Latest news with #FRAC
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
The ugly truth of Trump's 'big beautiful bill': It will cut $186 billion in food aid leaving 18 million children hungry in America's public schools
Trump's new tax bill cuts SNAP funding and shifts costs to US states President Donald Trump's "big beautiful" tax and spending bill, signed on 4th July, carries a devastating cost for millions of American children. The legislation slashes $186 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over the next decade — a move that threatens to leave 18 million children without access to free school meals. Food insecurity is already a pressing issue in classrooms nationwide. Teachers frequently witness students arriving hungry, struggling to focus, and unable to engage fully in their education. As Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association (NEA), wrote in Time magazine, "School meals are more than a budget line item. They are lifelines that help millions of students learn and grow." Hunger is a barrier to learning Research from the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) shows that children who participate in school breakfast and lunch programmes perform better academically, demonstrate improved behaviour, and have higher attendance rates. Yet, under this new law, SNAP benefits will be cut, eligibility restricted, and administrative costs shifted to states — making it harder for vulnerable families to access these crucial supports. Currently, more than 42 million Americans receive SNAP benefits to help buy food, with children constituting a significant portion of beneficiaries, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). But the new bill tightens eligibility rules and requires states to pay a larger share of benefit costs. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Our healthy baby has a hole in his heart, please help us! Donate For Health Donate Now Undo Many states face the difficult choice of raising taxes, cutting other services, or restricting food aid — all of which could mean fewer children receive the meals they need to thrive. The scale of the problem According to official data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the average state error rate on SNAP payments is about 10.9%, which will force many states to cover up to 15% of the programme's food benefit costs. For example, California alone could owe $1.8 billion by 2028, based on projections from Feeding America. Such financial burdens come amid already tight budgets and cuts to education and public services. States with high numbers of children eligible for free or reduced-price meals, especially in rural and southern areas, will be hardest hit. According to Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) data, nearly two-thirds of students in Texas qualify for free school meals, and in Mississippi, that figure is an astonishing 99.7%. The bill's cuts will disproportionately affect the most vulnerable communities, widening inequalities and harming children's ability to learn. Teachers are stepping in — but it's not enough Educators nationwide are already going above and beyond to support hungry students. Many spend their own money on snacks, organise food drives, or implement creative programmes to ensure no child goes hungry during the school day. However, as Pringle warns, "This isn't about whether we can afford to feed kids — it's about whether we choose to." Without federal support, schools will struggle to fill the gap left by SNAP reductions, and food banks will be unable to meet the increased demand. The long-term consequences could be severe — diminished academic achievement, poorer health, and lifelong disadvantages for millions of children. A national crisis in the making The "big beautiful" bill is a stark example of how policy decisions reverberate far beyond Capitol Hill, affecting the daily lives and futures of America's children. By cutting food assistance and shifting costs to states, it jeopardises the wellbeing and education of millions of students. Ensuring that no child goes hungry at school should be a bipartisan priority. As this law takes effect, educators, policymakers, and communities must come together to protect the essential programmes that keep children fed and ready to learn. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Newsweek
29-07-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
Map Shows States Paying Most—and Least—for SNAP Under Trump Bill
