Donald Trump's SNAP Benefit Cut Plans Suffer Blow
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A plan by Republicans to shift a portion of federal food stamp costs to state governments suffered a major setback after the Senate parliamentarian found it would violate chamber rules.
Why It Matters
The blocked provision was an attempt to reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), affecting more than 40 million low-income Americans who rely on food aid. The shift would have transferred major SNAP costs to the states, requiring them to pay at least 5 percent—and potentially more—of benefit costs, which analysts warned could result in significant cuts to nutrition support.
The parliamentarian's decision places additional pressure on the bill's champions to find alternative means to fund tax cuts without imperiling food assistance, Medicaid, or other federal support programs.
What To Know
The provision, a cornerstone of Republican efforts to offset the costs of President Donald Trump's multitrillion-dollar tax and spending legislation, has been ruled inadmissible under Senate rules, sending GOP leaders scrambling to revise the mega bill.
The ruling, issued by Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, came as the package prepared for a vote. While her opinions are advisory, they are rarely ignored in lawmaking practice. Republican lawmakers are now searching for new savings as they continue to advance Trump's legislative priorities despite the setback.
Activists with the Poor People's Campaign protest against spending reductions across Medicaid, food stamps and federal aid in President Donald Trump's spending and tax bill being worked on by Senate Republicans this week, outside the...
Activists with the Poor People's Campaign protest against spending reductions across Medicaid, food stamps and federal aid in President Donald Trump's spending and tax bill being worked on by Senate Republicans this week, outside the Supreme Court in Washington D.C. on Monday, June 2, 2025. More
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Parliamentarian Ruling and Byrd Rule Compliance
MacDonough declared the SNAP cost-sharing plan noncompliant with the chamber's budget reconciliation rules, specifically the Byrd Rule, which bars certain policy measures from being attached to budget bills. The proposal would have shifted billions of dollars in SNAP costs from the federal government to the states, creating a new fiscal obligation for state governments and threatening coverage for millions.
House Passes Bill with GOP SNAP Cuts
The House passed the broader tax and spending package along party lines in May 2025, including a provision to require states to fund at least 5 percent of SNAP benefits and more for high error rates. The House-passed measure's SNAP provision was projected to save about $128 billion. Republican leaders had hoped these savings would help offset the bill's $4.5 trillion in tax cuts and new spending.
Other Key Provisions
Beyond SNAP, the package includes an extension and expansion of individual and business tax cuts, new work requirements for Medicaid recipients, cuts to federal health and nutrition programs, increased military and border security funding, and the elimination of taxes on tips for service workers.
GOP Paths Forward
Republican leaders, including Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman of Arkansas, said they were exploring options to keep the legislation on track while still delivering savings elsewhere. Options range from modifying the disputed SNAP provision to removing it entirely or risking a procedural vote requiring 60 votes—an unlikely scenario in the current Senate.
Impact on SNAP Recipients
The plan would have expanded work requirements to older adults (up to age 65), a component that remains in the bill for now. Democrats and anti-hunger advocates warned of significant harm to those in need, with more than 3 million individuals projected to lose food stamp access based on Congressional Budget Office estimates.
Additional Rulings Expected
The Senate parliamentarian is also expected to rule on other elements in the bill, including limits on immigrant eligibility for nutrition aid and changes to federal agencies, with further decisions likely to shape the final legislation.
What People Are Saying
Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said: "We will keep fighting to protect families in need," opposing shifts in SNAP costs to states, which she said would result in significant benefit cuts.
Arkansas Senator John Boozman, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Republicans are "exploring options" to comply with Senate rules, while supporting those reliant on SNAP.
What Happens Next
Senate Republicans are expected to revise the bill to comply with the parliamentarian's rulings or drop the contested SNAP provisions. Further decisions from the adviser on other elements of the megabill are anticipated before any final Senate vote.
