Alabama food banks worry about Congress proposing billions in cuts to food aid program
According to multiple reports, the U.S. House of Representatives is considering cutting $230 billion from the program and shifting more of the cost from the federal government to the states.
State sales tax on diapers, formula, feminine hygiene products ends Sept. 1
But the food bank coalition Feeding Alabama tells News 19 the cuts come at a time when other federal dollars for food banks and school nutrition programs are also being cut, and hunger problems are not declining. There are food banks in every county in the state, but Feeding Alabama officials say a major cut to SNAP would be very difficult to make up elsewhere.
Congress on Tuesday was beginning its debate on the proposed $230 billion, 10-year SNAP benefit cut. The initial proposals would shift more costs to states, expand qualifying requirements and increase work demands on older recipients.
But advocates say SNAP in Alabama has an economic impact of $1.80 for every program. They said SNAP recipients include several people every year in Alabama who need temporary food assistance as they navigate a crisis brought on by a job loss or medical problems.
The goal, advocates say, is to provide a temporary source of reliable food to help allow them to get back on their feet and resume productive lives. Feeding Alabama says the program benefits farmers, small grocery stores and rural communities, and the impact is widespread. Feeding Alabama's network includes the Food Bank of North Alabama and food banks across the state, including the Gulf Coast.
'Over 700,000 folks in Alabama turn to SNAP at one time or another in any given year,' said Michael Ledger, CEO of Feeding the Gulf Coast. 'And it's a vital program, for every pound of food we put out in the food bank, SNAP can provide nine.''The vast majority of the people getting SNAP are either seniors or children that are benefiting from this. And these are two population segments, we know, the choices they have are limited. A child is not really going to be able to affect their circumstances. A senior who is on a fixedincome is not going to be able to affect their circumstances and so reducing that could have a real dramatic impact,' Ledger added.
Feeding Alabama also estimates that 23,000 veterans in Alabama are using SNAP benefits.
The proposed cuts are part of a House GOP-led budget and tax cut overhaul.
News 19 has reached out to North Alabama U.S. Representatives Dale Strong and Robert Aderholt regarding their views of the proposed SNAP cuts. So far, neither congressman has responded.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
7 minutes ago
- The Hill
Solar panels that fit on your balcony or deck are gaining traction in the US
When Terrence Dwyer received a knock on his door and a flyer for a solar panel system small enough to fit on his deck, he was quickly sold. Solar systems that plug into regular wall outlets have been popular in Europe for years and are gaining traction in the U.S. for their affordability and simple installation. 'We thought absolutely, let's do this right away,' said Dwyer, who lives in Oakland, California. These small-scale solar systems could become attractive to more homeowners now that President Donald Trump's sweeping budget-and-policy package will scrap residential rooftop solar tax credits and may shift interest to cheaper alternatives. Even before the GOP bill passed, manufacturers of the smaller systems known as plug-in or balcony solar were seeing increased demand and other positive signs such as a new Utah law streamlining regulations for homeowners to buy and install them. The systems about the size of a door haven't been as widely adopted in the U.S. as in Europe because of lack of awareness, patchwork utility rules and limited availability. The $2,000 plug-in solar system installed on Dwyer's backyard deck in March consists of two 400 watt panels, an inverter, a smart meter and a circuit breaker. It saves him around $35 per month on his power bill because he is consuming less energy from the grid, but he said reducing his carbon footprint was his primary motivation. 'We like the environmental benefits of solar and wanted to engage with solar in some fashion,' Dwyer said. Had Dwyer opted for rooftop solar, he would have paid $20,000 for the system and $30,000 to upgrade his roof to support the panels. Installing a plug-in solar system requires some homework. What power companies let customers do with energy-generating equipment varies, which is why prospective purchasers should check their utility's policies first. Building permits might be required depending on the municipality. Some systems can be self-installed, while others may require an electrician. For example, some kits have meters that must be wired into a home's circuit breaker. Removing hurdles for plug-in solar Dwyer bought his system from Bright Saver, a nonprofit company in California that advocates for plug-in solar. In addition to the type Dwyer bought, the company also offers a smaller model costing $399 that recently sold out in six days. 'The interest and demand have been overwhelming,' said Cora Stryker, a founder of Bright Saver. 