Food Bank of Iowa warns about SNAP implications in President Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
DES MOINES, Iowa — The Food Bank of Iowa is sounding the alarm while the fate of the President's 'big, beautiful bill' sits in the United States Senate.
The concerns outlined by the organization are food insecurity and limited resources that food banks already have.
'We're gravely concerned about the one big, beautiful bill act as written,' said Annette Hacker, Vice President of Strategy and Communications for the Food Bank of Iowa. 'It stands to slash $267 billion with a 'b' from SNAP over ten years. And it takes 9.5 billion meals a year off of the table for people facing hunger.'
New law helps clear the way for birthing centers in Iowa
The bill has states pay for these federal benefits, in part, through a cost sharing method. Hacker said that this would be roughly $40 million a year the state would have to account for, which to her doesn't feel possible.
The legislation also raises the age of SNAP work requirements to 65-years-old, extending those requirements to parents without children younger than 7-years-old.
'The crushing need this would create is not possible for the charitable food system, that's us, to absorb. If you look at every Feeding America food bank in this country, of which Food Bank of Iowa is one of 200 and all the partners and pantries we stock across the entire country, that's 6 billion meals a year distributed. This would be 9.5 billion more meals, a gap that would have to be filled. And the math just doesn't work,' said Hacker.
U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley said that the goal is for the chamber to take it up on the Senate floor in the last week of June.
To volunteer or donate, visit the Food Bank of Iowa's website.
Iowa News:
Food Bank of Iowa warns about SNAP implications in President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Winner named in Coolest Thing Made in Iowa contest
New law helps clear the way for birthing centers in Iowa
Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline
Third case of measles in Iowa this year reported by HHS
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
30 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Israeli strikes on Iran lead to new test of Trump's ability to deliver on ‘America first' agenda
Advertisement 'Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense,' Rubio said in a statement. 'President Trump and the Administration have taken all necessary steps to protect our forces and remain in close contact with our regional partners. Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up As Israel stepped up planning for strikes in recent weeks, however, Iran, had signaled that the United States would be held responsible in the event of an Israeli attack. The warning was issued by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi even as he engaged in talks with Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program. On Thursday, just hours before the strikes, Trump made the case that there was still time for diplomacy — but it was running out. The White House had even planned to dispatch Witkoff to Oman on Sunday for the next round of talks with Araghchi. It wasn't immediately clear how the strikes would affect plans for those discussions. Advertisement Trump is set to meet with his National Security Council in the Situation Room on Friday to discuss the tricky path ahead. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., offered rare words of Democratic praise for the Trump administration after the attack 'for prioritizing diplomacy' and 'refraining from participating in tonight's actions.' But he also expressed deep concern about what the Israeli strikes could mean for U.S. personnel in the region. Iranian officials made clear that they intended to retaliate with decisive action after the Israeli strikes targeted Iran's main enrichment facility in Natanz and the country's ballistic missile program, as well as top nuclear scientists and officials. 'I cannot understand why Israel would launch a preemptive strike at this juncture, knowing high level diplomatic discussions between the United States and Iran are scheduled for this weekend,' Kaine said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the U.S. Senate 'stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region and, first and foremost, to defend the American people from Iranian aggression, especially our troops and civilians serving overseas.' Trump in the hours before the attack still appeared hopeful that there would be more time for diplomacy. The president, in an exchange with reporters, again urged Iran to negotiate a deal. He warned that a 'massive conflict' could occur in the Middle East without it. He later took to social media to emphasize that his 'entire Administration has been directed to negotiate with Iran.' Advertisement As long as there was a chance for an agreement, Trump said of Israel, 'I don't want them going in because I think it would blow it.' But it was clear to the administration that Israel was edging toward taking military action against Iran. The State Department on Wednesday directed a voluntary evacuation of nonessential personnel and their families from some U.S. diplomatic outposts in the Middle East. 'I don't want to be the one that didn't give any warning, and missiles are flying into their buildings. It's possible. So I had to do it,' Trump explained. Before Israel launched the strikes, some of Trump's strongest supporters were raising concerns about what another expansive conflict in the Mideast could mean for the Republican president who ran on a promise to quickly end the brutal wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Trump has struggled to find an endgame to either of those conflicts and to make good on two of his biggest foreign policy campaign promises. And after criticizing President Joe Biden during last year's campaign for preventing Israel from carrying out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Trump found himself making the case to the Israelis to give diplomacy a chance. The push by the Trump administration to persuade Tehran to give up its nuclear program came after the U.S. and other world powers in 2015 reached a long-term, comprehensive nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. But Trump unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the 'worst deal ever.' The way forward is even more clouded now. Advertisement 'No issue currently divides the right as much as foreign policy,' Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA and an ally of the Trump White House, posted on X Thursday. 