Healey: Mass. can't afford federal food aid cost shift
Healey wrote to leaders of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee contending that potential changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would shift 'significant costs to states that they did not plan for and cannot afford.'
Depending upon the share of spending offloaded to states, Healey wrote that the proposal could cost Massachusetts between $185 million and $710 million per year, calling even the lower estimate 'an exorbitant burden.'
'These proposed changes would create an impossible situation for our most vulnerable families and residents. SNAP supports more than one million Massachusetts residents, one third of whom are elderly, one quarter of them are children, and a quarter of those who receive SNAP in our state have a disability,' Healey wrote. 'They receive a modest benefit, which averages about $10.70 per day per household. Beyond the direct benefits to families, SNAP is essential to the state's economy. Every dollar in SNAP benefits generates up to $1.50 in local economic activity, supporting thousands of Massachusetts jobs across many different industries, including farmers, grocers, manufacturers, delivery drivers, and other positions throughout the food supply chain.'
The U.S. House Agriculture Committee on Wednesday advanced a bill that could cut up to $300 billion in federal spending on SNAP.
Republicans in Congress are working to craft a massive domestic policy bill that would slash government spending in many areas in part to pay for extension of tax cuts President Donald Trump signed in his first term, which are set to expire at the end of the year.
MassHealth estimated that another portion of the package that moved through the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee could result in Massachusetts losing more than $1 billion annually.
The potential loss of significant federal revenues may soon force Beacon Hill Democrats to reassess spending priorities and choose whether to come up with revenue to salvage programs, perhaps through new taxes or the use of rainy day reserves.
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
National Guard vehicle, car collide in DC
A National Guard vehicle collided with a civilian car early Wednesday morning approximately a mile away from the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. The D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department said in a statement that the crash occurred at the intersection of 8th Street SE and North Carolina Avenue SE. The civilian driver was trapped in the car, rescued and transported to a local hospital with minor injuries, the statement said. The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) said officers responded to reports of the crash at 6:18 a.m. EDT and 'upon arrival officers discovered a two-car accident involving a government vehicle.' The driver was 'conscious and breathing' when taken to the hospital for 'non-life-threatening injuries,' MPD said. The military vehicle was a D.C. National Guard Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected All-Terrain Vehicle and was part of a five-vehicle convoy and an MPD cruiser, the National Guard said in a statement reported by local news outlets. The National Guard is investigating the incident, the statement said. Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) was asked about the incident at a press conference later Wednesday and said, 'I actually haven't gotten a readout on that collision yet, other than I know we had a person, I believe one person transported for medical attention. So I can't really say more,' NewsNation reported. The incident comes after President Trump ordered hundreds of National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., in an effort to crack down on crime in the nation's capital. Several Republican governors have joined his effort, bringing the total number of troops in the city to nearly 2,000.
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Washington must lead as AI reshapes the world
Artificial intelligence isn't just changing how we work but how we live. As a surgeon, I have seen how AI tools can reduce diagnostic errors, streamline paperwork and free me to spend more time with patients. It doesn't replace me — it makes me better at my job. In many ways, it lets me be more human. From agriculture to education, logistics to climate response, AI is already solving real problems. But the disruption is real, too — job losses, confusion and rising public distrust. Without direction, AI could deepen inequality, concentrate power and erode trust in democratic institutions. With the right leadership, it could do the opposite. This moment demands more than regulation. It needs vision — strategic, inclusive and grounded in shared democratic values. And that's where Washington comes in. I grew up in India, trained in Britain and now live and teach in Canada. Across continents, I have seen how new technologies can lift societies — or leave people behind. When the internet and personal computers emerged, many feared mass unemployment. There was disruption, yes, but also new industries, jobs and hope. AI holds similar potential — if we prepare wisely. The job losses AI is causing aren't speculative — they're already here. But they don't have to become casualties of progress. We can act now by funding real retraining, preparing people for future work and ensuring that AI's benefits reach beyond boardrooms to classrooms, clinics and communities. A practical step forward could be launching an 'AI impact initiative' — a public-private partnership that deploys vetted tools into real-world settings. Used wisely, AI can ease workloads, reduce burnout and free up time for what matters most — improving both productivity and quality of life. Globally, Washington could convene a 'democratic tech compact,' bringing together like-minded nations to align on trusted AI standards, open-data protocols and safeguards — offering a responsible counterweight to authoritarian AI models. AI, done right, could revive the middle class, restoring dignity to work, expanding access to services and letting people focus on what matters. It