Federal SNAP, Medicaid cuts could harm Alabamians and the state budget, advocates say
The U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., is pictured on Wednesday, May 7, 2025. Federal cuts to SNAP and Medicaid could significantly strain Alabama's budget, but Sen. Greg Albritton, R-Atmore, chair of the Senate Finance and Taxation General Fund committee urged caution due to the bill's uncertainty, despite critics calling the measures "cruel." (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
A budget bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives could impose significant financial and social challenges in Alabama.
The measure could cut food assistance and Medicaid program funding that serve hundreds of thousands of people with low incomes in Alabama, and potentially cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars annually. It's still unclear if it will pass the U.S. Senate.
The legislation, which passed the House largely along party lines, proposes funding reductions to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Medicaid. Experts and state officials warn the cuts could lead to increased hunger, loss of health care coverage and other economic consequences across the state, particularly in vulnerable rural communities.
'There are three things in the bill, as it came out of the House, that are problematic for SNAP,' said Carol Gundlach, a policy analyst with Alabama Arise, an organization working on poverty issues. 'The first — and the biggest and the most important one — is it shifts cost-sharing to the states.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Historically, states have paid 50% of administrative costs for SNAP, but the benefits themselves have been 100% federally funded. The new bill, Gundlach said, would increase Alabama's share of administrative expenses to 75%, costing the state an estimated additional $35 million.
More concerning, she said, is the proposal to shift part of the benefit cost to the states. Gundlach said Alabama could be 'on the hook for about 15% of the actual benefit cost of SNAP,' amounting to at least $254 million annually.
'That would also presumably have to come out of the General Fund, and that's every year, every single year,' Gundlach said.
The proposed SNAP changes also include an expansion of work requirements for parents with children over the age of 7. This could force parents to 'jump through a bunch of hoops in order to keep your SNAP benefits, or they're going to cut your family SNAP benefits,' she said.
The bill could prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from recalculating the base amount of SNAP benefits in the future, a measure Gundlach said would increase hunger as benefits fail to keep pace with food costs.
'Any way this works, people are going to lose SNAP benefits,' she said, warning that in a worst-case scenario, Alabama could walk away from the SNAP program completely, leaving nearly 1 million people dependent on SNAP, or about 20% of Alabama's population, without food assistance.
Debbie Smith, campaign director for Arise's Cover Alabama, said Alabama's 'bare bones' Medicaid program also faces pressures. According to Smith, the bill could cost Alabama '$324 million, I think, over 10 years' for Medicaid, translating to roughly $30 million annually. This could increase Alabama's Medicaid spending per resident by about 15%.
'Any cut to Medicaid is concerning when you have the bare bones program that we have. We really can't afford to cut anywhere,' Smith said. '$30 million for a year … that's still a big impact on our state budget.'
The bill would also eliminate the federal incentive designed to encourage states like Alabama to expand Medicaid, a significant concern for Smith.
'(The bill) sunsets that incentive, Jan. 1, 2026, so there's no time for anybody to take advantage of it before it sunsets,' Smith said.
Even without state expansion, the bill is expected to cause coverage losses. Smith said Arise projects 53,000 people could lose their Medicaid coverage. Combined with the potential expiration of enhanced subsidies for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace, 170,000 Alabamians could lose health insurance, leading to a $592.89 million increase in uncompensated care costs for the state, according to a Center for American Progress analysis.
The House bill also proposes reducing retroactive Medicaid coverage from three months to one month.
The combined potential costs from SNAP and Medicaid changes could put Alabama's General Fund in a challenging position, but Sen. Greg Albritton, R-Atmore, chair of the Senate Finance and Taxation General Fund committee, said it's still early in the process and that it's hard to plan for a bill that could still change.
'We know things are going to get tough, OK, but we don't know how tough they're going to be,' Albritton said.
Albritton said lawmakers had trouble finding an increase of about $220 million for Medicaid this past legislative session and he expects another significant increase next year. 'Between the changes of SNAP and other changes, that's going to put more pressure on us,' he said.
Albritton, who has often voiced concerns about federal program funding being pulled, suggested Alabama is somewhat prepared because it hasn't expanded Medicaid.
'That's something — at least one of the few things we don't have to worry about right now,' he said.
