ReportWire

Tag: USDA

  • Democratic attorneys general sue to block USDA guidance that makes some immigrants ineligible for SNAP benefits

    (CNN) — A coalition of 21 attorneys general have sued to block new guidance from the US Department of Agriculture that declares some immigrants, including refugees and those granted asylum, ineligible for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the coalition of other Democratic attorneys general, said in a statement Wednesday that the Trump administration is illegally cutting off benefits for tens of thousands of lawful permanent residents.

    The USDA provided the new guidance to states narrowing SNAP eligibility last month, aligning with rollbacks of the program outlined in President Donald Trump’s domestic policy law that passed earlier this year.

    The attorneys general argue in the lawsuit that the memo goes beyond what the law prescribes since it would make anyone who entered the country through humanitarian protection programs permanently ineligible for SNAP benefits — also known as food stamps — even if they become legal residents.

    The group of attorneys general warn that the USDA’s guidance, which prompts a swift overhaul of eligibility systems, “threatens to destabilize SNAP nationwide,” and could put significant financial strain on states that would have to shoulder the cost of fines.

    The lawsuit asks a federal judge in Oregon to vacate and block the implementation of the USDA’s guidance.

    The filing comes just days after a federal judge in Virginia dismissed an indictment against James, whom President Donald Trump has viewed as a political opponent.

    A spokesperson for USDA declined to comment on “pending litigation.”

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

    Alison Main and CNN

    Source link

  • Oregon Snowpack Off To Dismal Start – KXL

    Oregon basins reflect snowpack as a percent of normal for this time of year, as of Nov. 20, 2025. Courtesy of NRCS-Oregon; USDA.

    Portland, Ore. –After some early season snow in the mountains, some Oregon ski resorts are now nervous about opening on time. Snowpack in every Oregon basin is far below normal for this time of year. “That’s primarily the result of a lot of these atmospheric river events, so far in the season, just missing Oregon,” says NRCS Senior Hydrologist Matt Warbritton. “It is still early in the season for the Cascades and the Blue Mountains. We’ve had several winters in the recent past – 2024, 2022 – where we didn’t really see snowpack pick up until late November and into mid-December.” But, he adds, “Of course, we do want to see snowpack start to accumulate in the mountains as soon as possible, but it’s early in the season.”

    He is starting to worry about overall precipitation totals. Warbritton says, “We do expect more significant rainfall, and precipitation across the board, across the state. And, there are several basins that are in deficits.” Reservoirs, he says, have been slow to fill, “Especially if we move into central and northeastern Oregon, we’re seeing a little bit of a concerning deficit in precipitation.”

    He says fall rain replenishes soil moisture and aids in drought recovery. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, 31% of Oregon remains under some sort of drought designation and more than half the state is considered at least Abnormally Dry. 

    The federal government shutdown delayed data gathering and analysis by NRCS-Oregon, which is managed by the USDA. But Warbritton says they are now caught up after the six-week pause. 

    More about:

    Heather Roberts

    Source link

  • SNAP benefits update: Trump admin says ‘everyone’ will have to reapply

    The Trump administration has revealed plans to make all current SNAP recipients reapply for their benefits in an attempt to prevent fraud.

    Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told Newsmax on Thursday the plan is to “have everyone reapply for their benefits, make sure that everyone that’s taking a taxpayer-funded benefit through … food stamps, that they literally are vulnerable and they can’t survive without it.”

    SNAP fraud can occur when incorrect information is submitted, intentionally or unintentionally, such as misstated income, household size, or identity. Errors can be intentional, or in some cases arise from caseworker mistakes, outdated employer payroll data, or confusion over complex rules. Misusing benefits, such as by exchanging SNAP benefits for cash, is also considered fraud.

    State SNAP agencies already require recipients to recertify their details as often as every six months, and households are expected to report any updates to their employment situation, income, or other personal information.

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

    Source link

  • Supreme Court lets Trump pause full SNAP payments for now

    (CNN) — Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson on Friday temporarily paused a lower court order that required the Trump administration to cover full food stamp benefits for tens of millions of Americans in November, siding with the administration on a short-term basis in a legal fight that has quickly become a defining confrontation of the government shutdown.