could also help us respond to crises, from pandemics to wildfires, with more speed and less chaos. But it won't happen through fragmented legislation. Washington must lead — by uniting democratic allies, industry, civil society and those working with AI every day. This coalition could build something lasting: shared principles like transparency, fairness and accountability. Shared tools — open datasets, regional innovation hubs and incentives for responsible development. A blueprint for the kind of world we want AI to help build. Imagine if companies were recognized not just for breakthroughs, but for building systems that reduce burnout, stabilize supply chains and support everyday workers. That's not science fiction. That's a policy choice. Some early steps are promising. Congress is exploring bipartisan legislation on AI research and deepfakes. But what's missing is a coordinated roadmap — one that drives innovation, protects economic stability and brings democratic partners together to shape a future where technology strengthens, rather than destabilizes, our institutions. If the U.S. doesn't lead, others will. Authoritarian regimes are already using AI — not to serve people, but to surveil and control them. When Vladimir Putin said in 2017, 'Whoever leads in AI will rule the world,' he was telling the truth. I don't write this as an American. But like many around the world, I have seen how U.S. leadership can set the tone — not through dominance, but by offering direction rooted in freedom, fairness and trust. And AI desperately needs that guidance. In medicine, we don't let even the most gifted surgical trainees operate solo on day one — not because they lack potential, but because safety depends on oversight and structure. AI demands the same — not suppression, but stewardship. We've been here before, on the edge of revolutions we didn't fully understand. This time, we can be more prepared. We can build the foundation for a future where innovation and human dignity grow together. The decisions made today won't just shape AI. They will shape the kind of world we live in, and the one we leave behind. And because Washington holds unmatched influence — economic, military and technological — its leadership matters more than ever. Not to dominate the future, but to help humanity rise with it. Dr. Debakant Jena is an orthopedic surgeon, an assistant professor at the University of Calgary and a first-generation immigrant to Canada. He has written extensively on Canadian policy, immigration and international relations.
USA Today
15 minutes ago
- USA Today
Epstein grand jury records to remain sealed, but judge says government can release info
A judge denied the Justice Department's bid to unseal records from the grand jury that indicted the late financier Jeffrey Epstein on sex trafficking charges, saying the material paled in comparison to the trove of records the government has about the case but is not releasing. Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Richard Berman's Aug. 20 decision came as President Donald Trump has sought to quell discontent from his conservative base of supporters over his administration's decision not to release files of the case. The judge wrote that it would be more logical for the government to directly release the vast amount of information it has collected from its investigation into Epstein than to petition the court to release the more limited grand jury materials, whose secrecy is protected by law. "The Government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70 odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials," Berman wrote. "The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct." The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump, a Republican, had campaigned for a second term in 2024 with promises to make public Epstein-related files, and accused Democrats of covering up the truth. But in July, the Justice Department declined to release any more material from its investigation of the case and said a previously touted Epstein client list did not exist, angering Trump's supporters. Evidence seen and heard by grand juries, which operate behind closed doors to prevent interference in criminal investigations, cannot be released without a judge's approval. In July, Trump instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek court approval for the release of grand jury material from Epstein's case. The grand jury that indicted Epstein heard from just one witness, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department said in a court filing in July. Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. He had pleaded not guilty. His death in jail and his friendships with the wealthy and powerful sparked conspiracy theories that other prominent people were involved in his alleged crimes and that he was murdered. The New York City chief medical examiner determined that Epstein's death was a suicide by hanging. On Aug. 11, a different Manhattan-based judge, Paul Engelmayer, denied a similar request by the Justice Department to unseal grand jury testimony and exhibits from the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime girlfriend. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence following her 2021 conviction for recruiting underage girls for Epstein to abuse. Engelmayer wrote that the public would not learn anything new from the release of materials from Maxwell's grand jury because much of the evidence was made public at her monthlong trial four years ago. The grand jury testimony contained no evidence of others besides Epstein and Maxwell who had sexual contact with minors, Engelmayer wrote. Maxwell had pleaded not guilty. After losing an appeal, she has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review her case. In July, a Florida judge rejected the administration's request to unseal grand jury records from federal investigations there into Epstein in 2005 and 2007. Epstein served a 13-month sentence after pleading guilty in 2008 to a state-level prostitution charge as part of a deal now widely regarded as too lenient. (Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Daniel Wallis and David Gregorio)