Arise described the bill's measures as 'cruel.' Gundlach described the situation as 'making parents choose between adequate care for their children and being able to put food on the table. If there is any definition of cruel, I don't know what else it could possibly be.'
Albritton pushed back against such characterizations, calling the term 'alarmist' and blaming partisan politics. He chose a more cautious approach.
'All I can do at this point is sit and watch and wait,' he said. 'There's a lot that we do not know, and we're running around trying to fix something that we don't know what the problem is.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
San Francisco leaders blast Trump for trying to erase gay rights icon Harvey Milk's name from ship
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Leaders in San Francisco are blasting the Trump administration for stripping the name of gay rights activist Harvey Milk from a U.S. naval ship, and especially during Pride Month, when people gather to celebrate the LGBTQ+ community. Milk is a revered figure in San Francisco history, a former city supervisor and gay rights advocate who was fatally shot along with Mayor George Moscone in 1978 by disgruntled former supervisor Dan White. Just last month, California marked what would have been Milk's 95th birthday with proclamations heralding his authenticity, kindness and calls for unity. He served for four years in the Navy during the Korean War, before he was forced out for being gay. Milk later moved to San Francisco, where he became one of the first out gay politicians in the world with his election to the Board of Supervisors in 1977. Cleve Jones, a close friend and LGBTQ+ activist, dismissed the renaming as an attempt by the Trump administration to distract the American public from far more serious concerns, including the ongoing war in Gaza and looming cuts to Medicaid and Social Security. "Yes, this is cruel and petty and stupid, and yes, it's an insult to my community," Jones said. 'I would be willing to wager a considerable sum that American families sitting around that proverbial kitchen table this evening are not going to be talking about how much safer they feel now that Harvey's name is going to be taken off that ship.' The Pentagon has not confirmed news of the renaming, a highly rare move, but unnamed officials say the change was laid out in an internal memo. It is in keeping with attempts by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the broader Trump administration to purge all programs, policies, books and social media mentions of references to diversity, equity and inclusion. A new name has not yet been selected for the USNS Harvey Milk. Milk's nephew, Stuart Milk, said in a phone call Wednesday that he and the Harvey Milk Foundation have reached out to the Pentagon, which confirmed there is a proposed name change on the table. 'And our hope is that the recommendation is put aside, but if it's not, it will be a rallying cry not just for our community but for all minority communities,' said Stuart Milk, who is executive chair of the foundation, adding that his uncle always said that gay rights, and those of other marginalized communities, required constant vigilance. 'So I don't think he'd be surprised," Milk said, 'but he'd be calling on us to remain vigilant, to stay active.' Elected officials, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, called the move a shameful attempt to erase the contributions of LGBTQ+ people and an insult to fundamental American values of honoring veterans and those who worked to build a better country. Pelosi and Newsom are both San Francisco Democrats. Newsom took aim at Hegseth, calling the attempt 'A cowardly act from a man desperate to distract us from his inability to lead the Pentagon" on the social platform X. The USNS Harvey Milk was named in 2016 by then-Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who said at the time that the John Lewis-class of oilers would be named after leaders who fought for civil and human rights. Sean Penn portrayed Milk in an Oscar-winning 2008 movie depicting his audacious rise in politics and his death by a supervisor who cast the sole "no" vote on his legislation banning discrimination based on sexual orientation. While the renaming attempt is rare, the Biden administration also changed the names of two Navy ships in 2023 as part of the effort to remove Confederate names from U.S. military installations.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senior care, already challenged by pandemic and Boomers aging, needs Medicaid
PACE, the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, centers provide government-funded medical care and social services to people older than 55, and they are a growing alternative to nursing home care. In the photo, physical therapist Brad Ellis, standing, works with George Raines on mobility issues at a PACE center in Tennessee. (Anna Claire Vollers/Stateline) Caring for Oregon's seniors has been my life's work. It began when I was a high school student in Hillsboro, and it continues today in my role leading Arete Living, an Oregon-based company that provides assisted living and memory care facilities. Our caregivers and staff provide essential care to hundreds of seniors and people with disabilities every day in all corners of the state. We meet people where they are, and we provide the care they need to sustain their independence and quality of life. The work is hard, but it is also incredibly rewarding and fulfilling. The last five years in senior care have been challenging to say the least. We faced a global pandemic and worked tirelessly to keep our residents safe and supported. And yet, with the pandemic behind