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. The majority of U.S. states will be required to pay a portion of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in the coming years. Under current federal rules, SNAP benefits, which help some 42 million Americans across the country, are paid by the federal government but administered at the state level. All states pay half of the cost of this administration. But the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to change things. Beginning in 2028, the bill will require states to cover a portion of SNAP benefits if error payments are above 6 percent, and all must pay for an additional share of program administration costs. Why It Matters This will be the first time that states have had to shoulder the responsibility of paying SNAP benefits, and numerous lawmakers, poverty experts and advocacy groups have warned against the policy. How Does The Cost Share Work? Erroneous payments are when too much or too little is paid to a SNAP recipient. States will have to pay a certain percentage based on thresholds set by the bill: Error rate below 6 percent: No cost-sharing required 6 to 8 percent error rate: 5 percent cost-sharing 8 to 10 percent error rate: 10 percent cost-sharing Over 10 percent error rate: 15 percent cost-sharing Which States Will Pay The Most? Based on fiscal year 2024 data, 43 states will be expected to pay up for a portion of SNAP benefits when the new rules begin in 2028, according to data compiled by the Food Action Research Center (FRAC). California is poised to pay the most of all 50 states if its error rate doesn't come down. With a 15 percent requirement based on an error rate of 11 percent, the Golden State will be expected to pay an estimated $1.9 billion in benefit costs and $661 million in administrative costs, bringing its total to just shy of $2.6 billion if its error rate does not drop. Other top payers will be New York ($1.9 billion), Florida ($1.3 billion), Texas ($1 billion) and Pennsylvania ($982 million), according to FRAC's analysis. Which States Will Pay The Least? Based on 2024 error rates, only Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming will not have to cough up for a share of the benefits, though they will still be required to bear more of the administrative costs. Some Exceptions Senate Republicans added a carve-out to address concerns from Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, letting her state delay cost-sharing due to its high SNAP error rates. To follow reconciliation rules, the delay option was extended to any state with a SNAP error rate — when multiplied by 1.5 — that hits 20 percent or more. If a state meets that threshold in FY 2025, it can delay cost-sharing until FY 2029; if it qualifies in FY 2026, it can delay until FY 2030. But states can only use this delay once, based on either year, not both. Based on FY 2024 data, likely beneficiaries include Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington, D.C, according to FRAC. What People Are Saying FRAC in its analysis: "Taken together, these provisions represent an unprecedented cost-shift from the federal government to the states, one that forces local leaders to make painful tradeoffs between essential services and rising administrative demands. As states grapple with tighter budgets, reduced federal support, and growing caseload complexity, the core promise of SNAP — as a reliable safeguard against hunger and hardship — is at risk. The Trump- and Republican-passed budget reconciliation bill, OBBBA, not only weakens a cornerstone anti-poverty program; it reshapes the relationship between federal and state governments in ways that could prove devastating for millions of families, workers, and communities across the country." Jennifer Greenfield, associate professor at the University of Denver who specializes in the intersection of health and wealth disparities, told Newsweek: "The proposed federal 'savings' are not savings at all—it's a shift of the costs to our already cash-strapped states and families. The net result will be to increase hunger and financial instability among households with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans—while also sending tens of thousands of people into unemployment." House Speaker Mike Johnson told CBS News Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan in May: "The states are not properly administering this because they don't have enough skin in the game. So what we've done in the bill is add some- just a modest state sharing component, so that they'll pay attention to that, so that we can reduce fraud. Why? Again, so that it is preserved for the people that need it the most." What Happens Next Cost-sharing requirements will begin in 2028. How much each state will have to pay will depend on its future error rates.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Free meals for students could be impacted by federal budget cuts
Mar. 12—MASSENA — More than 31,000 north country students could potentially be impacted by proposed changes to the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), the program that allows districts to offer free meals to students. House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, has proposed $12 billion in cuts to school breakfast and lunch for the reconciliation, and the House Education and Workforce Committee, which has jurisdiction over school meals and the other federal nutrition programs, has been directed to cut funding for programs within its jurisdiction by $330 billion. In addition to the CEP cut, proposals include requiring schools to verify the household income of all families approved for free or reduced-price meals rather than using a sampling method. CEP is a non-pricing meal service option for schools and school districts in low-income areas. CEP allows the nation's highest-poverty schools and districts to serve breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without