Senate GOP aims to pare back proposed food stamp work requirements for parents in Trump megabill
The Senate Agriculture Committee is proposing some notable changes to the controversial food stamp provisions in the House-approved version of Republicans' megabill.
The committee, which unveiled its proposal on Wednesday, would dial back the introduction of work requirements for parents of dependent children in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps. The Senate version would mandate that parents of children ages 10 and older work to maintain their benefits, while the House package would impose that requirement on parents of children ages 7 and older. Currently, parents of dependent children are exempt from the program's work mandate.
(A summary released by the committee said that the work requirement would apply to parents of children over age 10, which conflicts with the text of the proposal. A committee spokeswoman confirmed to CNN that the provision would apply to parents of 10-year-olds and older children.)
The Senate committee also drops the exemptions for veterans, people experiencing homelessness and young adults who have aged out of foster care, according to Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.The House version includes the exemptions but ends them in 2030.
Like the House version, the Senate would expand the food stamp program's existing work requirements to able-bodied adults ages 55 through 64 and would curtail states' ability to receive work requirement waivers in difficult economic times, limiting them only to areas with unemployment rates above 10%. Both versions would also bar refugees, those granted asylum and certain survivors of domestic violence or labor or sex trafficking, among other immigrants with legal status, from receiving food stamps.
Currently, adults ages 18 to 54 without dependent children can only receive food stamps for three months over a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week or are eligible for an exemption.
The Senate measure aims at 'helping recipients transition to self-sufficiency through work and training. It's about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while giving folks the tools to succeed,' Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, the committee's chair, said in a statement.
But advocates lashed out at the Senate plan, saying it would worsen hunger in the US. Some 42 million people receive food stamps.
'The proposal would also take food assistance away from millions of parents and grandparents who are working but get tangled in red tape, have a health condition but fall through the cracks and don't get an exemption, or are between jobs and need temporary help,' Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said in a statement.
Senators in multiple committees are currently negotiating pieces of the House's sweeping tax and spending cuts bill, which aims to fulfill President Donald Trump's agenda.
The House, which passed the package last month, would enact the deepest cuts to food stamps in the program's history – reducing federal spending by nearly $300 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The work requirement provision would result in 3.2 million fewer people receiving benefits in an average month between 2025 and 2034, according to a preliminary CBO estimate of the House bill. That includes 800,000 adults who live with dependent children.
Both the Senate and House versions would require that states start covering part of the cost of food stamp benefits for the first time, though the Senate committee is calling for a smaller share.
States' tab would depend on their payment error rate in the program. In the Senate version, states with error rates below 6% would not have to contribute to the cost of benefits. The amount would then ratchet up in stages, with states that have error rates of 10% or more paying a 15% share.
The House version would require all states to shoulder at least 5% of the cost and as much as 25% for those with error rates of at least 10%.
Both versions would increase states' share of the program's administrative costs to 75%, from 50%.
Advocates and state officials have warned that asking states to pick up more of the costs would have dire consequences.
'Shifting the financial burden of SNAP onto states is fiscally unsustainable and risks harming the very individuals and families the program is designed to support,' Tim Storey, CEO of the National Conference of State Legislatures, wrote to House Agriculture Committee leaders last month.
State agencies are 'already underfunded and understaffed,' said Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, in a statement Wednesday. Shifting more of the cost to states would leave 'strained state budgets unable to absorb the added burden without raising taxes, cutting programs, or reducing access.'
How states would respond to having to pay for a share of the food stamp benefits would vary, but some 'would modify benefits or eligibility and possibly leave the program altogether because of the increased costs,' according to a preliminary CBO analysis of the House bill. The provision would lead states to reduce or eliminate food stamp benefits for about 1.3 million people in an average month over the decade, CBO estimates.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
18 minutes ago
- Fox News
Gabbard was in Situation Room on Iran, still key player despite Trump saying she was 'wrong' on intel
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was inside the Situation Room Saturday when the U.S. military launched successful strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, a White House official confirmed to Fox News Digital Sunday morning. A White House official confirmed Gabbard was in the room Saturday and that she is a "key player" on President Donald Trump's national security team. Speculation had mounted there was a rift between Gabbard and Trump after the president told the media Gabbard was "wrong" about intelligence on Iran back in March when she testified before the Senate that the nation was not actively building a nuclear weapon. Photos of the Situation Room released Saturday evening did not show Gabbard present alongside Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and other administration officials. The photos, however, did not include wide shots showing the entire room or each individual present, with the White House confirming the intelligence chief was present. Trump and Gabbard appeared at odds earlier in June, when the president was asked about Gabbard's testimony before the Senate in March, when she reported intelligence showed Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. Trump told the media June 16 he did not "care" what Gabbard had to say in previous testimony, arguing he believed Iran was close to building a nuke. "You've always said that you don't believe Iran should be able to have a nuclear weapon," a reporter asked Trump while aboard Air Force One on June 16. "But how close do you personally think that they were to getting one?" "Very close," Trump responded. Then again Friday, Trump said Gabbard was "wrong" after she reported that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. "My