Economic Justice · Oct 4, 2026The Aftermath of the Big Beautiful Bill, Part 2 of 5: SNAP and Food Assistance

The Aftermath of the Big Beautiful Bill · Part 2 of 5 · October 4, 2026, 7:00 AM CDT

Key Facts

• The law cuts about $186.7 billion from federal nutrition spending over ten years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. All of the SNAP provisions reduce spending.^[1]
• CBO estimates the expanded work rules alone will cut SNAP participation by about 2.4 million people in an average month.^[1]
• The time limit now reaches adults up to age 64 and parents whose youngest child is 14 or older.^[1]
• A peer-reviewed study of SNAP work requirements found they cut participation by 53% and had no effect on employment.^[3]

If Medicaid was the law’s largest health cut, SNAP was its largest food cut, and it reached households faster.

Part 1 covered the law and Medicaid. This part goes through each change to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, what the research says, and what you can do.

1. What changed

The Congressional Research Service says the law achieves its SNAP savings through eight provisions, all of which CBO expects to reduce federal spending.^[1]

• Wider work rules. Adults without dependents between 18 and 64 must work or take part in a program for 80 hours a month, or lose benefits after three months in a 36-month period. Before, the limit applied only to ages 18 to 54. The law also applies it to parents whose youngest child is 14 or older.^[1][2]
• Fewer exemptions. The law strikes the exemptions for veterans, people experiencing homelessness and young adults who aged out of foster care. It adds exemptions for Indians, Urban Indians and California Indians as federal law defines them.^[1]
• Harder waivers. Areas can still seek a waiver, but only where unemployment is above 10%. Alaska and Hawaii have a separate test of 1.5 times the national rate.^[1]
• States pay part of the benefit. Starting in FY2028, states with payment-error rates of 6% or more pay a share of benefit costs that rises with their error rate. CBO expects about $35 billion of the $41 billion in savings to come from states paying.^[1]
• States pay more to run the program. From FY2027, states cover 75% of administrative costs instead of 50%.^[1]
• The Thrifty Food Plan. The benefit formula’s market basket can be re-evaluated no earlier than October 1, 2027, and not in a way that exceeds inflation.^[1]
• Benefit calculation. Households without elderly or disabled members no longer get a standard utility allowance from an energy-assistance payment alone, and internet costs no longer count toward the shelter deduction.^[1]
• Noncitizens and nutrition education. SNAP eligibility narrows to lawful permanent residents, Cuban and Haitian entrants and certain Pacific compact migrants. Funding for SNAP-Ed ends.^[1]

2. Who is hit twice

The Medicaid work rule and the SNAP rule cover similar people. CRS estimates that in 2025, 6.2 million of 24.7 million affected adults were in both programs.^[2]

The two rules also differ. The SNAP rule took effect July 4, 2025, while the Medicaid rule starts by December 31, 2026. Medicaid exempts people already subject to SNAP’s work rules.^[2]

3. What the peer-reviewed research shows

A 2023 study in the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy used linked SNAP and earnings records to test work requirements directly. The researchers found they raised program exits by 23 percentage points among people already enrolled, and cut overall participation among those subject to them by 53%.^[3]

They found “no effects on employment.” They also found “suggestive evidence of increased earnings in some specifications.” That second finding supports the policy’s supporters, and we include it for that reason.^[3]

They also found that homeless adults were “disproportionately screened out.”^[3] The law removed the exemption for homeless adults.^[1]

On the other side of the ledger, a 2017 study in JAMA Internal Medicine followed 4,447 low-income adults. It found SNAP participation was associated with lower later health care spending, “consistent across several analytic approaches.”^[4] It is an observational study, so it shows an association, not proof of cause.

A National Bureau of Economic Research working paper studied the original rollout of food stamps by county. It found that access in childhood led to “a significant reduction in the incidence of metabolic syndrome” in adulthood, and, for women, more economic self-sufficiency.^[5] That paper is a working paper, not yet a peer-reviewed article in the version we read.

4. What each side says

The fight over SNAP is sharp, and both sides make claims we could not fully verify.

Democrats in Congress. When they introduced a bill to reverse the cuts in November 2025, House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig said the law “cut SNAP… by $187 billion, taking food away from millions of hungry American seniors, children, people with disabilities and veterans.” Rep. Jahana Hayes said it “implemented the largest cut to SNAP in history.”^[7]

The $187 billion figure matches the CBO estimate in the CRS report.^[1] We did not find a source that compares it with every past cut, so we cannot confirm “largest in history.”