'It is clear that we are hitting a nerve — many Americans have wanted solar for a long time but have not had an option that is feasible and affordable for them until now.' Kevin Chou, another founder of Bright Saver, said wider adoption of the systems in the U.S. has been hindered by utility policies that create uncertainty about whether they're allowed and a lack of state and local policies to make clear what rules apply. Some utilities contacted by The Associated Press say plug-in solar systems require the same interconnection applications as rooftop panels that send electricity back to the wider network. But Steven Hegedus, an electrical engineering professor at University of Delaware, said he doesn't understand why a utility would need to require an interconnection agreement for plug-in solar because, unlike rooftop systems, they are designed to prevent energy from flowing to the grid. Still, if in doubt, a customer should follow their utility's policy. During the early days of plug-in solar's growth, some opposition from utilities is likely since customers are buying less energy, said Robert Cudd, a research analyst at the California Center for Sustainable Communities at the University of California, Los Angeles. 'Utilities really prefer everyone being a predictable and generous consumer of the electricity they sell,' Cudd said. This year, Utah enacted a novel law supporting plug-in solar by exempting certain small-scale systems from interconnection agreements and establishing safety requirements such as being certified by a nationally recognized testing organization such as Underwriters Laboratories. It appears to be the only state that's passed legislation supporting plug-in solar, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Republican state Rep. Raymond Ward, who sponsored the legislation, said the smaller systems allow people to better manage where their energy comes from and what they pay. 'Europe has these things. You can go buy them and they work and people want them. There is no reason why we shouldn't have them here in the United States,' Ward said. Bright Saver says they are lobbying other states for similar legislation. Alexis Abramson, dean of the University of Columbia Climate School, also applauded Utah's move. 'We actually need more localities, more states putting in allowances for this type of equipment,' she said. Plug-in solar availability and savings potential Some questions remain about how much customers could save. Severin Borenstein, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley's Haas School of Business, said the cost of some portable solar systems in the U.S. would make it hard for customers to come out ahead on their utility bills over the time they own them. He estimates the price of a $2,000 system in the U.S. works out to paying about $0.20 a kilowatt-hour over a 25-year period, which only saves people money if they have high utility costs. By comparison, Borenstein said the cost of systems sold in Europe, typically around $600, is equivalent to paying about $0.05 or $0.06 per kilowatt-hour over 25 years. Baltimore resident Craig Keenan said saving money was only part of why he installed one of the smaller Bright Saver models on his balcony in July. 'I'm interested in renewable energy because the amount of carbon emissions that we produce as a species is very, very unsustainable for our world,' he said. He said he expects the system will save him about $40 per year on utility bills, so it would take him about 10 years to recoup the cost of the kit. Keenan, a mechanical engineer, said installation took him 10 to 15 minutes. 'I think anyone can install this,' he said. 'It's not complicated. It doesn't require a technical degree.' Other companies selling plug-in solar kits include Texas-based Craftstrom. It has sold about 2,000 systems in the U.S. since 2021, mostly in California, Texas and Florida. The company's basic kits contain a solar panel that can fit in a backyard or other sunny space, along with equipment to maintain and regulate the flow of energy including an inverter and smart meter. Kenneth Hutchings, Craftstrom's chief revenue officer, said their U.S. sales rose this year even before the passage of the GOP tax bill, and he expects demand for plug-in solar to increase further as federal rooftop solar credits expire. The company advises customers to notify their power company before installation, but it has 'never had any pushback from any utility,' said Michael Scherer, one of the founders of Craftstrom. China-based EcoFlow plans to begin selling plug-in solar systems in Utah and expand to other states if supportive legislation is passed, said Ryan Oliver, a company spokesperson. 'This is an example of where technology is sort of ahead of the regulators,' Oliver said, adding: 'As this rolls out to more of a nationwide product, we expect it will become more mainstream as people understand it better.' ___ Associated Press video journalist Mingson Lau in Baltimore contributed to this report. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Chuck Schumer drops F-bomb when asked if Dems would back Trump on DC police takeover
