SNAP proposal would increase food insecurity, critics say
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has proposed a new rule that would make it harder for millions of Americans to qualify for food stamps, the agency announced on Tuesday.
The proposed rule targets a policy known as "broad-based categorical eligibility." This policy, used by more than 40 states, allows households with incomes above the normal SNAP threshold to qualify for benefits if they receive non-cash TANF assistance, such as childcare or job training.
The Trump administration argues that the current system allows wealthy households to receive benefits and wants to better align eligibility requirements with Congress' original vision. The rule is intended to stop fraudsters and make life more affordable for all Americans.
Rather than throwing money at a broken system, the Trump Administration will continue to stop fraudsters stealing from these important programs, as well as take effective, cost-saving steps to make life more affordable for all Americans.
Impact on millions
If adopted, the rule would reduce public enrollment in the program by roughly 17%. The USDA projects that 6.3 million people would lose access to SNAP benefits in 2029, the year the proposal would take effect.
The consequences extend beyond food stamps. Nearly 1.8 million children would lose access to free school lunches, and 5,500 low-income women would lose access to supplemental food aid for women and children.
Critics say the rule would cut off benefits for people with a gross household income just above 130% of the poverty line, or about $35,500 per year for a family of three.
Opposition from advocates
Anti-hunger advocates are denouncing the proposal, arguing that cutting off so many Americans from food stamps would greatly increase food insecurity at a time when many people are already struggling financially.
Instead of listening to the public sentiment on affordability following the election, the administration is continuing its attacks on vital food assistance and the families who need help to put food on the table.
Rep. Angie Craig, a Democrat from Minnesota and ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee, called the proposal "heartless and cruel." The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities also issued a statement condemning the move.
Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP director for the Food Research and Action Center, said the administration's changes have created additional barriers as hunger in the U.S. is becoming more pervasive. She noted that food insecurity has surged since the pandemic.
Broader context
The proposal comes amid what advocates say is a broader push by the Trump administration to narrow eligibility for food stamps. The "One Big Beautiful Bill" expanded SNAP's work requirements.
As of Oct. 1, states are also required to shoulder a larger share of the cost of administering SNAP, a change advocates say could lead to further benefit cuts. According to USDA figures, more than 5 million Americans have lost access to food stamps since the "Big Beautiful Bill" was enacted in July of 2025.
The USDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The agency stated in the rule text that the current SNAP eligibility standards mean that even wealthy households could technically receive food stamps.
The Trump administration issued a similar proposal in 2019, but the Biden administration withdrew it two years later. The new rule is intended to better align SNAP eligibility requirements with Congress' original vision.
Cyndi Kirkhart, CEO of a food bank in Huntington, West Virginia, said the new challenges as proposed by the USDA only represent an absence of awareness of the actual circumstances and realities of the grandfamilies, seniors, and those managing to maintain employment in a state fraught with unemployment and low-paying work.
Related
