Latest news with #SpecialSupplementalNutritionProgramforWomen
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
How Trump's budget would hit America's poorest families hardest
Donald Trump's plan to slash billions of dollars in federal spending includes dramatic cuts to vital programs that support millions of Americans, including the nation's poorest families. New details in a massive White House document spanning more than 1,200 pages outline stark cuts to programs that help feed and house millions of children, which critics fear will have dangerous consequences for the nation's most vulnerable households. Trump's 2026 budget proposal was released with little fanfare on Friday evening as Congress prepares to vote on more than a dozen spending measures. It will ultimately be up to lawmakers to decide how far those cuts stretch. But the president wants to shed $163 billion in non-defense spending from the nation's 2026 budget. That includes cutting down $12 billion from education programs and more than $60 billion from agencies supporting housing and food access for women and children — from slashing rental assistance for poor families to ending the only federal program that supports state-level preschool development. The White House proposes significantly rolling back support for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), which supports more than 6.7 million people, including 1.5 million pregnant and post-partum mothers and more than 5 million children under age 5. Under Trump's proposal, breastfeeding mothers receiving WIC assistance would see their monthly benefits plummet from $54 to just $13, while support for children would drop from $27 to $10, according to the National WIC Association. Current WIC benefit levels only cover the cost for about half the recommended daily serving of fruits and vegetables for young children and mothers, according to the group. Trump's proposed cuts would give children only 19 percent and mothers just 12 percent of those recommendations, the group found. 'This budget request falls short of the Trump administration's commitment to 'Make America Healthy Again,' particularly in its failure to support maternal and child health through vital nutrition programs,' according to National WIC Association president Georgia Machell. Trump's proposal 'directly removes healthy food from the hands of low-income moms and young children who face nutritional risk,' she added. 'This budget doesn't just break promises. It takes healthy food off of children's plates.' The proposal would also eliminate funding for Child Nutrition Trainings, Farm to School Grants, and School Meal Equipment Grants, 'which will hurt schools' ability to feed children nutritious food during the school day,' according to Democrats on the Senate Appropriations committee. Trump's budget document zeroes out programs across education. Entire pages across the 1,200-page document would eliminate programs supporting preschools, before- and after-school programs, literacy programs and education for homeless children and in rural areas. The proposal would reduce the annual budget for the Department of Education — which the president wants to abolish altogether — by $12 billion, from $79.6 billion to $66.7 billion. 'The budget underscores that President Trump's vision for returning education to the states means state and local taxpayers will pay more to support students and educators at their local schools thanks to major cuts in federal funding,' according to Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee. Under the White House proposal, more than a dozen existing grants supporting education programs would be condensed into one fund that would let states choose how to spend those dollars. That would mean ending dedicated funding streams to support after-school programs and other services — such as programs that specifically support tens of thousands of homeless children. Roughly 1.4 million children in kindergarten through 12 grade experienced homelessness during the 2022-2023 school year, according to the latest federal data. Trump also proposes slashing funds for the Department of Housing and Urban Development by more than 43 percent. More than 10 million Americans rely on federal rental assistance, including 5.6 million people in families with children. Drastic cuts to those lifelines could put more families at risk of eviction and homelessness, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Housing Choice Vouchers and Section 8 assistance would lose more than $26.7 billion, marking a 42 percent reduction, under Trump's proposal. 'We should be making housing affordable by expanding effective rental assistance to help everyone in need, not slashing it irresponsibly to pay for tax cuts skewed to the wealthy,' said Will P. Fischer, the center's director of housing policy. A cap on how long households with 'able-bodied adults' can continue receiving federal assistance could put thousands of families at risk of losing their homes. In New York City, more than 61 percent of residents receiving assistance — roughly 316,00 people — could be deemed ineligible under Trump's vague definition, according to an analysis of New York City Housing Authority data. 'This is a draconian proposal to hurt working people and our economy, and it is dead on arrival in Congress as long as I have anything to say about it,' said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations committee. 'But this is just another reminder we need Republicans to join us to reject these reckless cuts, focus on the investments we actually need to make in our communities and security, and to finally force Trump to follow the law and end his devastating funding freeze,' she added.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Babies and Young American Children Suffer As US Lags In Family Support