    The upshot is that the US Department of Agriculture will not have to immediately honor a lower court order that required it to transfer $4 billion to the key food assistance program by the end of the day. The decision, while temporary, could put at risk the full benefits for millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, to feed themselves and their families.

    The order does not resolve the underlying legal questions raised by the case – and the Trump administration has already committed to using the program’s contingency fund to partially pay benefits. Rather, Jackson’s “administrative stay” freezes any additional action by the administration to give an appeals court additional time to review the case.

    Jackson is the justice assigned to handle emergency appeals from the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals.

    The legal fight over food stamps has emerged as a central pressure point between all three branches during the historically long government shutdown because it is one of the easiest to understand and most tangible impacts of that impasse so far. At stake is food assistance that nearly 42 million Americans rely on.

    It’s unclear how the case will ultimately impact the billions of dollars spent in federal SNAP funding.

    Complying with the lower court

    The Trump administration’s emergency request to the justices came hours after the USDA told states that it was working to comply with the ruling to fully fund the program that was issued a day earlier by US District Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island.

    This latest legal move has injected more uncertainty into whether food stamp recipients would see their full allotments anytime soon.

    The administration had made a similar emergency appeal to a Boston-based federal appeals court Friday morning, but the court had not yet weighed in by the time the USDA sent the guidance, which also said the process to make full funding for November available should be completed later on Friday. The appeals court, in a brief order Friday night, declined to put the payments on hold temporarily while it reviewed the case “as quickly as possible.”

    In its emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, the administration said, “Such a funding lapse is a crisis. But it is a crisis occasioned by congressional failure and one that can only be solved through congressional action.”

    “The district court’s ruling,” US Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court, “is untenable at every turn.”

    The administration moved to appeal McConnell’s order after he ruled on Thursday that the government had to provide full SNAP benefits for November, instead of issuing only partial benefits as he had mandated days earlier.

    Rushing to fund full benefits

    Before the latest legal twist, several states had rushed to start issuing full SNAP payments to their residents. But that has caused problems, according to the administration’s filing to the Supreme Court.

    Sauer told the court that Wisconsin immediately filed for 100% of its residents’ benefits to be placed on their electronic benefit transfer cards. But the USDA rejected the request because it had not yet had time to comply with McConnell’s order. That resulted in the state overdrawing its letter of credit by $20 million.

    Similarly, Kansas issued full benefits worth nearly $32 million to approximately 86,000 households in the state, Sauer said.

    These actions have hurt states that did not move quickly to issue benefits, he continued. They will be unable to receive funding to provide partial payments to their residents under McConnell’s prior order.

    Kansas Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly reacted to the Supreme Court’s action in a statement Friday night, saying, “Today, in accordance with a court’s order and after receiving guidance from the USDA, Kansas sent full November SNAP benefits to all eligible Kansans. These Kansans, most of them children, seniors or people with disabilities, were struggling to put food on their plates.”

    Other states have also promised beneficiaries would start receiving their full allotments as soon as Friday or over the weekend.

    Pennsylvania residents who should have already received their SNAP benefits this month will start seeing their full payments hit their electronic benefit transfer cards on Friday, Gov. Josh Shapiro announced at a press conference earlier in the day.

    “We are hoping that by this evening, by midnight or so, that all of those individuals who were owed money over the first week or so of this month, who hadn’t gotten it from the federal administration, are going to get their money,” Shapiro said.

    Meanwhile, the governors of Maryland and New York said beneficiaries could expect to start seeing their benefits over the weekend.

    The food stamp program has been in legal limbo since last month, when officials said recipients would not receive their payments for November due to the lapse in appropriations for the government.

    The decision prompted two lawsuits, with two federal judges ruling last week that the agency must at least tap into contingency funds to provide partial benefits for this month or, at its discretion, use other revenue to fully fund November’s allotments.

    The agency opted to fund partial benefits, but warned it could take weeks or months for some states to recalculate the allotments and distribute the assistance. The plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case raced back to McConnell earlier this week to argue that he should require the USDA to fully fund the benefits to get the money out the door quickly.

