Oklahoma kids in need can get $120 for groceries this summer — but only on tribal lands
For the second year in a row, Oklahoma's government will not participate in a federal summer food program worth $120 per eligible child.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's SUN Bucks program, also known as Summer EBT, doles out funds to state and tribal programs, that in turn give residents preloaded cards to buy food while children are on summer break.
Most states have accepted the federal funds and will be providing EBT cards that are worth $120 for the entire summer. Children who qualify for free and reduced school lunches are automatically eligible to receive the funds.
While Oklahoma will not take part in the program, a handful of tribal nations in the state will, meaning some Oklahoma families may still be eligible for the funds.
Gov. Kevin Stitt said in 2024 that he turned down the funds because Oklahoma was 'fully capable of serving children and students without a federal program that has floundered in other states.' He also cited the elimination of Oklahoma's grocery tax as another reason why the state wouldn't be accepting those federal funds.
Oklahoma recently eliminated the collection of a 4.5% sales tax on most groceries. Only 10 states still require sales tax to be collected on groceries, but most U.S. states that have eliminated their grocery tax also participate in Summer EBT.
'Oklahomans don't look to the government for answers, we look to our communities,' a statement from the governor's office said last year ahead of the 2025 participation deadline.
Stitt named several programs that provide food year-round, including the Oklahoma State Department of Education's Summer Food Program, Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma's Summer Feeding Program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Be A Neighbor Initiative, which is a list of community resources.
The state Education Department's Summer Food Program provides bagged lunches that can be picked up at sites like parks, schools, playgrounds, gymnasiums, community centers, churches, apartment complexes or day camps.
Despite the efforts made by the state, nonprofits and tribes, and despite agriculture being one of the pillars of the state's economic output, Oklahoma remains one of the worst states when it comes to food security.
According to Feed the Children, Oklahoma ranks fifth when it comes to the percentage of households that do not have access, at all times, to enough food for an active, healthy life.
"The state of childhood hunger in Oklahoma has not gotten any better," said Chris Bernard, president and CEO of the nonprofit Hunger Free Oklahoma. "It's still between one-in-four and one-in-five kids, and what we're actually seeing now is pressures on families are growing. Things cost more and wages haven't kept up with those costs."
And with the Trump administration again in power, there is likely to be significant changes to the federal government's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which has historically been known as "food stamps." A Fox News report this week quoted officials saying they have a "massive plan" to reform SNAP in light of Trump's quest to slash government spending.
"There are fears of everything getting cut right now," Bernard said with a nervous chuckle.
The administration has yet to provide details about how it plans to reform SNAP, but reformers have pushed for increasing work requirements and forcing states to cover a percentage of the benefit cost. Oklahoma residents currently receive over $1 billion each year to buy food, so even a 10% matching requirement would mean the state government would have to find $100 million annually.
"States that tend to need these benefits the most also tend to be the states that spend the least on social services and cut budgets rather than increase them," Bernard said.
Only 12 states will not participate this year, including Oklahoma. However, five Oklahoma tribes have signed up for the program:
Cherokee Nation
Chickasaw Nation
Choctaw Nation
Muscogee Creek Nation
Otoe-Missouria Tribe
The tribes can only provide Summer EBT to children living inside their respective reservations or jurisdictional areas, which mostly includes eastern and southern Oklahoma.
Tribal membership is not required to access the program, however, so any student who is eligible for free and reduced lunches at schools within tribal boundaries can receive funds.