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer dropped an expletive when asked whether Democrats would support President Trump's bid to extend federal control over Washington, DC's police force beyond the current 30-day limit. 'No f–king way!' the New York Democrat exclaimed during an interview with 'The Parnas Perspective' podcast on Thursday. 'We'll fight him tooth and nail.' Trump announced this week he's seeking 'long-term extensions' from Congress to maintain command of the Metropolitan Police Department past the month allowed under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act. Advertisement 6 Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer dropped an expletive during a podcast interview on Thursday. Substack / The Parnas Perspective The president expressed confidence Republicans would back the measure 'pretty much unanimously.' But Schumer signaled fierce Democratic resistance when host Aaron Parnas posed a hypothetical about Trump claiming a crime emergency to justify keeping the National Guard deployed and controlling the capital's law enforcement. Advertisement 'He needs to get Congress to approve it, and not only are we not going to approve it, but there are some Republicans who don't like it either,' Schumer said. The minority leader dismissed Trump's push as 'just a distraction' from ongoing demands that the administration release documents about convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. 'He's afraid of Epstein. He's afraid of all that, and we are not going to give up on Epstein,' Schumer charged. Advertisement Trump has maintained that nothing will stop his crackdown on what he describes as crime and homelessness plaguing the nation's capital, though recent reports indicate crime rates have actually been declining. 6 'No f–king way!' the New York Democrat exclaimed during an interview with 'The Parnas Perspective' podcast host Aaron Parnas on Thursday. Substack / The Parnas Perspective 6 'We'll fight him tooth and nail,' Schumer said when asked if Democrats would support granting an extension to President Trump's takeover of the DC police. Speaking to reporters at the Kennedy Center on Wednesday, Trump suggested he could bypass Congress entirely if necessary. Advertisement 'Well, if it's a national emergency, we can do it without Congress. But we expect to be before Congress very quickly,' Trump said. 'And again, we think the Democrats will not do anything to stop crime, but we think the Republicans will do it almost unanimously.' The president outlined plans for legislation specifically targeting DC, which he wants to use as a model for other cities. 6 Department of Homeland Security agents are seen above joining Metropolitan Police Department officers at a checkpoint in Washington, DC on Wednesday. AP 'So we're going to need a crime bill. That we're going to be putting in, and it's going to pertain initially to DC. We're going to use it as a very positive example,' he said. Trump emphasized the urgency of extending federal control beyond the initial window. 'You can't have 30 days,' he insisted. 'We're going to do this very quickly, but we're going to want extensions.' 6 Trump has maintained that nothing will stop his crackdown on what he describes as crime and homelessness plaguing the nation's capital. AP Advertisement 6 Trump suggested he could bypass Congress entirely if necessary by declaring a national emergency. REUTERS Despite his preference for congressional approval, Trump left the door open to unilateral action. 'I don't want to call a national emergency, but if I have to, I will,' the president warned. The Post has sought comment from the White House.
Forbes
8 minutes ago
- Forbes
Controversial $250 Visa Integrity Fee Will Cost US $11 Billion As It Deters Tourists, Analysts Say
U.S. tourism officials say Congress's controversial $250 visa integrity fee will deter international visitors and cost the country nearly $11 billion in lost visitor spending and tax revenue over the next three years. US tourism officials say the controversial visa integrity fee will cost American businesses roughly $11 billion over three years. getty The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the new $250 visa integrity fee will bring in around $27 billion over a decade—or $2.7 billion per year—to U.S. government coffers and reduce the national debt. But a U.S. tourism official told Forbes the fee will instead cost the U.S. economy $11 billion over three years, including $9.4 billion in lost visitor spending and $1.3 billion in lost tax revenue—or about $3.6 billion per year, according to an analysis by Tourism Economics. In addition, the lost revenue will lead to losing 15,000 U.S. travel jobs, according to U.S. tourism industry estimates. The CBO based its estimate solely on the potential revenue generated by the fee itself, while the U.S. tourism industry looked at the macroeconomic impact of implementing the fee, hence the wildly different estimates. The CBO estimated that charging roughly 11 million annual visa applicants $250 apiece would rake in roughly $2.7 billion per year for the State Department. Tourism officials say Congress wrongly assumed the pricey fee would have little impact on the volume of visitation. Tourism Economics, a division of Oxford Economics, estimated that the $250-per-person fee is onerous enough to deter 5.4% of international visitors from coming to the U.S., which would translate to a drop of nearly 1 million fewer visits annually. Fewer visitors translate to less visitor spending, and in turn to lower tax revenue and job losses in the tourism industry, sending a negative ripple effect throughout the national economy. 