    McConnell obliged. He ruled the administration had not worked fast enough to ensure at least partial benefits reached millions of the program’s recipients and that it had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” when it decided against providing the full benefits this month.

    “People have gone without for too long,” McConnell said during a hearing Thursday. “Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable.”

    Under McConnell’s ruling, the government was required to transfer additional unused tariff revenue used to support child nutrition programs in order to pay full SNAP benefits for November.

    This story has been updated with more details.

    Devan Cole, John Fritze, Tami Luhby and CNN

    Source link

  • How influential was the food pyramid of the 90s?

    Maybe it was a faded poster in your school cafeteria or a worksheet in health class, but if you attended school in the 1990s or 2000s, you’re almost certainly familiar with the food pyramid. 

    The graphic dominated U.S. dietary education until 2011, when the federal government replaced it with MyPlate, which emphasized fruits and veggies as making up roughly half of a healthy diet. 

    Today, health leaders and some influencers are still lashing out at the old pyramid, with its grain-heavy focus, blaming it for some Americans’ poor health. As Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced December plans to unveil new federal dietary guidelines, we looked back at the old food pyramid. Was it really that bad? And did it actually change how we eat?

    And what do experts (who aren’t trying to sell you something) say is a “healthy, balanced diet,” anyway? 

    Old, but not as old as the pyramids in Egypt

    The iconic food pyramid didn’t make its debut in the U.S. until 1992, but its triangular building blocks date back further.  


    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “The Basic Seven,” 1943 

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture published its first dietary guidance in 1894 as a “Farmers’ Bulletin.” Over the next 80 years, as nutrition and food science understanding evolved, the department issued new guidelines on how to eat. In 1933, guidance advised families on how to get nutrients on a Depression-era budget. In 1943, the USDA’s “Basic Seven” food groups focused on healthy eating during wartime rationing. In 1956, USDA simplified its guidance to the “Basic Four” food groups. 


    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “The Basic Four,” 1956 

    Up until the mid-20th century, nutrition guidance focused on vitamin deficiencies and making sure Americans got enough of certain foods. But as chronic health problems like obesity and cardiovascular disease began to rise in the 1950s and ‘60s, so did concerns about the American menu

    In 1980, the USDA and HHS released the first set of dietary guidelines, which the USDA now publishes every five years. The food pyramid and MyPlate are simple, visual representations of these 100-plus-page guidelines over the years. 

    The dietary guidelines of the 1980s and 1990s focused heavily on reducing fats and cholesterol and eating more carbohydrates such as rice, corn and wheat. 


    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Food Wheel,” 1984

    “Carbohydrates are especially helpful in weight-reduction diets because, ounce for ounce, they contain about half as many calories as fats do,” read the 1985 dietary guide.

    Fats, sugars and oils appeared at the 1992 Food Guide Pyramid’s top “use sparingly” category, and grains formed the base with a recommended six to 11 daily servings. 


    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Food Guide Pyramid,” 1992 

    “The pyramid wasn’t ‘bad,’ but it reflected the nutrition science of its time,” said Debbie Petitpain, registered dietician and Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics spokesperson. 

    The thinking at the time was that low-fat diets were protective against heart disease, and carbohydrates were a healthier alternative to fatty foods. “It turned out that was wrong,” said Marlene Schwartz, University of Connecticut food policy and health professor. 

    Research around the turn of the century revealed the reality was more complicated. Added sugars and refined grains also contribute to cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, and not all fats are equally bad for us. “Unsaturated fats from foods like olives, nuts, and seeds can be protective for heart health,” Petitpain said.

    Reflecting this shift, the 2005 dietary guidelines ditched the grain-heavy focus in favor of a more even breakdown across the food groups. For a 2,000-calorie diet, federal guidance recommended six ounces of grains (half of them whole grains), two and a half cups of vegetables, two cups of fruits, five and a half ounces of lean meat or beans and three cups of milk. 

    The USDA ditched the pyramid’s hierarchical sections in favor of vertical colored stripes and added a person walking up the side to represent physical activity. The visual was confusing and hard to parse.


