The American Cost of SNAP Cuts

Written by Piotr Mateusz Kukula

Edited by Logan Dorton and Francesca Howard

Image under Public Domain

Our society is made up of people from all walks of life, those rich and poor, those housed and unhoused, with each individual sharing a unique life story of personal life difficulties and struggles. For those struggling to maintain an adequate source of income in the United States, as inflation and the daily cost of living continue to rise out of reach for millions of Americans, cuts to federal programs meant to benefit those in need have directly affected millions of everyday citizens. In particular, cuts to one specific program, SNAP, or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, colloquially known by many as food stamps, have had a tremendous impact on communities across the nation. A program many relied on over the years has been severely stripped down since the beginning of last summer under a Republican president and Congress, restricting and complicating access to those already deprived of a comfortable life. 

What is SNAP?

SNAP, also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, is a federal food assistance program founded in 1939 that provides financial assistance to millions of low-income individuals and families across the United States. Founded as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal program, the goal of the food stamp program was to reduce both hunger and poverty among many Americans, but also to address the crisis of unmarketable agricultural surpluses. However, this predecessor program was much more limited than the modern one, even with the cuts. The original program was discontinued in 1943 amid massive domestic economic growth and low unemployment rates during World War II. Over a decade and a half later, President John F. Kennedy reintroduced the program as a pilot project under an executive order in a greater measure to tackle poverty in rural and urban areas alike, and it was not until President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Food Stamp Act of 1964 as part of his Greater Society initiative that the program became permanent and reflected the current nature of SNAP.

Over the years, SNAP evolved to become entirely free for poor families and eliminated any requirement mandating the purchase of stamps under President Jimmy Carter’s presidency in 1977. Access to the food assistance program continued to grow and modernize through the abolition of paper stamps and the introduction of EBT in 2008. And as such, the following years that the governmental assistance program The program is centered on providing low-income households with monthly funds to purchase groceries, with eligibility determined by federally set factors such as income, household size, and living expenses. Most states allow households to qualify if they do not exceed the threshold of a gross monthly income 200% above the federal poverty line, which depends on household size and other factors.

The introduction of SNAP in the mid-1960s has drastically reduced hunger and malnutrition among young children in impoverished communities and has invested billions of dollars in local businesses that partner with the USDA to accept SNAP EBT cards. The Food Research & Action Center reports that for every $1 distributed in federal food stamp benefits, that one dollar generates between $1.50 and $1.79 in local economic activity, effectively benefiting not only the recipient but also local businesses. 

The One Big Beautiful Bill’s Impact

In July of 2025, a GOP-controlled House of Representatives and Senate passed a landmark bill that significantly altered the nation’s future. Tax cuts launched under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, also passed under President Donald Trump’s leadership, were made permanent into law, along with cuts to welfare and social programs, including Medicaid and SNAP. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), $186 billion in federal cuts towards SNAP were introduced over a ten-year period through 2034, making it the largest reduction of the program since the program’s founding.

Since its passage into law just under a year ago, over 3.5 million Americans have lost access to food assistance through SNAP due to stricter enrollment and eligibility rules and complex state-level adjustments. For one, the law vastly expanded the number of Americans who are not eligible for the program who formerly were, specifically many veterans, people experiencing homelessness, stay-at-home mothers, and young adults aging out of foster care. The law now mandates that “Able-bodied Adults Without Dependents” have to document at least 20 hours per week of work, volunteering, or other eligible community activities to maintain or access SNAP benefits. Even parents or caregivers who report having children aged 14 to 17 are required by law to work the minimum number of hours. Another long-term hurdle that may detrimentally impact states and local communities is how the OBBBA passes on administrative costs.

Historically, SNAP benefits were fully covered by the federal government, while administrative costs were split 50/50 between the states and the federal government. Under the still-fresh law, states will be required to cover 75% of administrative costs, increasing the burden on local taxpayers and on governments not accustomed to overseeing the program’s administrative aspects. 

Summary

The federal reduction in eligibility for everyday Americans to access SNAP benefits has already had negative effects nationwide. Amid rising inflation, gas prices, and skyrocketing healthcare costs, many individuals and families are squeezed out of a resource that could help them manage their costs, including those who are critically dependent on SNAP to purchase groceries. Heading into the future, government officials should prioritize everyday Americans over those powerful, and not serve the interests of the wealthiest, as evidenced by a massive transfer of wealth in the revised tax code and cuts to numerous social assistance programs. Putting the needs of those most affluent not only leads to a poorer nation, but also a much weaker and more vulnerable one. 

---

Works Cited:

Coffey, Amelia, and Heather Hahn. “SNAP Cuts in One Big Beautiful Bill Act Leave Almost 3 Million Young Adults Vulnerable to Losing Nutrition Assistance.” Urban Institute, 6 Aug. 2025, www.urban.org/urban-wire/snap-cuts-one-big-beautiful-bill-act-leave-almost-3-million-young-adults-vulnerable.

“Explainer: Understanding the SNAP Program—and What Cuts to These Benefits May Mean.” Harvard.edu, 10 Nov. 2025, www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/social-policy/explainer-understanding-snap-program-and-what-cuts.

IRS. “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: A Comparison for Businesses | Internal Revenue Service.” Irs.gov, 5 Nov. 2024, www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-a-comparison-for-businesses.

Narasimmaraj, Prihatha R, et al. “Health Effects of Reductions in Food Assistance Benefits in the USA.” The Lancet, Feb. 2026, www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(26)00036-X/fulltext?rss=yes, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(26)00036-x.

Suite, Pear. “Medicaid, SNAP, and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act Explained - Pear Suite.” Pear Suite, 26 Sept. 2025, www.pearsuite.com/post/one-big-beautiful-bill-act/.

“Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) | Food and Nutrition Administration.” Usda.gov, 2026, www.fna.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program.

“The Positive Effect of SNAP Benefits on Participants and Communities - Food Research & Action Center.” Food Research & Action Center, 2018, frac.org/programs/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap/positive-effect-snap-benefits-participants-communities.