'I'm very concerned based on (everything) I've seen in the grassroots the last few months that this will cause a massive schism in MAGA and potentially disrupt our momentum and our insanely successful Presidency.' Jack Posobiec, another prominent Trump supporter, warned a 'direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition.' 'Trump smartly ran against starting new wars, this is what the swing states voted for — the midterms are not far and Congress' majority is already razor-thin,' Posobiec added in a posting on X. Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, said the job ahead for Trump and his team is to protect U.S. forces who are highly vulnerable to Iranian retaliation. 'Israel's strike on Iran must not become the United States' war,' Kelanic said. 'The U.S. public overwhelmingly opposes another military engagement in the Middle East for good reason — an open-ended military campaign in Iran would risk repeating the catastrophic mistakes of the 2003 war in Iraq, which inadvertently strengthened Tehran's influence there.' ___ AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro contributed reporting.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Home solar panel systems could cost 43% more for most consumers under Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
HARRISBURG, Pa. (WHTM) — They first existed in a different form in 1978 — and have existed in essentially their current form since 2008 — and 30% tax credits for new home solar system installations were scheduled to last another eight years. Instead, they could end just 60 days after President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' becomes law, warn solar advocates, unless the plan changes in the U.S. Senate, where it is under consideration now after passing the U.S. House late last month. 'Companies have built infrastructure. They have created pipelines. They have employed people. We've had billions of dollars spent on factories to supply solar panels, solar inverters, solar modules,' Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), an industry lobby, said in an interview. Two months, she said, are 'obviously not enough time to change your business model, find new markets — kind of evolve your structure.' 'And so we are asking the United States Senate to restore some of those cuts,' Ross Hopper said. Might Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pennsylvania), a member of the chamber's energy and national resources committee, consider supporting such a restoration? 'The full reconciliation text has not been released from Senate committees, particularly the finance committee,' a spokesperson for McCormick said in a statement. 'We expect there will be changes from the House approved language, but we do not know those details yet. We cannot comment on hypotheticals at this time. Senator McCormick is committed to ensuring Pennsylvania families benefit from this bill, and he will review the legislation carefully when the text is released.' President Trump has said he hopes to sign the bill by July 4. The tax credits amount to a 30% refund. A real-world example: A reporter paid $15,366 for a 2-panel solar system to power a home (the systems can be paid for in cash or financed, similar to buying a car), resulting in an extra tax refund of $4,610 — that's 30% of $15,366 — bringing the total cost down to $10,756 for a system that has eliminated electric bills (in a house that does still rely on natural gas for heat). In fact, the system generates more electricity than the home needs. That electricity is automatically sold back to the power company at a small profit. Without the credit, the system cost would have risen from that after-credit price of $10,756 to the original price of $15,366, which is a 43% increase. Steve Bodley, a retired science teacher who has a (solar-powered) home-based business selling solar power systems for a company called Lifestyle Solar, said 93% of his clients since 2021 have gotten the credits. And although this is harder to know for sure, Bodley estimates 75% of his customers wouldn't have bought their systems if not for the credits. Customers are happy to rely on clean energy generated on their own rooftops, but the motivation is not primarily altruistic, Bodley said. 'The majority is economics,' he said, acknowledging the credits are a subsidy — but saying that only serves to help level the playing field against other forms of energy. 'We subsidize every other source of power,' Bodley said. For example, some analysts and critics say tax credits and loan guarantees could save Constellation Energy as much as $200 million if it wins approval to restart one Three Mile Island nuclear reactor as the Crane Clean Energy Center in order to supply power to Microsoft. Download the abc27 News+ app on your Roku, Amazon Fire TV Stick, and Apple TV devices On a larger scale, Ross Hopper cited the Aspen Road Solar farm in Fannett Township, Franklin County — whose owners say it can power 18,000 homes and will contribute $23 million in state and local taxes during its existence — as an example of a project that might not have existed if not for solar tax credits. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Thune issues response to Israel's attack on Iran
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — South Dakota Senator John Thune is responding to Israel's recent attack on Iran's capital city of Tehran. In a post on X, Senate Majority Leader John Thune issued a statement regarding Israel's recent attack. Damage in Sibley, IA after near 70 mph winds In the post, Thune states that Israel hs determined that it must take 'decisive action to defend the Israeli people' and that 'the United States Senate stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region'. He also states that Iran should 'heavily consider' consequences before taking any action against American influence in that area. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
