PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6554-6555)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 20, 2012
Food Stamp Restoration Act of 2012 - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA), for each of FY2014-FY2021, to establish a food stamp block grant program under which the Secretary shall make annual grants to each participating state that establishes a food stamp program and submits a specified annual report to the Secretary.
Requires a participating state to certify that its program includes: (1) work requirements; (2) mandatory drug testing; (3) verification of citizenship or lawful U.S. permanent residency; and (4) limitations on the eligible uses of benefits that are at least as restrictive as those in place for the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP, formerly the food stamp program).
Provides a grant to a participating state in an amount equal to the product of: (1) the specified amount made available for the applicable fiscal year, and (2) the proportion that the number of legal residents in the state whose income does not exceed 100% of the poverty line (applicable to a family of the size involved) bears to the number of such individuals in all participating states for the applicable fiscal year.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires an annual Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit and report to Congress regarding the effectiveness of the nutritional assistance block grant program and the manner in which each participating state is implementing the program.
Permits a participating state to use the grant in any appropriate manner to provide food stamps to its legal residents.
Authorizes funds to remain available to a state for five years and requires any funds remaining unused after five years to be deposited in the Treasury.)
Repeals: (1) the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, effective September 30, 2013; and (2) specified mandatory and direct funding provisions.
People & committees
Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6554-6555)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6553-6554)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3602 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3602 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3602 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3602 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.