The administration. In a separate fight over state data in December 2025, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the department asked states “to turn over their data to the federal government to let the USDA partner with them to root out this fraud.” She said data from compliant states showed “186,000 deceased people are receiving SNAP benefits and that 500,000 are getting benefits more than once.”^[6]

Those are the Secretary’s figures. We did not find an independent review of them. Democratic governors objected: a spokesperson for California’s governor called cutting programs that feed children “morally repugnant,” and New York’s governor asked why the administration was “so hellbent on people going hungry.”^[6]

The research gives each side something. It shows the work rule reduces enrollment sharply and does not raise employment. It also shows a small, uncertain earnings signal. It does not settle whether the savings are worth the lost benefits. That is a values question for voters and legislators.

Watch: how the new rules are landing

Video: NBC 7 San Diego — “New work requirements for some SNAP recipients.”

What is not yet known

• States implement these rules on their own timelines, and we have not seen a national count of people who have already lost benefits.
• Whether states will cut benefits, tighten eligibility or raise taxes to cover their new cost share is still open. CBO expects a variety of responses.^[1]
• No peer-reviewed study yet measures the enacted rules. The evidence above comes from earlier work requirements and earlier SNAP research.

What You Can Do Right Now

1. Check if the time limit applies to you. It reaches adults 18 to 64 without dependents, and parents whose youngest child is 14 or older.
2. Look for an exemption. Pregnancy, disability and the Native-population categories defined in federal law are exempt. Veterans, homeless adults and former foster youth are no longer exempt under the law.
3. Log your hours. Keep pay stubs, volunteer sign-in sheets, training or class records. You need 80 hours a month.
4. Ask your county office about a waiver. Areas where unemployment is above 10% can qualify.
5. Answer recertification notices on time. Paperwork gaps drive losses in work-requirement programs, as the Arkansas Medicaid research in Part 1 showed.
6. If you lose benefits, ask how to re-qualify. Ask your state agency in writing what you must show and by when.
7. Use local food help. Food banks and pantries can bridge a gap while you sort out paperwork.
8. Tell your state legislators. The error-rate cost share starts in FY2028, and states can reduce errors before then.

How to Verify This Yourself

• Open CRS report R48552 and read Table 3 for each CBO estimate.
• Read the abstracts of the Gray and Berkowitz papers at the links below.
• Compare the quotes above with the original press release and PBS article.

References

1. Congressional Research Service, “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Related Nutrition Programs in P.L. 119-21: An Overview,” R48552, 2025. Primary (nonpartisan congressional analysis; reports CBO estimates). congress.gov
2. Congressional Research Service, “Work Requirements: Comparison of Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) After P.L. 119-21,” R48755, 2025. Primary (nonpartisan congressional analysis). congress.gov
3. Gray C, Leive A, Prager E, Pukelis K, Zaki M. “Employed in a SNAP? The Impact of Work Requirements on Program Participation and Labor Supply.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2023. Primary (peer-reviewed). aeaweb.org
4. Berkowitz SA, Seligman HK, Rigdon J, Meigs JB, Basu S. “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participation and Health Care Expenditures Among Low-Income Adults.” JAMA Internal Medicine, 2017. Primary (peer-reviewed observational study). doi.org
5. Hoynes HW, Schanzenbach DW, Almond D. “Long Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net.” NBER Working Paper 18535, 2012. Primary (working paper; we read the abstract only). nber.org
6. PBS NewsHour, “Trump administration says it will withhold SNAP from states led by Democrats if they don’t provide recipient data,” December 2, 2025. Secondary (news report quoting officials). pbs.org
7. Office of Rep. Jahana Hayes, “After Republicans Cut SNAP, Hayes, Craig, Luján Fight to Restore $187 Billion in Food Assistance,” November 20, 2025. Primary (statements by the officials quoted; partisan source). hayes.house.gov

Investigative methodology: provisions and CBO figures were read from the CRS reports. Study findings were read from published abstracts. Quotation marks mark exact wording from the pages we read. Claims by officials are attributed to them and labeled as unverified where we could not check them.

Kemetic Minds Editorial Desk

Verified Newsroom

Primary-sourced investigative intelligence on civil rights, voting rights, federal policy, and consumer protection. Sourced from primary legal filings, government statistics, and direct field reporting.

Editorial Standards & Policy → Join Telegram Alerts