us, I can say that I have never been more worried about the future of long term care in Oregon. At the federal level, discussions around cutting Medicaid are rampant and incredibly worrisome. At the state level, difficult decisions are being made about what programs to fund and what programs to cut. I am deeply concerned about what cuts to healthcare, or flat investments, will mean for our seniors as more Baby Boomers age into the years of their life when they need care, whether it is in an assisted living facility or in their own home. The increasing number of aging Oregonians who have more complex care needs than past generations, along with record-high inflation in medical supplies, food services, labor, and other critical health care components, means that the cost to provide care in Oregon is higher than it has ever been. These issues are felt more deeply in our rural and frontier communities where fewer caregivers are available and health care deserts already exist. Older Oregonians who have spent their lives in these communities should not have to move away from family and friends simply to find care. But Oregon is seeing assisted living and memory care facilities close their doors amid the combined pressures of more regulation, higher costs, and an underfunded Medicaid system. I know that lawmakers have hard choices to make, and I do not envy their positions. But I urge them to think about the seniors in their districts who have worked hard and contributed to Oregon's beauty and success. They deserve a long term care system that is well-funded and thriving. That will only happen when lawmakers step up and invest in Medicaid for our most vulnerable seniors, the same individuals we serve every day at Arete facilities and in others around the state. They are counting on us. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Top Dems claim 51K people will die annually from the 'big beautiful bill' and its Obamacare freeze
Two top Democrats claimed the Republicans' budget reconciliation bill and its proposal to let enhanced Obamacare credits expire will cause the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans. Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, along with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., announced findings that an estimated 51,000 Americans could die each year due to Republican-led changes to the federal healthcare system and the broader reconciliation bill. The national debt — which measures what the U.S. owes its creditors — fell to $36,214,400,664,854.53 as of June 3rd, according to the latest numbers published by the Treasury Department. That is down about $1.4 billion from the figure reported the previous day. Wyden called the "stakes" of the 'big, beautiful bill' debate "truly life and death," as a statement from his office read that "a new analysis estimates that more than 51,000 people will die per year as a direct result of the Republican reconciliation bill, and their refusal to extend Affordable Care Act premium tax credits." "Taking away health insurance and benefits like home care and mental healthcare from seniors, people with disabilities, kids, and working families will be deadly," Wyden said. "This analysis shows the dire consequences of moving ahead with this morally bankrupt effort," he said, referring to a study he and Sanders asked the University of Pennsylvania and Yale to conduct. Read On The Fox News App Liberals Blame Big Beautiful Bill's Loss On Dying Dems The Democrats employed the Philadelphia college's Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, as well as the Yale School of Public Health's Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis. "Let's be clear," Sanders said in a statement, "The Republican reconciliation bill which makes massive cuts to Medicaid in order to pay for huge tax breaks for billionaires is not just bad public policy." "It is not just immoral. It is a death sentence for struggling Americans." "[N]ot only will some of the most vulnerable people throughout our country suffer, but tens of thousands will die. We cannot allow that to happen," Sanders added. Winners, Losers And Grab-bags From House Gop's Narrow Passage Of 'Big, Beautiful Bill' In a copy of the study posted on UPenn's website, economics and health-centric academics found 7.7 million people would be estimated to lose Medicaid or Obamacare coverage by 2034, and 1.38 million "dual-eligible beneficiaries" would find themselves "disenroll[ed]." In a statement, Wyden cited figures of 11,300 deaths from the loss of Medicaid or Obamacare coverage, 18,200 deaths from the loss of Medicaid coverage among low-income beneficiaries and 13,000 deaths of Medicaid enrollees in nursing homes due to the rollback of a "nursing home minimum staffing rule" from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Wyden attributed an additional projected 8,811 deaths per year to the "failure to extend the enhanced [Obamacare] premium tax credits," citing the academics' analysis. Fox News Digital reached out to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., -- who spearheaded the "big, beautiful bill" in the House -- for comment. A representative for UPenn told Fox News Digital the university sent the results of their analysis to Wyden and Sanders in response to a request on the matter. "The estimates of mortality that are contained in the letter were based on peer-review research that was done independently and well before their request," the UPenn representative said. "The senators' request was to take the research results and translate into the estimated number of deaths."Original article source: Top Dems claim 51K people will die annually from the 'big beautiful bill' and its Obamacare freeze