News

from H. Luke Shaefer, faculty director of Poverty Solutions at the University of Michigan

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program, is the cornerstone of our social safety net for poor families. It serves about 1 in every 8 Americans—42 million of us, including about 8 million seniors and 16 million children. A robust body of research finds that SNAP cuts food insecurity and indirectly helps families pay their rent and utility bills. Those who receive it in utero and during early childhood grow up healthier, do better in school, and are more self-sufficient in adulthood. Beyond all the benefits to Americans who receive it, the program has proven effective at bolstering local economies as benefit dollars are spent at local grocery stores.

SNAP has long enjoyed support from both Republicans and Democrats alike, but presently the future of the program is threatened more than in any moment in modern history. Everyone exhaled with relief when the federal shut-down ended and benefits resumed in November. The Trump Administration’s decision to suspend benefits during the shutdown was unprecedented—no presidential administration, including President Trump’s first term, took such a position. It was inspiring to see so many try to fill the gap—state governments, nonprofit food providers, and individual community members. Yet SNAP accounts for roughly $7.8 billion in benefits every single month. There is no filling that gap.

Beyond the potential for more shutdowns, which could occur as early as this coming February, the program’s future is very much in question because of provisions included in the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) this past summer. OBBBA expands work requirements that research finds lead to large numbers of beneficiaries being cut off from aid while having no meaningful impact on rates of employment, and it will shift billions of dollars in program costs from the federal government onto states through a series of changes. It is unclear how states will respond to the much higher program costs they must bear, but the Congressional Budget Office highlights the possibility that some will choose to end the program entirely. What’s more, the Trump Administration terminated the Census Bureau’s annual food security survey, fielded since the early 2000s, reducing the ability to track the impacts of these changes.

Luke Shaefer, faculty director of Poverty Solutions at the University of Michigan

Over the next year, Poverty Solutions will work to raise awareness about the future of SNAP with evidence-based analysis. We have already begun to partner with researchers at the Institute for Social Research to track rates of food hardship nationally. We will offer analysis of SNAP’s success in supporting Americans who struggle to put food on the table and deeper analysis of how the program will be impacted by OBBBA provisions. We will work with the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services—and any other state—to understand the OBBBA provisions, plan, and respond to them in the best ways possible. And if the measures included in the law go into effect, we will provide timely analysis of the impact for the 42 million Americans who depend on the program and the tens of thousands of grocery stores where these dollars are spent.

As a university-based initiative with the charge to help policy makers and communities prevent and alleviate poverty, the Poverty Solutions team will determine what these changes mean for families, neighbors, local grocers, and communities all over the country – and work with our partners to find solutions.