    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “MyPyramid,” 2005

    In search of a more intuitive graphic, the USDA changed to MyPlate in 2011. MyPlate focused on proportions as they might appear on a plate, broken up into roughly even quarters of fruit, vegetables, grains and protein. The underlying portion sizes haven’t changed since 2005.

    U.S. Department of Agriculture, “MyPlate,” 2011 

    Did the food pyramid change how Americans eat? 

    Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, Tufts University nutrition science professor, described the pyramid as a disaster. “People feared all fats, regardless of the type or the food source,” he said. “Refined grains and starches — which we now know have similar health effects as added sugar — were given a free pass.” Despite the pyramid being retired years ago, Mozaffarian said, “The image is burned into people’s minds, conscious and unconscious.”

    The American diet shifted from the 1970s to the 2000s; fewer daily calories came from fat, and more calories came from carbs. Food manufacturers made more “low-fat” and “fat-free” options. “They sort of took the fat out of the cookies, but then they put in more sugar,” Schwartz said. “And so even though the grams of fat went down, the overall nutrition really wasn’t improved.”

    The trend of less fat and more carbs has shown signs of reversing in more recent data post-2000, when “low-carb” diets took off. However, overall intake of both fats and carbs has climbed as Americans consume more calories overall, eat out more and consume more processed foods. 

    Not all experts blame the pyramid.

    Schwartz said Americans’ finances tend to drive their dietary choices. “If you have a limited income and your goal is to feed your children, your dollars are going to go a lot farther with processed, packaged food than fresh ingredients,” she said.

    Research since 1980 shows Americans have regularly failed to eat according to recommended dietary guidelines. “The pyramid definitely shaped nutrition education and public awareness,” Petitpain said, “but its effect on actual eating habits was limited.”

    Surveys show only about one-third of American adults have heard of MyPlate and even fewer have tried to follow its recommendations.

    Public school lunch programs have been required since 2010 to follow MyPlate guidelines and the dietary guidelines can shape federal food programs like WIC. 

    It’s not clear whether December’s federal dietary guidelines release will include a plan to replace MyPlate and its diet recommendations.

    What is a healthy, balanced diet?

    In a media world inundated by fad diets, supplements and cures, knowing what is healthy can feel overwhelming. The nutrition experts we spoke with offered broad guidance, most of which you have probably heard before.

    A healthy diet is varied but includes generous portions of fruits and veggies alongside whole grains, beans, nuts and lean protein. Cheese, milk, poultry, eggs and unprocessed red meats should be consumed in moderation.

    “Modern nutrition advice emphasizes eating patterns rather than single nutrients,” Petitpain said.

    Cutting out any of the macronutrients food groups like carbs or fats might cause weight loss, because you may be eating less food overall, but it is hard to sustain and won’t be healthy in the long run, Schwartz said.

    Experts said MyPlate isn’t a bad place to start.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Federal judge orders Trump administration to make full November SNAP payments

    (CNN) — A federal judge in Rhode Island said Thursday that the Trump administration must fully cover food stamp benefits for tens of millions of Americans in November.

    “People have gone without for too long,” US District Judge John McConnell said during a hastily called hearing Thursday. “Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable.”

    Nearly 42 million Americans receive food stamps. Payments are made on a staggered basis over the course of a month.

    But the US Department of Agriculture took the unprecedented step of halting benefits for November, saying the program had run out of funding amid the government shutdown.

    Despite the judge’s ruling, however, many beneficiaries may have to wait a at least few more days to see the assistance. States send food stamp enrollees’ information to vendors every month so they can load funds onto recipients’ benefit cards, often days or weeks before the new month begins. Those steps need to take place before benefits can restart.

    McConnell’s order comes days after the administration, in response to an earlier order from him, said it would provide only partial food stamp benefits for November by using $4.65 billion in a contingency fund maintained by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps.

    The judge said the administration had not worked fast enough to ensure money reached the program’s millions of recipients and that it had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” when it decided earlier this week that it would not provide the full benefits this month.

    Under McConnell’s new ruling, the government must tap into billions of additional dollars held by USDA in a separate pot of money so full SNAP benefits can be paid. The judge said those payments needed to be made to states, which administer the program, by Friday.