The United States has one of the highest child poverty rates among all developed countries. One in six American children under the age of 5 live in poverty, a higher rate than for any other age group. In 2022, the U.S. ranked at 38 out of 40 countries, bested not just by countries known for robust safety nets like Finland and Denmark but also Slovenia, Russia and Mexico. The reality of such a high poverty rate among the youngest and most vulnerable Americans is the result of policy choices. Research has found that it's not because the U.S. has higher rates of single parenthood or because low-income Americans don't work hard enough for a decent income. Instead, where other countries make robust investments in government programs, particularly those that benefit parents and children, the U.S. spends far less. And yet poverty has been found to have catastrophic effects on children's development and well-being. The stories below expose the result of this disinclination to invest in families with babies and young children — as well as what happens when efforts to do things differently are abruptly abandoned. homelessnessHousing instability can affect children's cognitive and emotional development and ultimately their academic success. Housing instability can affect children's cognitive and emotional development and ultimately their academic success. Various data sources all illuminate the same trend: homelessness among children under age 6 has been climbing in recent years, driven by a mix of systemic factors, with disturbing consequences for the country's children. school meals During the pandemic, universal, free school meals were a lifesaver for parents like Lynnea Hawkins, who no longer had to pull together complicated paperwork and send it in with her son, making him a target for torment. But then Congress ended the program, forcing parents to once again face shame and stigma to participate — or forego free meals for their children altogether. child hungerThe first federal food assistance program in decades helps eligible families cover groceries in the summer, but many dollars may go unclaimed. The first federal food assistance program in decades helps eligible families cover groceries in the summer, but many dollars may go unclaimed. Even when Congress passes a new program aimed at helping families afford the basics for their children, it doesn't always reach them. Erika Marquez's family was eligible for the new Summer EBT benefits rolled out in 2024 to help parents get through the lean summer months, but her husband couldn't figure out how to sign up, so they missed out. 'It's just hard when you hear your child say, 'Mom, my stomach is rumbling,'' she said. policy Even long-established programs with solid track records aren't always safe. At the end of 2023, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, known as WIC, needed more money to stay available to all low-income pregnant people and new parents, but Republicans threatened to break a 25-year track record of fully funding it. inflationDiaper need increases dramatically as pandemic-era programs end and inflation rises Diaper need increases dramatically as pandemic-era programs end and inflation rises The often threadbare American safety net leads to some disturbing outcomes, such as the fact that nearly half of our nation's families are struggling to afford diapers. Some change their children less often than they should to make the diapers they do have last, while others go without diapers at all. ConnecticutBaby bonds can help tackle generational poverty in low-income families. Baby bonds can help tackle generational poverty in low-income families. Some states have taken bold steps to do more to address child poverty. In 2021, Connecticut became the first state to create 'baby bonds,' depositing $3,200 in an account for every baby whose birth is covered by Medicaid so that it can accrue interest and create wealth for them later in life.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
COVID-19 experience strengthens Countryside Public Health for challenges ahead
Apr. 23---- Five years after the COVID-19 pandemic reached far western Minnesota, the public health agency serving the Upper Minnesota River Valley finds itself in a stronger position than when the pandemic began, but its director is also keeping a keen eye on storm clouds on the horizon. An infusion of funding brought about by the pandemic — and the opportunity to better assess its role and the needs of its population — has really strengthened the work that Countryside Public Health is doing, according to Liz Auch, its director. The first case of COVID-19 was recorded on April 19, 2020, in the five counties served by Countryside Public Health: , , and . It was an "all hands on deck" moment, said Andrea Mills, communications specialist for the agency. Countryside was as ready as it could be for the new virus, according to Auch. Before retiring and turning over the baton to co-worker Dawn Bjorgan, infectious disease expert Gloria Tobias had been monitoring the virus and its spread in China. She had local staff "practicing and practicing" for the response, Auch explained. Nationally, there has been some distrust and disconnect about the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Auch said, but Countryside saw nearly the opposite effect. In western Minnesota, Countryside realized early its important role as the source of information. It worked to improve its ability to provide the information everyone — from restaurant owners to law enforcement officers — needed. What made it all work? Auch credits her staff and, importantly, a good track record of working with partners in health care in the region, schools and law enforcement. There were "bumps," but those partners trusted Countryside Public Health and supported it, she said. The infusion of funding the pandemic triggered allowed Countryside to increase its staffing from 30 to about 32 positions. Importantly, it was able to assess its role, and focus on its key service areas and better align staff members' responsibilities. New funding that resulted from the opioid crisis and subsequent legal settlement also has allowed Countryside to do more to educate people about substance abuse, as well as equip an educator to bring lessons to classrooms in the five counties. Despite serving an aging population, five years after the pandemic's start is seeing a steady creep upward in the number of young families it serves through programs such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, often known as WIC. An emphasis on outreach to serve clients in some of the smallest and relatively remote corners of