collecting household applications. This allows all students in those schools to eat breakfast and lunch at no charge regardless of their family's income. Schools that adopt CEP are reimbursed using a formula based on the percentage of students categorically eligible for free meals based on their participation in other specific means-tested programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The proposal would increase the CEP eligibility threshold for schools from 25% to 60% of students identified as receiving benefits. In the 2023 — 2024 school year, one out of every two schools that operated the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) participated in CEP, and more than 23 million children had access to healthy school meals at no charge through CEP. Now, according to the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), the proposal would force more than 24,000 schools nationwide to drop CEP. "Congress should be making it easier, not harder, for children to get the meals they need to learn and thrive," Crystal FitzSimons, interim president of FRAC said in a statement. "Community eligibility is a proven success, ensuring tens of millions of students have access to nutritious meals while easing burdens on families and schools. Instead of cutting community eligibility, lawmakers should be expanding it to allow more high-need schools and districts to adopt the option." "As families struggle to keep up with the rising cost of food, Republicans in Congress are looking at making it harder for millions of children in families with low incomes to get free meals at school. Worse yet, the proposed cuts would be part of legislation that would give massive tax cuts to the wealthiest people and businesses," Zoë Neuberger, a senior fellow at CBPP said in a statement. "Congress should instead focus on removing red tape for schools and families so parents can afford groceries and children can get the meals they need for healthy development." The two groups released state-by-state fact sheets detailing how proposed cuts to CEP would worsen childhood hunger, hurt struggling families, and create unnecessary burdens for schools and districts. Their list of schools details how many children attend and could be impacted if Congress increases the eligibility threshold to 60% of students identified as receiving benefits. That includes 13,123 students in Jefferson County, 4,119 students in Lewis County, and 14,270 students in St. Lawrence County. JEFFERSON COUNTY Alexandria — 477 students Belleville Henderson — 471 students Carthage — 3,132 students General Brown — 1,441 students Indian River — 3,677 students LaFargeville — 523 students Lyme — 344 students Sackets Harbor — 419 students South Jefferson — 1,820 students Thousand Islands — 819 Watertown — N/A LEWIS COUNTY Beaver River — 874 students Copenhagen — 491 students Harrisville — 341 students Lowville — 1,353 students South Lewis — 1,060 students ST. LAWRENCE COUNTY Canton — 1,060 students Clifton-Fine — 265 students Colton-Pierrepont — 385 students Edwards-Knox — 533 students Gouverneur — 1,432 students Hammond — 244 students Hermon-DeKalb — 431 students Heuvelton — 644 students Lisbon — 566 students Madrid-Waddington — 640 students Massena — 2,423 students Morristown — 327 students Norwood-Norfolk — 962 students Ogdensburg — 1,581 students Parishville-Hopkinton — 353 students Potsdam — 1,471 students St. Lawrence — 953 students
CBS News
03-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Study shows the consequences of budget cuts to SNAP in Minnesota
As lawmakers in Washington consider a budget proposal to slash taxes, advocates in Minnesota are warning of the potential for devastating consequences for hundreds of thousands in the state. The non-partisan Food Research and Action Center says more than 458,000 Minnesotans rely on the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits to put food on the table. The non-profit says SNAP also offers nine meals to every one that a local pantry can provide. The FRAC study also found that among the Minnesota households relying on SNAP benefits: 45% are with children 49% are with a person with a disability 35% have older adults in them 10,989 veterans rely on SNAP The CEO of Second Harvest Heartland, Allison O'Toole, says she fears the impact of potential SNAP cuts during the budget talks in Washington. "We've seen food insecurity rates skyrocket in the last 4 years. We're at an all-time high right now," said O'Toole. "We are in a hunger crisis already. If these proposals are enacted, it'll be catastrophic." To do her part, O'Toole is flying to Washington, D.C. this week to meet with U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and the House Committee on Agriculture to advocate for hunger relief policy. "I'm making a special trip [on Monday] because it's a critical time," said O'Toole. While cuts are not official yet, O'Toole hopes people will give money, food donations or service hours to Minnesota food shelves to prepare for what's a possibility. "This is a solvable issue and if there's one state that can do it, it is ours. We just need everyone to join forces to make sure we can do it," said O'Toole.