    The administration quickly appealed McConnell’s order to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which is stacked with appointees of Democratic presidents.

    Throughout the brief hearing, McConnell repeatedly chastised an attorney representing the Trump administration over the government’s failure to ensure SNAP benefits quickly reached the millions of Americans who rely on them, stressing the on-ground-impact nearly a week after recipients began missing payments for November.

    “Without SNAP funding for the month of November, 16 million children are immediately at risk of going hungry,” the judge said. “This should never happen in America. In fact, it’s likely that SNAP recipients are hungry as we sit here.”

    On Tuesday, a coalition of cities, non-profits, unions and small businesses that brought the legal challenge complained that the administration was not complying with McConnell’s order from last week. The plaintiffs claimed that since the government admitted in court filings that reduced benefits could take weeks or months to be administered, they were violating his directive that the government work “expeditiously” to ensure November payments are made.

    The judge agreed.

    “It is clear to the court that the administration did not comply,” he said. “The court was clear that the administration had to either make the full payment by this past Monday, or it must ‘expeditiously resolve the administrative and clerical burdens it described in its papers.’ … The record is clear that the administration did neither.”

    The hearing was the latest high-stakes court showdown over food stamps, which the administration had attempted to defund amid the government shutdown, prompting both the lawsuit in Rhode Island and a separate one filed by Democratic governors and state attorneys general in Massachusetts.

    In both cases, McConnell and US District Judge Indira Talwani, of the federal court in Boston, made clear last week that the USDA must tap into contingency funds to provide at least partial SNAP benefits this month, but they left it up to government to decide whether to use unused tariff funds meant for child nutrition programs to provide full SNAP benefits for November. Both judges were appointed by former President Barack Obama.

    The administration said earlier this week that it opposed using the nearly $17 billion left in the child nutrition fund because it would endanger the nation’s free and reduced-price school meals program, which serves about 29 million children a day. (The agency has transferred $750 million in tariff revenue to the WIC food assistance program for pregnant women, new moms and young children.)

    But McConnell ruled on Thursday that the administration’s choice not to make full payments by dipping into the other pot of money at the USDA did not reflect reasoned agency decision-making.

    He pointed specifically to the USDA’s decision to pull money from that pot to the fund the WIC food assistance program, saying that move “undermines” their argument against using it for SNAP payments.

    “A rationale premised on such legal errors must be set aside as arbitrary and capricious,” McConnell said.

    The administration pushed back strongly on claims that it wasn’t complying with McConnell’s earlier order and that it had made a slap-dash decision to only partially fund food stamps this month. It insisted in court papers filed Wednesday that since it had released the money from its contingency fund to states and provided guidance on how state officials can calculate reduced payments, “there is nothing more USDA could do.”

    “We resolved all of the burdens that the government is responsible for,” Tyler Becker, a Justice Department lawyer, said during Thursday’s hearing.

    Attorneys for the plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case said the new ruling from McConnell was a “major victory” for the millions of Americans who receive the federal food benefits.

    “This immoral and unlawful decision by the administration has shamefully delayed SNAP payments, taking food off the table of hungry families,” said Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “We shouldn’t have to force the President to care for his citizens, but we will do whatever is necessary to protect people and communities.”

    Recalculating partial benefits

    The swiftly changing legal landscape has left states scrambling to catch up and recipients wondering when they would receive any assistance.

    The USDA provided states with guidance on Tuesday on how to issue benefits based on cutting households’ maximum allotments in half, which the agency initially said was all it could provide with the available contingency funds.

    To provide partial benefits, which has never been done before, states have to reprogram their systems to recalculate recipients’ payments.

    Illinois said that beneficiaries would start seeing payments on Friday, while North Carolina and Massachusetts said recipients could expect to get their assistance next week. But Pennsylvania wrote the agency a letter saying that it would take a few weeks to get aid to recipients because of the burdensome process the USDA chose. Other states CNN contacted could not give a timeline for when benefits would be distributed.

