"Without essential support": Congressional cuts could leave nearly 360,000 kids hungry

Yahoo

13-02-2025

As Congress moves forward with budget reconciliation discussions, proposed cuts to safety net programs are raising concerns about their ripple effects — particularly on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC.
While WIC itself isn't facing direct funding cuts, a new policy brief from the National WIC Association (NWA) warns that changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) could make it significantly harder for families to access WIC benefits.
At the heart of the issue is adjunctive eligibility, a streamlined process that allows families to qualify for WIC if they are already enrolled in other income-tested programs like Medicaid or SNAP. This process reduces administrative burdens, making it easier for families to access benefits quickly. However, if eligibility for Medicaid or SNAP is restricted, fewer families will qualify for WIC through this automatic pathway — forcing them to navigate additional paperwork and verification processes that WIC experts say could discourage participation.
One of the most controversial proposals under discussion is the elimination of Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility (BBCE) in SNAP. BBCE is a provision that allows states to expand SNAP eligibility, ensuring that families who are just above the federal income threshold can still receive benefits. The policy brief cites a 2019 USDA analysis estimating that eliminating BBCE would remove 3.1 million people from SNAP.
Given that 11.6% of SNAP recipients are preschool-aged children, this could mean that at least 359,600 infants and young children would lose their automatic WIC eligibility.
This is not the first time BBCE has come under fire. During the first Trump administration, the rule's future was hotly debated, with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) warning of severe consequences for working families, seniors and individuals with disabilities.
In a statement at the time, CBPP noted that eliminating BBCE would cut off food assistance for millions of households while also preventing children from accessing free school meals. The organization also pushed back against the Trump Administration's argument that states were approving households for SNAP under BBCE without checking their incomes or assessing their need for food assistance.
'The claim is incorrect,' the statement read. 'To receive SNAP, all households, including those eligible under BBCE, must apply, be interviewed and document that their monthly income and expenses, such as high housing and child care costs, leave them with too little disposable income to afford a basic, adequate diet. Indeed, the Department of Agriculture's own data show that only about 0.2% of SNAP benefits went in 2017 to households with monthly disposable incomes — net income after deducting certain expenses like high housing and child care costs — above the poverty line. SNAP has some of the most rigorous program integrity standards and systems of any federal program.'
The statement continued: 'With this rule, the Administration is seeking to implement through executive action a harsh policy that Congress rejected in the 2018 farm bill. Instead of punishing working families if they work more hours or must incur high child care costs in order to work, or penalizing seniors and people with disabilities who save a modest amount for emergencies, the President should seek to assist them with policies that help them afford the basics and save for the future.'
Now, six years later, the National WIC Association warns that for families already struggling with food insecurity, these changes could still have severe consequences.
'WIC, SNAP and Medicaid work together to ensure that families have the nutrition and healthcare they need to thrive,' said Georgia Machell, President & CEO of NWA. 'If Congress moves forward with cuts to Medicaid or SNAP, families will not only lose access to food and healthcare, they'll face unnecessary barriers to WIC. This will leave pregnant women, infants, and young children without essential support that keeps them healthy — at a time when families are already struggling with rising food insecurity.'
Beyond SNAP, proposed Medicaid restrictions could also impact WIC enrollment. Nearly 80% of WIC participants also rely on Medicaid for healthcare, meaning that any additional eligibility hurdles for Medicaid could create logistical challenges for families seeking WIC benefits. Requiring families to provide additional income documentation — rather than using adjunctive eligibility — introduces delays that could prevent young children from receiving critical nutrition support during their most formative years.
As Congress finalizes its budget reconciliation package, advocates are urging lawmakers to consider the broader implications of these proposals. Limiting access to WIC, SNAP or Medicaid would not only undermine efforts to combat food insecurity, they say, but also jeopardize the long-term health and well-being of millions of families as the interconnected nature of these programs ensures that families receive the support they need to maintain health and stability, and cutting one inevitably weakens the others.
With rising food costs and growing economic uncertainty, the stakes for these policy decisions are high. While lawmakers may be focused on budget savings, NWA's brief underscores that the cost of restricting access to essential programs isn't just financial — it's a matter of public health.