intelligence community is wrong," Trump said when asked about the intelligence community previously reporting that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. When Gabbard appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee in March, she delivered a statement on behalf of the intelligence community that included testimony that Iran was not actively building a nuclear weapon. "Iran's cyber operations and capabilities also present a serious threat to U.S. networks and data," Gabbard told the committee March 26. The intelligence community "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003," she said. She did add that "Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons." "Iran will likely continue efforts to counter Israel and press for U.S. military withdrawal from the region by aiding, arming and helping to reconstitute its loose consortium of like-minded terrorist actors, which it refers to as its axis of resistance," she warned. However, as critics picked apart Gabbard's past comments, the White House stressed to Fox Digital that Gabbard and Trump were closely aligned on Iran. A White House official told Fox News Digital on Tuesday afternoon that Trump and Gabbard are closely aligned and that the distinction being raised between Gabbard's March testimony and Trump's remarks that Iran is "very close" to getting a nuclear weapon is one without a difference. The official noted that Gabbard had underscored in her March testimony that Iran had the resources to potentially build a nuclear weapon. Her March testimony reflected intelligence she had received that Iran was not building a weapon at the time but that the country could do so based on the resources it amassed for such an endeavor. Gabbard took to social media and blasted the media for "intentionally" taking her March testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee "out of context." "The dishonest media is intentionally taking my testimony out of context and spreading fake news as a way to manufacture division," Gabbard said in a Friday post on X, accompanied by a video clip of her March testimony to Congress. "America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly," she wrote. "President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree." Trump announced in a Saturday evening Truth Social post that the U.S. military had carried out strikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran, obliterating them. Trump held an address to the nation later Saturday night, describing the strikes as wildly successful and backing Iran into a corner to make a peace deal. "A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan," Trump said from the White House on Saturday evening. "Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number-one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success." "For 40 years, Iran has been saying, 'Death to America. Death to Israel.' They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs," Trump continued. "That was their specialty. We lost over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular." Fox News Digital reached out to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for any additional comment on the Sunday strikes, but did not immediately receive a reply.
Fox News
19 minutes ago
- Fox News
Tom Homan reveals the 'biggest national security vulnerability' after US strikes Iran
Border czar Tom Homan voiced concern over the presence of Iranian nationalists and other unaccounted illegal immigrants after the United States launched an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities on Saturday night. Homan revealed what he feels is the 'biggest national security' vulnerability the U.S. currently has amid the conflict in the Middle East during an appearance on "Sunday Morning Futures" with anchor Maria Bartiromo. TOM HOMAN: I've said in the last four years, my biggest concern was this open border. It was the biggest national security vulnerability this country has ever seen. So, I pulled numbers this morning, just from a CBP under Joe Biden — there were 1,272 nationalists from Iran released in the country between OFO and the border patrol. You compare that the Trump administration is zero, right? Zero releases. And right now, because of President Trump's leadership, we have the most secure border in my lifetime, the most secure border in the history of this nation. So we have a secure border, so that was President Trump's big win in securing this nation. We're not releasing people in this country, especially when there are aliens that aren't crossing the border undetected. But under Joe Biden, we had over 10 million people cross that border. But my biggest concern from day one, beyond the fentanyl, beyond the sex trafficking women and children, were the two million known 'gotaways' — over two million people crossed that border. We don't know who they are, where they came from, because they got away because border patrol is so overwhelmed with the humanitarian crisis that Biden created. Over two million people crossed the border and got away. That is my biggest concern. And that's what created the biggest national security vulnerability this country's ever seen. The U.S. Department of State raised warning levels for U.S. citizens traveling to countries across the Middle East on Sunday. The changes come after President Donald Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday. Affected countries include Lebanon, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The measures are most severe in Lebanon, where the state department has ordered the departure of family members and all non-emergency government personnel from the nation due to the heightened security situation. The state department increased its warning levels for Americans in both Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but there is no departure order. Meanwhile, Jordan remains at a level two advisory, calling for Americans in the country to exercise special caution. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said President Trump was "fully committed" to engaging in peace talks with Iran before ordering strikes on the country's nuclear facilities on Sunday. Hegseth made the statement while speaking to reporters on Sunday morning, asked if there was a "particular moment" when Trump decided the airstrikes were necessary. "I would just say having the opportunity to witness his leadership, he was fully committed to the peace process, wanted a negotiated outcome, gave Iran every single opportunity and, unfortunately, was met by stonewalling, which is why he gave them plenty of time to continue to come to the table and give up enrichment, give up the nuclear program," Hegseth said. "But there was... I won't say the particular moment... there was certainly a moment in time where he realized that it had to be a certain action taken in order to minimize the threat to us in our troops," he added.
CNN
24 minutes ago
- CNN
Dem. Senator Adam Schiff says 'we simply don't know' if US is safer after Iran strikes
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff speaks to Kasie Hunt about the congressional response to President Trump's order to strike Iran.