the rural counties with regular clinics has helped, Auch said. So did the fact that more people were seeking health information during the pandemic. Countryside leveraged the trust people had in it. "It gave us an audience that we maybe didn't have before," Mills said. In a fragmented media world, Mills takes advantage of multiple social media platforms, along with traditional newspaper and radio outlets, to reach that audience. Keeping the attention of its audience in the days ahead may be more important than ever. "My growing concern as a public health leader right now is we're going to see a rise in infectious diseases," Auch said. She pointed to recent reports of cases of measles and pertussis in the country as reason for concern. Her agency works to communicate to the public the importance of vaccinations against infectious diseases, and offers clinics and referrals to get people vaccinated. The percentage of children ages 24-35 months who are up-to-date with vaccines in the five Countryside counties ranges from 59.7% in Chippewa to 77.2% in Lac qui Parle, with Big Stone at 64.2%, Swift at 67.4%, and Yellow Medicine at 65.4%. The statewide vaccination rate for that age group is currently 63%. When Auch began her public health career 25 years ago, the statewide rate was over 90%. Auch pointed out that most young people do not have the firsthand experience of having known polio and other infectious diseases. As a consequence, they may not have a full understanding about the benefits of vaccines. She also noted there is currently a tension in the public discourse over the right to choose and a social obligation to keep others safe. Auch said public health has generally been considered underfunded for all of her career. Those concerns are growing today in the midst of federal and state cutbacks to health funding, and it has her attention. Countryside receives about 28% of its funding from federal sources, 30 to 32% from the state, and 20% from local sources. Private insurance, Medicare and Medical Assistance, licensing fees and charges for services, as well as investment interest and opioid settlement funds, comprise the remainder. The funding is very much needed in this post-COVID era, as there remain a whole range of public health issues to address, Auch said. Obesity, mental health care for youth, how kids are doing after COVID, kids' resiliency, dental health access, and the numbers of people being injured and killed on the roads due to distracted driving and drinking and other substance use are among some of the concerns she cited. All the while, Countryside continues to maintain its readiness for the potential of another pandemic. "Are we better prepared? Sure we're prepared, but tell me what the strain is, its impact and mortality rate," Auch said. This is no time to let down our guard, or reduce our defenses and ability to respond to a pandemic, she explained. There was a lot to learn and do on the fly once COVID-19 arrived, but Auch said that without a doubt, the lesson of COVID-19 was clear for Countryside. The preparation and practicing paid off.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Leaders expect big enlisted pay raise won't cause new financial woes
Service officials don't anticipate that the military's recently enacted junior enlisted pay raise will hurt young families' ability to qualify for federal nutrition assistance programs, but promised they will closely monitor the issue to ensure the extra money doesn't cause unintended problems. During testimony before the House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday, senior enlisted officials from each of the armed forces testified on quality-of-life initiatives and efforts to help families facing challenges because of the rigors of military life. Those included a congressionally approved pay raise for junior enlisted troops that went into effect this month. Under legislation signed into law by President Joe Biden last year, troops ranked E-4 and below saw a 10% boost in monthly salaries, compared to their 2024 paychecks. The move will bring paychecks for nearly all troops to more than $30,000 annually. E-2s with two years in service now have a base salary rise of about $31,000, up from $27,000 last year. E-4s with three years in the ranks saw their pay rise from $35,000 a year to more than $40,000 now. What troops need to know about the basic pay raise in 2025 But lawmakers on Tuesday expressed concerns that the higher pay could also eliminate some families' eligibility for support services like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children. They warned that while the higher pay will offset some of the need for federal support services, the extra monthly money may not completely eliminate those financial hardships. 'Are we simply canceling out good intentions of pay increase?' asked Rep. Sanford Bishop, D-Ga. Military officials said they do not believe so, but are closely monitoring the situation to ensure the extra pay doesn't cause different financial problems. 'We've only had this in place since April 1, but what I would say is that we're watching this closely,' said Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Carlos Ruiz. 'The data tells us that with any change — this raise, or maybe a spouse gets employment or gets promoted — [families] would not climb more than one bracket in their childcare fees. That's what I have so far.' Air Force Chief Master Sergeant David Flosi said they expect only a small number of families to be impacted negatively by the extra paycheck boost, but promised that officials are monitoring those issues to ensure such problems can be addressed. 'If a family member or a service member demonstrates a financial need, we can adjust fees for child care or other services, to make sure we head off any financial crisis,' he said. Past department surveys have shown that up to 3% of military families have accessed federal nutrition support programs in the past. All troops received a 4.5% pay raise in January, the third consecutive year of paycheck boosts of more than 4%. Lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee have discussed a targeted pay boost for senior enlisted troops next year, as a way to help retention among those personnel.