This article contains reporting from The Associated Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
32 minutes ago
- New York Post
For a change, Primary Day won't decide NYC's next mayor
Don't expect a final answer on New York's future when the Primary Day polls close Tuesday night. Between absentee ballots, ranked-choice voting and the city's glacial vote-transfer process, it may take weeks to know who won the Democratic nomination. But even once the party's mayoral candidate is officially named, voters may be in for a surprise the city hasn't seen in decades. 4 Zohran Mamdani could realistically run on the Working Families Party is he loses Tuesday's primary. Robert Miller In a deep-blue city where Democrats are used to wrapping up elections in June by default, this year might be different. Advertisement That's because the Democratic frontrunners, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, may both appear on the general-election ballot regardless of Tuesday's outcome. Cuomo already secured his own 'Fight and Deliver' party line. Mamdani could keep himself in contention on the leftist Working Families Party ticket if he falls short. Advertisement After all, the party already crowned him as its No. 1 rank for mayor, suggesting its leaders are comfortable with the pro-intifada firebrand carrying their banner in November. 4 Democratic mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo speaking at a press conference in the Bronx on June 21, 2025. Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto/Shutterstock If both Cuomo and Mamdani continue past the primary, they'll likely face Mayor Eric Adams (who's seeking reelection on his own independent line), Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa and lesser-known independent Jim Walden. That would create a volatile five-way general election with overlapping coalitions, unpredictable math in a five-way split of the vote and what could be Gotham's first truly competitive multi-candidate general mayoral election since 1969. Advertisement For once, New Yorkers might actually get a real choice come November. But no matter how things shake out in the coming weeks, one thing is certain: Big Apple voters are fed up. A recent Manhattan Institute poll finds 62% of likely 2025 voters say the city is on the wrong track. Advertisement That number isn't just ambient gloom — it translates into sharp concerns about safety and quality of life. Most New Yorkers want more police on the streets. Even more support cracking down on fare evasion, open-air drug use and vandalism. Democrats are no exception — a majority agree. These aren't abstract culture-war issues. They're everyday frustrations in neighborhoods that experience chronic public disorder, even as citywide crime rates begin to tick down. That's the context behind Cuomo's lead heading into Primary Day. He's running against absurdities — government-run grocery stores, letting mentally ill homeless people take over the subways and a far-left political movement that seems intent on fanning the flames of antisemitism. Who is Cuomo's base? Older women, outer-borough moderates and black and Latino voters. 4 New York Mayor Eric Adams stands silently as NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch speaks during a press conference on Public Safety at City Hall on June 03, 2025 in New York City. Getty Images Among primary voters who rank crime as their top issue, 71% pick Cuomo first; Mamdani gets just 6%. Advertisement Cuomo's critics aren't wrong — he has baggage. But Democratic voters aren't rallying around him out of adoration or nostalgia. Rather, they see him as the only viable option left who seems remotely capable of running the largest city government in the nation. Advertisement Mamdani, by contrast, is a millennial socialist with an ideological fanbase and little broader appeal. He's activated highly educated white voters and the under-35 crowd cloistered in the city's most progressive geographic enclaves along the East River. But appealing to that coalition alone won't let you sail to Gracie Mansion. 4 Guardian Angels founder and mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa attends a small protest outside a vacant lot at 2481 McDonald Avenue on Sunday, April 6, 2025. Luiz C. Ribeiro for New York Post Advertisement For years, New York's left believed it could define the terms of debate by default. This race has exposed the limits of that theory. Voters aren't rejecting progressivism because they watch too much Fox News — they're rejecting it because they live here and see its disastrous results. They've watched their neighborhoods deteriorate while elected officials chase viral moments and utopian plans. (Remember then-Mayor Bill de Blasio's promise to end the Tale of Two Cities?) Meanwhile, Sliwa and Adams both appeal to less liberal, working-class voters who disdain the progressive left. Advertisement If both campaigns go the distance, they risk splitting that vote — unless something, or someone, steps in to consolidate it. One possibility? Donald J. Trump. The president, who won 30% of the NYC vote in 2024, could intervene somehow, say by endorsing one of them — and maybe offering the other a federal appointment to take him off the board, clearing the field for a single 'law-and-order' candidate. Something like that isn't guaranteed. But in this topsy-turvy political environment, nothing can be ruled out. A creative political maneuver could redraw the entire race. The potential shakeup should not be underestimated. Tuesday may be the first vote — but it won't be the final word. As the general-election season begins, the question now is who can win over the city's exhausted middle. Voters don't want a revolution, just a mayor who can stretch their budgets and keep the streets safe and clean. That may not be a glamorous mandate. But it's the one that matters. Jesse Arm is the executive director of external affairs and chief of staff at the Manhattan Institute.
