WASHINGTON (May 13, 2025) The following statement can be attributed to Eric Mitchell, President of the Alliance to End Hunger.
“Late last night the House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture released their budget resolution proposal. Within the legislation is a $290 billion cut, mostly at the expense of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). As the Alliance and our broader community continue to analyze the full impacts of this bill, we know for certain that those who are helped by food assistance in this country are facing severe uncertainty and the possible elimination of benefits. The proposal would be the largest cuts in the history of SNAP.
Within the legislation is a proposal for cost-sharing of SNAP benefit funding with state governments. Part of what has made SNAP such a successful program is its ability to respond to economic downturns, especially within states that bear the brunt of recessions. SNAP investments not only help get food on the table, but they add much-needed investment into local economies, providing a one-two punch against economic hardship. The current proposal would penalize the residents of states hit hardest by economic downturns, possibly leading to waiting lists for food assistance and additional beneficiaries cut from the program.
The proposed legislation also contains hurtful provisions that would negatively impact individuals and families in need. Restrictions on updates to the Thrifty Food Plan – the basis for benefit amounts – would stifle needed adjustments to food benefits at a time when many families experience rising grocery bills, inevitably creating a system that would not allow food assistance to keep up with the rising cost of food. Further, proposed increased work requirements would add additional stress and pressure to households, especially those with children as young as age 7 who are not yet old enough to stay at home alone and find affordable childcare in short supply. A vast majority of SNAP recipients who can work already do work. For the sake of responding to a problem that doesn’t exist, increasing work requirements simply adds extra barriers for those who need food assistance.
We call on members of the House to consider the impacts on people and local economies as they decide their votes. As the Senate considers its own proposals, we urge Senators to reject this plan and prioritize impacts on actual people and not simply the impact on federal spending.”
