FRAC Chat

The proposed House Farm Bill provides no meaningful avenue to restore or strengthen the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Instead, it advances provisions that weaken long‑standing statutory protections by undermining merit‑based staffing requirements and opening the door to privatization. Section 4103, titled “SNAP Staffing Flexibility,” if approved, will amend Section 11 of the Food and Nutrition Act (7 U.S.C. § 2020) to authorize states to contract with private entities to perform SNAP certification and other core administrative functions. As the Farm Bill heads to a floor vote, advocates should stay informed and actively oppose the current proposal.

Recent efforts by some policymakers are seeking to attack the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payment error threshold provision, which has proven to be a pivotal quality control policy and has been validated by bipartisan support and administrations.

On Friday, April 3,  President Trump released his proposed budget for fiscal year 2027. Despite the administration professing a commitment to making America healthy, this budget proposal would cut critical nutrition service for moms, babies, and children, dramatically slashing the benefit that participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) receive to purchase fruits and vegetables — what is known as the cash value benefit (CVB). 

The president’s proposed budget reflects a clear set of priorities, and those priorities come at the direct expense of federal programs that help millions of Americans meet their basic needs and achieve economic stability.

Over the past year, SNAP participation has declined by approximately 3.3 million people. This is neither a neutral correction nor evidence that fewer Americans need help affording food. It is the predictable outcome of a set of deliberate policy choices advanced by the Trump administration and a majority of Republicans in Congress — choices that systematically reduce access to the program, increase administrative burden, and shift responsibility away from the federal government and onto states, localities, and ultimately families themselves.