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
"Without essential support": Congressional cuts could leave nearly 360,000 kids hungry
As Congress moves forward with budget reconciliation discussions, proposed cuts to safety net programs are raising concerns about their ripple effects — particularly on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC. While WIC itself isn't facing direct funding cuts, a new policy brief from the National WIC Association (NWA) warns that changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) could make it significantly harder for families to access WIC benefits. At the heart of the issue is adjunctive eligibility, a streamlined process that allows families to qualify for WIC if they are already enrolled in other income-tested programs like Medicaid or SNAP. This process reduces administrative burdens, making it easier for families to access benefits quickly. However, if eligibility for Medicaid or SNAP is restricted, fewer families will qualify for WIC through this automatic pathway — forcing them to navigate additional paperwork and verification processes that WIC experts say could discourage participation. One of the most controversial proposals under discussion is the elimination of Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility (BBCE) in SNAP. BBCE is a provision that allows states to expand SNAP eligibility, ensuring that families who are just above the federal income threshold can still receive benefits. The policy brief cites a 2019 USDA analysis estimating that eliminating BBCE would remove 3.1 million people from SNAP. Given that 11.6% of SNAP recipients are preschool-aged children, this could mean that at least 359,600 infants and young children would lose their automatic WIC eligibility. This is not the first time BBCE has come under fire. During the first Trump administration, the rule's future was hotly debated, with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) warning of severe consequences for working families, seniors and individuals with disabilities. In a statement at the time, CBPP noted that eliminating BBCE would cut off food assistance for millions of households while also preventing children from accessing free school meals. The organization also pushed back against the Trump Administration's argument that states were approving households for SNAP under BBCE without checking their incomes or assessing their need for food assistance. 'The claim is incorrect,' the statement read. 'To receive SNAP, all households, including those eligible under BBCE, must apply, be interviewed and document that their monthly income and expenses, such as high housing and child care costs, leave them with too little disposable income to afford a basic, adequate diet. Indeed, the Department of Agriculture's own data show that only about 0.2% of SNAP benefits went in 2017 to households with monthly disposable incomes — net income after deducting certain expenses like high housing and child care costs — above the poverty line. SNAP has some of the most rigorous program integrity standards and systems of any federal program.' The statement continued: 'With this rule, the Administration is seeking to implement through executive action a harsh policy that Congress rejected in the 2018 farm bill. Instead of punishing working families if they work more hours or must incur high child care costs in order to work, or penalizing seniors and people with disabilities who save a modest amount for emergencies, the President should seek to assist them with policies that help them afford the basics and save for the future.' Now, six years later, the National WIC Association warns that for families already struggling with food insecurity, these changes could still have severe consequences. 'WIC, SNAP and Medicaid work together to ensure that families have the nutrition and healthcare they need to thrive,' said Georgia Machell, President & CEO of NWA. 'If Congress moves forward with cuts to Medicaid or SNAP, families will not only lose access to food and healthcare, they'll face unnecessary barriers to WIC. This will leave pregnant women, infants, and young children without essential support that keeps them healthy — at a time when families are already struggling with rising food insecurity.' Beyond SNAP, proposed Medicaid restrictions could also impact WIC enrollment. Nearly 80% of WIC participants also rely on Medicaid for healthcare, meaning that any additional eligibility hurdles for Medicaid could create logistical challenges for families seeking WIC benefits. Requiring families to provide additional income documentation — rather than using adjunctive eligibility — introduces delays that could prevent young children from receiving critical nutrition support during their most formative years. As Congress finalizes its budget reconciliation package, advocates are urging lawmakers to consider the broader implications of these proposals. Limiting access to WIC, SNAP or Medicaid would not only undermine efforts to combat food insecurity, they say, but also jeopardize the long-term health and well-being of millions of families as the interconnected nature of these programs ensures that families receive the support they need to maintain health and stability, and cutting one inevitably weakens the others. With rising food costs and growing economic uncertainty, the stakes for these policy decisions are high. While lawmakers may be focused on budget savings, NWA's brief underscores that the cost of restricting access to essential programs isn't just financial — it's a matter of public health.