'By longstanding tradition, the Congressional Budget Office does not incorporate macroeconomic feedback effects into its traditional cost estimates,' a CBO spokesperson told Forbes. 'We didn't specifically do a dynamic analysis of this provision.' In other words, the CBO did not factor in the potential negative economic impact from lower visitor spending, tax revenue and subsequent job cuts—key metrics used by the U.S. tourism industry and the U.S. Commerce Department to evaluate the overall value of tourism to the U.S. economy. 'I think in the minds of congressional leaders, foreign visitors don't vote, so making them pay more to help fund the [Big Beautiful] Bill wouldn't come at any political cost,' Erik Hansen, senior vice president of government relations at the U.S. Travel Association, told Forbes. 'But the problem is it comes at a huge economic cost to American businesses.' What Else Do U.s. Tourism Experts Say Congress Got Wrong? 'Congress made the mistake of assuming that this worldwide visa integrity fee would not have a big impact on visitors from countries like India or Brazil,' Hansen told Forbes. 'This is the exact type of armchair public policymaking that is going to get us into a big mess.' India, in particular, is a 'bright spot' for inbound international travel because visitation numbers have surpassed where they were in 2019, he said, while most other countries are lagging behind their pre-pandemic volume. In 2024, Indian tourists spent roughly $13.3 billion in the U.S., according to the National Travel and Tourism Office, part of the U.S. Commerce Department. 'Applying a $250 fee to a country where travel is growing is mindboggling. It will absolutely deter travel—that's what our research has found,' Hansen said. The fee is not actually as 'refundable' as Congress has billed it to be. As written, the Big Beautiful Bill says the State Department 'may reimburse' the fee after the visitor's visa expires, provided that the visa holder has complied with all conditions of the visa. But most visitor visas are valid for 10 years, Hansen pointed out. 'The idea that you're going to give the government money and then wait around 10 years and remember to ask for it back, even if you followed the rules, is just absolutely crazy,' he said. Indeed, to arrive at its projection, the CBO reasoned in its estimate that 'a large number of nonimmigrants would not be eligible to seek reimbursement until several years after paying the fee' so consequently only 'a small number of people would seek reimbursement.' In other words, said Hansen, 'there's a very good understanding that the refund process itself is not going to be easy, and even if it is easy, that a lot of people aren't going to seek that refund after a decade.' Another red flag: The $250 fee was inserted into the Big Beautiful Bill without a plan for processing refunds. In its analysis, the CBO wrote that 'the Department of State would need several years to implement a process for providing reimbursements.' Why Are So Many International Travelers Avoiding The U.s. This Year? In June, a World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) analysis of the economic impact of tourism in 184 countries revealed the U.S. was the only country forecast to see international visitor spending decline in 2025, which by some estimates is as much as $29 billion. The root causes of this decline, multiple studies have found, are a combination of President Trump's tariffs, travel bans, inflammatory rhetoric and harsher immigration policies, all which have created a chilling effect on visitors. 'While other nations are rolling out the welcome mat, the U.S. government is putting up the 'closed' sign,' Julia Simpson, president and CEO of WTTC, said in a statement. 'Given we're halfway through the year and we've seen these impacts, we don't know when the stiffest headwind is, but I think it does stay sustained,' Aran Ryan, director of industry studies at Tourism Economics, told Forbes last month. 'We're generally assuming that this persists for a while and that some of it is going to persist throughout the end of the administration.' Simpson characterized the WTTC study as a 'wake-up call for the U.S. government,' adding that 'without urgent action to restore international traveler confidence, it could take several years for the U.S. just to return to pre-pandemic levels of international visitor spend.' Tangent Trump's signature spending bill contains another blow to U.S. tourism. A Senate committee led by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) slashed the budget of Brand USA, the country's public-private destination marketing organization, from $100 million to $20 million. 'This is another error that Congress has made,' Hansen said, noting that the Trump administration recommended full funding for the organization in its fiscal year 2026 budget. 'We have a big misperception problem among international visitors right now, but Congress cut funding for the one organization that's in charge of setting perceptions and sending a welcoming message about travel to the United States.' Further Reading Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Has A Nasty Surprise For World Cup Tourists (Forbes)
