves the right to edit or reject letters for length and abusive language. Address letters to: Letters to the Editor, The Journal, P.O. Box 487, New Ulm MN 56073-0487, or e-mail them to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Republican House recently bifurcated the failed farm bill, removing food stamps to be addressed later. The new bill included many generous provisions directly related to farming e.g. crop insurance, etc., etc.
It should be instructional that not one Democrat voted for the new bill. Maybe they are not interested in passing a farm bill, but rather interested in passing another welfare bill to satisfy their urban voting base.
I agree with Mr. Quist. Let's address one issue at a time so legislators and we the people understand the bill. Enough of these "comprehensive" bills.