    By midweek, however, the situation has changed twice in less than 24 hours. On Wednesday evening, the USDA announced it could actually pay 65% of maximum benefits from the contingency fund and issued new guidance to states, which would necessitate another round of recalculations. The next day, McConnell ordered full payments to be made for the month.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    Devan Cole, Tami Luhby and CNN

    Source link

  • Colorado Department of Human Services receives federal guidance to issue partial SNAP benefits

    DENVER — The Trump administration is supposed to start rolling out partial SNAP benefits Wednesday. This is a significant development for the roughly 600,000 Coloradans that rely on this assistance to buy food.

    The money normally allocated for SNAP is frozen right now during the federal government shutdown as Congress fails to reach a deal on the national budget.

    Families stretching every dollar at grocery stores and relying on food banks won’t see an end to that struggle immediately because it could still take some time before these partial SNAP benefits reach them.

    The Colorado Department of Human Services received federal guidance to issue the partial assistance and is making technical system updates with its EBT processor to distribute funds as quickly as possible.

    CDHS receives federal guidance to issue partial SNAP benefits

    Denver7 spoke with Jefferson County nonprofit The Action Center. The group said families are stressed, confused, and facing a ripple effect that could last for months.

    “It’s going to be half the amount that they normally get. We’ll see that ripple effect with need for families into December, into January, and long term, where they’ve had to make really, really hard decisions, and how it’s going to affect their financial well being in months to come,” Sunny Garcia with the Action Center said.

    What Garcia is talking about is roughly $4.6 billion being released in emergency funds, which is only half of what’s usually given out. That in itself could cause confusion.

    “The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has not designated specific dollars per state,” the Colorado Department of Human Services said. “The compliance ruling cites that the contingency fund will be obligated to “cover 50% of eligible households’ current allotments.”

    States will now recalculate benefits based on new maximum allotments, but families shouldn’t expect to receive half of their usual SNAP benefits for November.

    Denver7

    Denver7 | Your Voice: Get in touch with Sophia Villalba

    Denver7’s Sophia Villalba covers stories that have an impact in all of Colorado’s communities. If you’d like to get in touch with Sophia, fill out the form below to send her an email.

    Sophia Villalba

    Source link

  • About 1 in 5 kids are at risk of losing SNAP. Centralized control keeps failing low-income families.

    The federal government shutdown is disrupting major federal programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Now one in five children nationwide risks losing benefits because Congress has failed to pass a budget. On October 30, a federal judge ordered the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to draw from SNAP’s contingency fund to cover payments, but that fund holds roughly $5–6 billion—barely enough to cover three weeks of payments for a program that spends more than $8 billion each month. 

    The ongoing deadlock highlights SNAP’s fragility due to its near-total reliance on federal funding. More importantly, its chronic dependency on Washington’s one-size-fits-all solutions has left it failing the very children it’s supposed to help. The best way to ensure healthy outcomes for kids and protect them from the partisan crossfire of D.C. politicking is to break the federal grip on nutrition programs.

    Washington has become a permanent fixture of childhood in low-income America. The N in SNAP stands for “nutrition,” but federal food aid has routinely failed to deliver healthy diets for low-income families despite nearly $2 trillion in spending since 2000. Almost one-quarter of food purchases by SNAP households are for junk food, which undermines the efforts of doctors and other federal agencies to promote healthy diets. SNAP participants also have higher rates of obesity and poorer nutrition than nonparticipants, regularly failing to meet dietary guidelines while performing poorly on key health indicators. All of this has helped drive child obesity to nearly one in five children and adolescents as of 2020.

    SNAP may provide assistance to families, but a program that consistently fails to deliver positive outcomes for the children it aims to serve falls far short of its purpose.

    We’ve seen this problem before—and its solution. Like SNAP, Congress designed Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) to assist low-income households, but its structure created perverse incentives that encouraged single motherhood, punished work, and trapped families in dependency for years. The 1996 welfare reforms replaced AFDC with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), a fixed block grant program that provided states with much-needed flexibility to innovate and tailor their programs to fit the needs of their residents.