"If people want to make sure every kid in Oklahoma has access, not just kids who live on tribal lands, they need to be calling their state legislators and telling them it's something they want to see," Bernard said.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Oklahoma tribes offer summer EBT after state declines funds again
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Arkansans getting government assistance ask senators to vote down ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – Arkansans receiving government assistance are asking Arkansas senators in Washington to vote against President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act.' Chanting 'The big ugly bill will kill,' about a dozen people spoke out against changes to Medicaid, SNAP, and HUD Housing in the 1,000-page bill while arguing that health, food and housing are human rights. Big, beautiful bill heads to the Senate Norma Huffman is a member of Arkansas Community Organizations, the group that organized a visit to the Washington D.C. and Little Rock offices of Senators Cotton and Boozman on Wednesday. 'We are here to try to convince the head honcho of this office to vote no,' Huffman stated. Huffman is a single parent and says she is permanently disabled. She is on Medicaid, SNAP, and housing assistance for her needs, and she fears what the future will hold if Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' becomes law. 'We have to fight for ourselves because we know for a fact nobody else is going to,' Huffman argued. The act proposes substantial cuts, restrictions, and added requirements for Medicaid and SNAP, shifting more costs to states, limiting eligibility, and repealing support programs. For HUD, the bill removes funding for cost-cutting green retrofitting. Hattie Temple says any change could be a triple blow to her and hundreds of thousands more. 'It makes our deficit higher. It doesn't make any sense. Everything that he (Trump) cuts is to keep the folks down that are already down,' Temple stated. Trump 'disappointed' by Musk criticism of 'big, beautiful bill' Senator John Boozman provided this statement when asked about the visit: 'Work requirements for able-bodied adults are a fair and effective way to ensure SNAP and Medicaid benefits are directed to those who truly need them. By implementing commonsense policies, we can strengthen the programs while eliminating waste, reducing federal spending and promoting accountability.' -Senator John Boozman At the time of this report, Senator Cotton's office has not replied to requests for comment. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Performative Austerity Vanishes As GOP Flees Town Before Trump's Dictator-Style Parade
Hardly any Republicans in the Senate want to be caught dead at President Trump's big boy parade this weekend. The two most powerful Republicans in Congress — House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) — are not going to come. Johnson's office claims he has other plans, Thune's office says he's engaged with constituents back home on Saturday. Reporters from HuffPost, Politico, the Wall Street Journal and others all tried to pin a handful of Republicans down on this issue in pieces published this week. Many said they weren't coming, offering shrugs of excuses for their absence. Most refused to even touch questions surrounding the price tag on the whole spectacle: $45 million in taxpayer funds for Trump to roll out a bunch of military tanks and show off America's lavishly unmatched spending on weaponry, all in honor of Trump's 79th birthday (and the 250th anniversary of the Army). It, of course, all comes on a week of growing public pushback, not just to Trump's mass deportation agenda but to his use of the military as a prop, escalating mostly peaceful protests and infringing on the power of politicians who lead cities he doesn't like. Bookending the week of overreach on state sovereignty with a garish military parade — which will involve rolling out 150 military vehicles and more than 50 aircraft into the streets of the capital — has at least one Republican comparing it to a scene out of North Korea. Most of the Republicans who spoke to the media about their planned absence suggested they had other plans, or indicated that their decision to not RSVP had nothing to do with the outlandish cost of the event designed specifically for Trump's ego. 'I don't like spending on anything, but if you're going to splurge on something, this is probably not a bad thing,' Johnson told WSJ this week, while avoiding questions about what he's doing on Saturday instead. Ironically, Johnson is the Republican in the Senate most vocally opposed to the sweeping reconciliation package that'll fund much of Trump's fiscal agenda if it passes the upper chamber in coming weeks — primarily due to his belief that it doesn't do enough to cut federal spending on social safety net programs like Medicaid, which are, as I get into below, already on the chopping block. For those observing at home for at least the past two decades, austerity matters most, to this group of politicians, when a Democrat is in the White House. And it matters the least when the wannabe dictator head of the Republican Party decides to throw himself a multi-million dollar bday bash. As they have for decades, Republicans in recent months have attempted to spin their devastating proposed cuts to Medicaid and supplemental nutrition programs like SNAP as necessary 'reforms' to cut out the amorphous 'waste, fraud and abuse' supposedly baked in to these programs. They've also championed the implementation of so-called common sense 'work requirements' in order to be eligible for the coverage (which conveniently ignores the fact that a significant number of those on Medicaid are either people with disabilities or children). This spin is, of course, spin, as TPM has reported, and all the changes listed as provisions in the House's reconciliation package will result in some 16 million Americans losing their health care. By other estimates (from researchers at Yale University and University of Pennsylvania) 51,000 people may die annually as a direct result of proposed cuts to the program. It's real and devastating stuff. Republicans have historically, famously spun their efforts to gut social safety net programs under the same guise of 'reforms' that House Republicans are using now. They promise to never touch Medicare or Social Security, while salivating for the very types of 'reforms' to the social safety net that may soon become law, that are stuffed into the House's latest reconciliation package. In one of his last truly eloquent moments as president, Biden was able to back Republicans into a corner during his 2023 State of the Union address, and got the Republican conference to agree, on live TV, to drop their at-the-time-latest effort to sunset Medicare and Social Security every five years. New polling from Quinnipiac University today shows that Republican efforts to obscure what exactly it is they're doing to Medicaid may not have been as successful as it has been in the past — or perhaps the opposition party's telegraphing of the horrors to voters actually broke through this time. Per Quinnipiac: As the Senate debates the GOP tax and spending bill titled One Big Beautiful Bill Act and President Donald Trump pushes for a July 4 deadline to sign it, voters 53 – 27 percent oppose the legislation, with 20 percent not offering an opinion, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll of registered voters released today. I mean, who among us doesn't do a little self deprecative soul searching at such an hour. According to some reports, Trump and the world's richest man actually spoke on the phone late on Monday night after their messy, public breakup last week. Musk posted the tweet early Wednesday. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) on Tuesday night succinctly articulated the longstanding punditry norms that have Democrats policing the largely organic Los Angeles protests: 'It is 100% carrying water for the opposition to participate in this collective delusion that Dems for some reason need to answer for every teen who throws a rock rather than hold the Trump admin accountable for intentionally creating chaos and breaking the law to stoke violence.' One of the most dependable formulations in political commentary is that Democrats are responsible for everyone vaguely, even just aesthetically, associated with the left, while Republican politicians can directly fraternize with neo-Nazis and still claim ideological distance. — Kate Riga How Some Very Bad Luck Has Made It Even Harder To Rein In Trump Passing Big Beautiful Bill Would Mean 'Effectively Dismantling' Obamacare, Gutting Inflation Reduction Act New episode of the Josh Marshall Podcast: Ep. 377: Protest Politics Stephen Miller Demanded ICE Target Home Depots Judge Bars Trump Administration From Detaining Mahmoud Khalil National Guard troops have temporarily detained civilians in LA protests, commander says Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to deploy National Guard across the state in response to protests
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Would Boost Subsidies for Rich Farmers
It should be clear by now that, despite the assurances from President Donald Trump and his allies in government, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month—not only won't reduce the federal budget deficit but will in fact increase the nation's debt load by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. Given that Trump came into office promising to cut federal spending, it's worth looking at how Trump's bill does the opposite of what he and other Republicans say it does. And one of the more egregious things it does is boost corporate welfare for wealthy farmers. "The government provides agricultural subsidies—monetary payments and other types of support—to farmers or agribusinesses," says the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). "While some subsidies are given to promote specific farming practices, others focus on research and development, conservation practices, disaster aid, marketing, nutrition assistance, risk mitigation, and more." "In reality, this support is highly skewed toward the five major 'program' commodities of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice," according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an environmental advocacy organization. "Despite the rhetoric of 'preserving the family farm,' the vast majority of farmers do not benefit from federal farm subsidy programs and most of the subsidies go to the largest and most financially secure farm operations." The new bill will only make the problem worse: According to an analysis by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the bill "would increase agriculture-facing programs spending by $56.6 billion over the next decade," of which "$52.3 billion is tied to enhancements in the farm safety net." That "farm safety net" comprises most agricultural subsidy spending in any given year. It includes price and revenue guarantees for certain crops, ensuring farmers earn a set minimum on staples like corn and soybeans, as well as crop insurance assistance, covering up to 60 percent of farmers' insurance premiums in the event of price declines or poor harvests. The programs are a bad deal for taxpayers—indeed, for anybody but the very wealthiest agribusinesses. "Just in the last 10 years, crop insurance agents and the 14 companies the USDA allows to sell and service crop insurance policies…received almost $33.3 billion from the federal Crop Insurance Program," EWG Midwest director Anne Schechinger wrote in 2023. "In some years, up to one-third of crop insurance payments are made to companies and agents, not farmers." The new bill would make the program even more generous, tying payouts to inflation and putting taxpayers on the hook for even more insurance company operating costs. The bill would also increase the price minimums for many staple crops, though the increases for those grown in southern U.S. states go up exponentially: While corn would go up by 18 percent, and wheat and soybeans by more than 70 percent each, minimum prices for seed cotton, peanuts, and rice—grown primarily in the southern states—would each more than double, with the minimum price of rice going up 185 percent. Price minimums inherently distort the market, causing farmers to prioritize favored crops even if others would be better suited to the growing conditions—after all, if you're guaranteed a minimum price for what you sell, and you're covered for what doesn't grow, what do you have to lose? At the same time, "subsidies increase land prices, which benefits wealthy landowners at the expense of the many farmers who rent," writes Nan Swift of the R Street Institute. "Young farmers can't afford to rent or buy land at inflated prices. Likewise, young farmers often have smaller farms that don't benefit from the primary federal subsidy programs." Not only does the "Big Beautiful Bill" keep these programs intact, it expands them; it even introduces an "insurance pilot program" for "poultry growers." "The farm subsidy increases in the reconciliation bill are brazen. The GOP lavished the biggest subsidy increases on GOP parts of the country," writes Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute. "More importantly, in a supposed spending reform bill, the GOP doesn't just spare millionaire farmers from cuts, they aggressively expand inefficient farm giveaways by $57 billion." The post Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Would Boost Subsidies for Rich Farmers appeared first on