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
2025 farm bill: Advocates prioritize anti-hunger policies while Republicans push budget cuts
By eliminating barriers to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, Congress can make it easier for millions of low-income rural Americans to put food on the table, according to Salaam Bhatti of the Food Research & Action Center, or FRAC, a nonprofit policy and research organization. But GOP members of the House Agriculture Committee are pushing forbudget cuts to the Farm Bill, the legislation that authorizes food stamps and a variety of other nutrition and agriculture programs. "We know that 15.4% of households in rural areas had experienced food insecurity in 2023," Bhatti told The Daily Yonder in a phone interview. "So that's a significant number." SNAP is the first line of defense against hunger, according to a report from Jordan Baker, senior communications manager at FRAC. The last Farm Bill was signed into law by Trump in 2018 during his first term. Since then, the legislation has been in limbo, awaiting updates until September 2025, when Congress is scheduled to vote on new legislation. Bhatti said nutrition advocates are pushing for three major changes in the 2025 Farm Bill to address food insecurity in rural areas. SNAP allowances are based on estimations of the cost of groceries for a given year, something the USDA Food and Nutrition Service refers to as the Thrifty Food Plan. According to the November 2024 Thrifty Food Plan, the estimated monthly cost of groceries for a family of four was $983.80 (SNAP allowances can vary by household size, gender, and age). The Thrifty Food Plan estimates the cost of groceries for an individual or household, then uses that estimation to determine the maximum SNAP allotments a person can receive. Congress updates the Thrifty Food Plan every five years to keep SNAP allotments up to date with market prices. Bhatti said that protecting funding for the Thrifty Food Plan will be important for fighting food insecurity in rural America. In 2022, an estimated 2.5 million rural households relied on SNAP to subsidize their grocery bill. That's about 14% of all rural households, slightly higher than the 11% of metropolitan residents who rely on SNAP. About one million households that rely on SNAP are families with children, a group that makes up about 22% of the rural population. To add to that, every SNAP dollar spent in a rural community has an outsized effect on economic activity compared to metropolitan counties. "For every SNAP dollar, there's an economic impact of $1.54 cents," said Bhatti. "But that is even more impactful within rural parts of the country because a lot of our farmland is in rural America. SNAP is an economic investment." SNAP drives economic activity in rural areas primarily by supporting local grocery stores, providing money that, without SNAP, "is going to really hurt [the store's] bottom line," Bhatti said. Those SNAP dollars spill over into agriculture and food processing, industries which have a large economic base in rural areas, according to a USDA report. Many GOP lawmakers want to cut back on its funding. In May of 2024, Republican chair of the House Agriculture Committee Glenn Thompson released his proposed farm bill that would make it harder for the USDA to keep the Thrifty Food Plan up to date with potential increases in the cost of healthy food. "There's an attempt to cut SNAP benefits over the next 10 years by $30 billion," Bhatti said of Thompson's proposed legislation. "So that would be … an enormous negative impact because a lot of people came out to vote because groceries are unaffordable." Thompson's proposal is a response to the Biden Administration's updates to the Thrifty Food Plan, which increased SNAP benefits by 30%. Under current SNAP guidelines, an individual can only receive three months of SNAP benefits every three years without meeting the program's work requirements. The Food and Nutrition Service, or FNS, the department of the USDA that oversees SNAP, requires able-bodied recipients between 16 and 59 years old to work or participate in a workforce program for at least 80 hours per month to continue receiving benefits after that three month window. "We want to eliminate the time limits that are disproportionately impacting rural residents and other underserved populations," Bhatti said. "There's just not enough good paying jobs in rural America, so to force them into low paying work really puts them into a cycle of poverty." Previous Daily Yonder reporting demonstrated that living in a poor job market may be more burdensome for rural residents compared to their urban counterparts. That's because fewer households in rural America have reliable internet access and transportation compared to urban and suburban residents. Rurality can therefore make it harder for people already struggling to meet SNAP's work requirements. "We also want to repeal the lifetime ban for individuals with felony drug convictions, which affects a lot of families trying to rebuild in rural areas," Bhatti said. Living in a rural community can exacerbate existing challenges that felons face in finding employment and meeting work requirements. Rural areas also have limited access to reentry programs compared to urban centers, a deficit that can make it harder for formerly incarcerated people to get back on their feet, according to a report from the Rural Justice Collaborative. The initial push to ban people with felony drug convictions from SNAP was based on an allegation that many SNAP recipients illegally trade their benefits for things like guns and drugs. Data shows that SNAP fraud accounts for less than 2% of total allotments, with most instances involving retailers rather than individuals trading benefits for drugs. The practice of banning people with felony drug convictions from participating in SNAP began in 1996 when President Bill Clinton signed into law the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, or PRWORA. About half of rural Americans live in a state that has either a temporary or lifetime ban for individuals with felony drug convictions, according to a Daily Yonder analysis of PRWORA data. "There's a bipartisan agreement to get rid of [the ban], which is really great," said Bhatti. This story was produced by The Daily Yonder and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