    States leveraged TANF’s block grant flexibility by shifting funds from pure cash assistance to targeted supports such as childcare subsidies, job training, and education programs. These reforms helped parents—especially single mothers—overcome employment barriers and increase their income. The results surpassed everyone’s predictions. Within a decade, more than 1.6 million children were lifted out of poverty. Additionally, poverty in single-mother families fell to record lows, and overall poverty and child hunger declined substantially. All of this occurred while welfare caseloads declined by more than half.

    By converting SNAP into a block grant and gradually decoupling it from federal dollars, states would be able to take on decision-making and responsibility for their programs, controlling funding and tailoring solutions to the needs of their low-income families. Just as TANF prioritized economic independence and employment, state SNAP reforms could prioritize better health and self-sufficiency.

    The current shutdown should serve as a catalyst for Congress to reassess the federal role in welfare. Children shouldn’t go hungry because Congress can’t govern—nor should they be dependent on the D.C. bureaucracy for their food. SNAP’s centralization and reliance on federal dollars have caused it to fail at meeting the nutritional needs of children, and now, millions of families face the prospect of sudden benefit disruptions.

    Congress should stop treating Americans as collateral damage in their fight over extending Obamacare subsidies and end the shutdown immediately. While restoring federal funding will avoid immediate disruptions to benefits, Congress should also reform welfare to ensure it helps rather than hinders the families who rely on it. 

    SNAP is outdated. Congress should devolve funding and administration to the states, allowing them to pursue more effective nutrition policies for low-income families.

    Romina Boccia

    Source link

  • Will snap recipients get ‘food stamps’ in November? The latest

    Two federal judges ruled on Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration must continue to pay for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) using emergency reserve funds during the government shutdown.

    However, it remains unclear exactly when SNAP recipients may receive benefits after the administration announced that it would freeze payments starting November 1.

    Newsweek has contacted the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which runs SNAP, for comment via an email sent outside regular business hours.

    Why It Matters

    SNAP, also known as the food stamp program, is a major piece of the nation’s social safety net.

    It helps almost 42 million low- and no-income people across the U.S. buy groceries. Most are in households with children, older adults or people with disabilities, and many are working families, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

    Some SNAP users told Newsweek about their fears and uncertainty about how they will be able to afford food if they don’t receive their November benefits, while food banks were bracing for a spike in demand.

    Why Were SNAP Payments Paused?

    The USDA said it planned to freeze payments to the SNAP program starting November 1 because it said it could no longer keep funding it due to the shutdown, which is now in its second month. SNAP costs about $8 billion per month.

    “Bottom line, the well has run dry,” the USDA said on its website. “At this time, there will be no benefits issued November 01.”

    Democrat state attorneys general and governors from 25 states and the District of Columbia challenged the plan to pause the program, arguing that there is money available to fund the program and that the Trump administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions.

    The administration said it wasn’t allowed to use a contingency fund of about $5 billion for the program, which reversed a USDA plan from before the shutdown that said money would be tapped to keep SNAP running. 

    The Democrat officials said not only could that money be used, but that it must be. They also said a separate fund with around $23 billion is available for the cause.

    Judges Order Trump Admin. To Pay SNAP

    On Friday, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell in Providence, Rhode Island, ordered the government to fund SNAP using at least the contingency funds. 

    “SNAP benefits have never, until now, been terminated,” McConnell said at a hearing on Friday. “And the United States has in fact admitted that the contingency funds are appropriately used during a shutdown and that occurred in 2019.” 

    The judge, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, rejected the administration’s claims that the contingency funds could only be used for natural disasters.

    In Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, another Obama appointee, also ruled that the USDA has to pay for SNAP, calling the suspension “unlawful.” 

    She ordered the federal government to advise the court by Monday as to whether they will use the emergency reserve funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program “using both contingency funds and additional available funds.”

    Are We Getting SNAP Payments?

    Despite the rulings, the benefits for millions of people will be delayed in November because the process of loading SNAP cards can take a week or more in many states.

    Even if the contingency funds are tapped, it will not be enough to fully cover the costs of the program.

    The contingency funds are estimated to be between $5 and $6 billion, while a month’s SNAP benefits cost around $8 billion. In court papers, attorneys for the government said it costs between $8.5 billion to $9 billion each month to fund SNAP at its regular level.

