The House Agriculture committee released budget reconciliation text this week and scheduled a full committee markup. As part of the budget framework passed earlier this year, the Agriculture Committee was tasked with identifying cuts of $230 billion over 10 years. Nutrition programs account for the bulk of spending under the committee’s jurisdiction, with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) making up the vast majority of nutrition expenditures.
SNAP now costs taxpayers approximately $100 billion per year and serves 12 percent of the US population, with caseloads and spending increasing steadily, irrespective of broader economic conditions. The reconciliation text released by the Agriculture Committee makes several important changes to address the program’s tremendous cost growth in recent years, while prioritizing employment and state accountability. These reforms will put SNAP on a more sustainable path, while refocusing the program on its core principles—helping low-income households afford food and supporting employment.
Controlling Costs
The reconciliation text includes two important, long-overdue provisions aimed at controlling SNAP costs. The first is to ensure that any future reevaluations of the Thrifty Food Plan are administered in a cost neutral way, only increasing benefit levels for inflation. The Thrifty Food Plan sets maximum SNAP benefit levels, intending to represent the cost of a “nutritious, practical, cost-effective diet” for home consumption. President Biden’s US Department of Agriculture (USDA) broke precedent in 2021 by increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan beyond the historical norm of adjusting benefit levels for inflation only. This questionable action increased SNAP benefit costs by 25 percent on top of increases for inflation. This, combined with participation increases, increased SNAP benefit cost 36 percent in constant dollars since 2019 ($76 billion in 2019 compared to $103 billion in 2024, in today’s dollars).
The reconciliation text maintains SNAP benefit levels at current levels, but ensures that the USDA cannot increase the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan beyond inflation in future years. This will ensure that SNAP benefit costs are predictable and consistent across time, and that only Congress can adjust SNAP benefit levels.
Another proposed cost-control measure is to increase the share of benefit and administrative costs that states must cover. Currently, the federal government pays 100 percent of SNAP benefit costs and 50 percent of administrative costs. This arrangement encourages states to expand their caseloads, as doing so brings in more federal funding. It also gives states little incentive to enforce work requirements and reduce errors and improper payments, or to manage overall program costs efficiently. The reconciliation bill changes this financial arrangement; states will be required to fund five percent of benefit costs and 75 percent of administrative costs. Moreover, states’ will be incentivized to ensure that benefits are going into the right hands; as states’ improper payment rates increase, their expected financial contribution to benefits increases, further incentivizing states to administer SNAP with care.
Prioritizing Work
The reconciliation text appropriately prioritizes employment. Congress added “assisting low-income adults in obtaining employment and increasing their earnings” to SNAP’s purpose in 2023. The reconciliation text furthers this purpose by strengthening the work requirement for able-bodied adults without dependent children, also called ABAWDs, expanding the requirement to adults up to age 64 (from 54), and extending the requirement to parents when the youngest child is school-age. The text eliminates the ability of states to waive work requirements unless they can demonstrate an unemployment rate above 10 percent. These provisions reflect the reasonable expectation that non-disabled adults with minimal caregiving responsibilities should engage in work or community service activities at least part-time as a condition of receiving SNAP benefits.
Other Changes, and What Remains
The reconciliation bill makes several other necessary changes to close loopholes, improve accountability, and reduce redundant programming. A few key areas left unaddressed in the reconciliation bill text involve establishing nutrition standards in SNAP, addressing benefit cliffs, and eliminating the use of broad-based categorical eligibility by states to expand SNAP income eligibility.
The House Agriculture Committee will have another opportunity to advance these reforms later this year during consideration of a Farm Bill, which reauthorizes SNAP. In the meantime, passing the reconciliation text is a crucial first step toward restoring accountability and imposing meaningful constraints within the program.
Reprinted with permission from AEI by Angela Rachidi.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AMAC or AMAC Action.
This is yet another example of a half-hearted action. Rather than revert the SNAP criteria back to before Biden greatly expanded the SNAP criteria and factor in the inflation of the 4 years of Biden to restore a lower baseline, the GOP House has left that insane ramp up in place and simply puts a sort of guardrail on future expansions by future administrations. Weak tea.
Yes, you are getting some savings, mostly backloaded to the end of a 10 year budget estimation, but we are throwing away yet another huge opportunity to save substantially more tax dollars by simply doing things right.
Things like this is why we are looking at saving $1 trillion over a 10 year period instead of shaving $1 trillion annually off the federal budget for a savings of $10 trillion over the 10 year budget period.
I am retired and work part time bagging groceries. Most people on the program eat better than I do. A fair number cannot speak English and you have to point to the right button to push to get the free food. What a great country we live in.
SNAP should have the same food restrictions as WIC. No fast food, junk food, prime meats, crab legs etc. Yes, work requirements for those of sound mind and/or body should be required; SNAP should also be a temporary hand-up for the aforementioned. Nix the generational welfare!
SNAP food stamps called it whatever you want but once such program is put in place it is impossible to dismantle it. From the day one it should have been geared to food only and checked for effectiveness and abuse, obviously that never happened and now 50 years later here we are third generation on it and thriving. It comes from a taxpayer not from good and kind hearted politicians so it continues. How do you get rid of something that is considered God’s given right. So called leaders of the community that is hurt by it are mum on the harm of it or demand more. Should MLK come for a visit to see the progress of his effort he’d be shot before his feet touched the ground.
So much damage done by the US program to provide aid to American People was damage Biden Administration and President Trump is trying correct and balance these program
There is nothing in the US Constitution or Bill of Rights that permits Congress to expend taxpayer dollars on providing free stuff to those who don’t want to work. I know there are those with a legitimate need for help, but there are a lot of freeloaders and illegal aliens on the system, and they need to be purged. I remember when welfare was something that made people feel shame. These days, it’s a badge of pride for those who feel entitled to it. It’s disgraceful.
Yes those that are able bodied and sound mind should be required to work. I also believe paper and personal hygiene products should be allowed.
Able bodied ppl should work. At least 20 hrs a week. Veterans & senior citizens should be eligible first. Also stop increasing their benefits after each kid
My SNAP benefits went DOWN under Biden but then I was not an Illegal Alien!
Anyone remember when there was little to nothing in the form of welfare of any kind? Taking care of the poor and disabled used to fall to the churches. That is one reason those establishments still for some reason enjoy tax exempt status. They provide NOTHING now……nothing other than occasionally acting like booking agents to take desperate old widows to visit the Wailing Wall in the child murdering state of Israel.
Perhaps the Churches should resume their former roles, that or lose their current tax exempt status. I grow tired of providing my money to pay for the food and housing of folks I don’t know, will never meet and have no desire to meet.