Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Benefit Integrity Snap Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House tables multiple benefit-integrity amendments after floor debate
Summary
The Pennsylvania House voted to lay several proposed benefit-integrity amendments on the table after floor debate about whether to wait for potential federal changes. Each motion to table passed by narrow margins.
HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania House on June 25 voted to lay on the table multiple floor amendments aimed at benefit-integrity changes to state-administered public benefits, after members sparred over whether to proceed while Congress may still change federal law.
Lawmakers debated several amendments (labeled a01171, a01174, a01175, a01211, a01215, a01216 and others) proposed during consideration of a larger bill; the majority moved repeatedly to table them under House rules. Representative Schlossberg moved to table multiple amendments, and the motions carried by narrow margins, typically recorded as 102 ayes to 101 nays on the motions where the clerk recorded the counts.
The argument to table was advanced by Representative Schlossberg, who said federal legislation pending could affect the underlying programs and that it was therefore “wholly inappropriate for us to consider any further changes until we know the effects of said legislation.” Representative Schlossberg formally moved several motions to lay the amendments on the table pursuant to Rule 59.
Opponents of tabling, including Representative Heffley and Minority Leader Representative Topper, urged the chamber to debate the amendments now. Heffley said the amendments “deal[s] directly with the underlying legislation” and contended there was time on the legislative calendar to consider them. Topper described the measures as “benefit integrity” steps that could help sustain programs and asked members not to foreclose debate.
Representative Wignack said one of the amendments “has potential to bring more money into the SNAP program” and urged members to address it rather than table it. Representative Nelson argued tabling denied citizens transparency and the opportunity to hold lawmakers accountable for votes that affect benefits for tens of thousands of residents.
On multiple motions to table during the afternoon session, the clerk recorded the ayes as 102 and the nays as 101; in each instance the motion was adopted and the amendment was laid on the table. The transcript shows repeated recognition of the motion, debate limited by the chair to those leaders and makers as required by chamber rules, and the clerk’s recording of the vote totals.
The floor record includes an assertion — made during debate — that Pennsylvania’s SNAP error rate is about 16.6%; the House did not adopt language changing program eligibility on these amendments because they were tabled. The motions to table were procedural (Rule 59) and did not themselves change program law; they removed the amendments from further consideration at that time.
No subsequent direction to staff or referral for study was made on these specific amendments on the floor; they were tabled. Several members urged future debate and indicated they would press the policy questions in subsequent floor or committee actions.
Votes on the specific motions to table, as recorded by the clerk during the session, are listed in the actions section below.