Time Magazine
36 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
World Leaders React After U.S. Strikes Iran: Gravely Alarmed
The world is reacting after President Donald Trump authorized U.S. strikes on three three key Iranian nuclear sites, joining Israel in its conflict with Iran. 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,' Trump said in an address to the nation on Saturday night. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Iran has since responded with a grave new warning, threatening 'everlasting consequences' and calling for an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council. Read More: Iran Delivers Furious Warning, Speaks of 'Unprecedented Level of Danger and Chaos' After 'Heinous' U.S. Strikes As the world awaits to see what Iran's next step will be, global leaders are reacting to the news of the strikes. European Commission European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen posted on social media, saying that 'the negotiating table is the only place to end this crisis.' Von der Leyen maintained that 'Iran must never acquire the bomb,' and said the Middle Eastern country should now 'engage in a credible diplomatic solution.' United Nations Secretary General of the United Nations (U.N.) António Guterres shared a strong statement on social media, stating that he was 'gravely alarmed' by the strikes. He called for de-escalation and shared concerns that the conflict could cause a 'spiral of chaos.' 'This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge—and a direct threat to international peace and security,' Guterres said. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate and to uphold their obligations under the U.N. Charter and other rules of international law. He continued by saying there is 'no military solution,' and that he believes the only way forward is 'diplomacy.' Argentina Argentina's President Javier Milei, a right-wing ally of Trump's in Latin America, has yet to comment specifically on the U.S. strikes, but he re-posted a message in the early hours of the morning on June 22. 'Today is a great day for Western civilization,' read the post, authored by Argentine billionaire and businessman Marcos Galperin. Australia The Australian government, led by Anthony Albanese, has called for de-escalation but its statement, issued by a spokesperson, did not reveal much of whether or not the government supported the U.S. strikes. "We note the U.S. President's statement that now is the time for peace. The security situation in the region is highly volatile. We continue to call for de-escalation, dialogue, and diplomacy." Chile Chilean President Gabriel Boric condemned the U.S. strikes, calling them a violation of international law. He went on to 'demand peace' 'We will defend respect for international humanitarian law at all times,' he said. 'Having power does not authorize you to use it in violation of the rules we have established as humanity. Even if you are the United States.' China China 'strongly condemns' the U.S. strikes, according to state media. 'The actions of the United States seriously violated the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and international law, and have exacerbated tensions in the Middle East,' a spokesperson said. 'China calls on the parties to the conflict, Israel in particular, to reach a ceasefire as soon as possible, ensure the safety of civilians, and start dialogue and negotiation.' France The French government released a statement clarifying that France was not involved in the attacks. The European country reiterated 'its firm opposition to Iran gaining access to nuclear weapons,' but also urged both parties to 'to exercise restraint.' 'France is convinced that a lasting solution to this issue requires a negotiated solution within the framework of the Treaty of Non-Proliferation. We remain ready to contribute to this in conjunction with our partners,' the statement read. Israel During Trump's address to the U.S., he thanked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, stating that the two of them worked as a team on the Iran strikes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin praised President Trump for conducting the strikes in a video address. 'President Trump and I often say peace through strength. First comes strength, then comes peace," he said. 'And tonight President Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength.' Israeli President Isaac Herzog also thanked Trump, calling the evening a 'decisive moment between the axis of terror and evil and the axis of hope.' 'This brave step serves the security and safety of the entire free world. I hope it will lead to a better future for the Middle East—and help advance the urgent release of our hostages held in captivity in Gaza,' he said. Iran Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi accused the U.S. of breaching international law and warned that the strikes will have 'everlasting consequences.' 'The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the U.N. Charter, international law and the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations,' Araghchi said. Russia Russia's Foreign Ministry shared a statement on Telegram condemning the airstrikes and calling them 'a dangerous escalation... fraught with further undermining of regional and global security.' The governmental body called the strikes 'a gross violation of international law, the U.N. Charter, and U.N. Security Council resolutions' and called for an "end to aggression and for increased efforts to create conditions for returning the situation to a political and diplomatic track." Saudi Arabia According to the Saudi Press Agency, the country has expressed 'deep concern' over the U.S. strikes and see them as a 'violation' of the sovereignty of Iran. '[The Kingdom] underscores the need to exert all possible efforts to exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and avoid further escalation,' read a statement attributed to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 'The Kingdom also calls upon the international community to intensify its efforts during this highly sensitive period to reach a political resolution that would bring an end to the crisis and open a new chapter for achieving security and stability in the region.' Spain Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said that he is mourning the civilian lives lost amid the conflict. He highlighted an 'urgent need for restraint and de-escalation, for diplomacy and dialogue.' 'Iran must never have access to nuclear weapons, but stability in the region can only be achieved at the negotiating table, with full respect for international law,' Sánchez said. 'We need a diplomatic solution that establishes a comprehensive framework of peace and security for all.' United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for Iran to 'return to the negotiating table' after the U.S. strikes and referred to Iran's nuclear programme as a 'grave threat to international security.' 'The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis,' Starmer said.
News24
37 minutes ago
- News24
‘Anxious' South Africa urges dialogue to end Israel-Iran conflict
The South African government says it has 'noted with a great deal of anxiety' the entry of the United States into the Israel-Iran war. The Presidency issued the statement on Sunday just hours after US President Donald Trump said the country had struck three nuclear sites in Iran on Saturday night. He said the facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan were 'completely and totally obliterated' and warned of further attacks if Tehran refused to 'make peace'. 'It was South Africa's sincerest hope that President Donald Trump would use his influence and that of the US government to prevail on the parties to pursue a dialogue path in resolving their issues of dispute,' Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said in a statement. 'South Africa calls on the United States, Israel and Iran to give the United Nations the opportunity and space to lead on the peaceful resolution of the matters of dispute, including the inspection and verification of Iran's status of uranium enrichment, as well as its broader nuclear capacity.' Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said the bombing was 'outrageous and will have everlasting consequences'. The US attacks come just over a week after Israel launched missiles at Iran and Tehran hit back by striking targets in Israel.