    The government’s attorneys also wrote that using the contingency fund for partial payments could cause problems, warning of “the catastrophe likely to result from each State reprogramming its system repeatedly for pro-rated payments and full payments.”

    They also said that reprogramming state systems for partial payments “would take weeks, if it can be done at all.”

    What People Are Saying 

    President Donald Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social site on Friday: “I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT. Therefore, I have instructed our lawyers to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible. It is already delayed enough due to the Democrats keeping the Government closed through the monthly payment date and, even if we get immediate guidance, it will unfortunately be delayed while States get the money out. If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding, just like I did with Military and Law Enforcement Pay.”

    Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat and the ranking member of the Senate Agriculture committee that oversees SNAP, said on X: “GOOD NEWS: A judge ruled the administration is required by law to use emergency funding to provide food assistance to families in need. Trump has no excuse to withhold food assistance. If the admin does not issue SNAP, it is purely a cruel political decision, not a legal one.”

    Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, one of the plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case, said in a statement on Friday: “I applaud the court for its quick action to provide immediate, emergency relief to more than 42 million Americans, including children, seniors and veterans, who would otherwise go hungry without access to federal nutrition programs. For now, these families can continue putting food on their tables, and thousands of nonprofit food banks, pantries and other organizations across the country can avoid the impossible burden that would have resulted if SNAP benefits had been halted.”

    What Happens Next

    Both Talwani and McConnell have asked for an update from the federal government by Monday.

    Source link

  • Federal judges order Trump administration to fund SNAP benefits by Monday

    Volunteers at Arlington Charities gather and pack fruit, produce and pantry items for neighbors in need in Tarrant County.

    Volunteers at Arlington Charities gather and pack fruit, produce and pantry items for neighbors in need in Tarrant County.


    Fousia Abdullahi

    fabdullahi@star-telegram.com

    Days after 25 states and the District of Columbia sued the federal government, two federal judges ruled in favor of two states that sued the US. Department of Agriculture over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits pause due to the government shutdown.

    The USDA announced earlier this week that benefits would be paused during the federal government shutdown, which began Oct 1.

    The judges in Rhode Island and Massachusetts issued a temporary order to the Trump administration to continue funding the benefits.

    They both ruled that the administration should utilize the SNAP contingency funds and other appropriated funds during the shutdown.

    Judge Indira Talwan, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, said on Friday that even the contingency fund might not cover all the SNAP benefits.

    “At least some recipients will not receive SNAP payments at the beginning of the month, and this absence of SNAP payments will undoubtedly result in substantial harm to them,” Talwan said.

    Tarrant County residents account for almost 225,000 individuals who rely on SNAP benefits out of the 3.5 million Texans who are eligible for the program.

    North Texas organizations have been scrambling to ensure they have sufficient donations to support SNAP recipients and federal employees who have been out of work for nearly a month.

    Trey Harper, executive director of Community Link Mission in Saginaw, said that people who have an EBT card for SNAP can use the Double Up Food Bucks program at the Saginaw Farmers Market, the Azel Farmers’ Market and other participating farmers markets. The program allows recipients to double their SNAP dollars for every dollar spent on fruits and vegetables.

    “The job is really too great for private philanthropy to carry on without the government’s help,” Harper said. “So we’re at a point that is kind of a perfect storm brewing as we see federal dollars cut to agencies that are providing for those who are reliant on the government, whether for their paycheck or for their benefit of receiving supplemental nutrition dollars.”

    Local restaurants have also stepped up to offer free food to those in need across the county.

    According to a statement by Arlington charities, SNAP benefits last month averaged $175 per recipient in Tarrant County.

    This story was originally published October 31, 2025 at 6:35 PM.

    Fousia Abdullahi

    Source link

  • Judges order USDA to restart SNAP funding, but hungry families won’t get immediate relief

    Two federal judges told the U.S. Department of Agriculture in separate rulings Friday that it must begin using billions of dollars in contingency funding to provide federal food assistance to poor American families despite the federal shutdown, but gave the agency until Monday to decide how to do so.

    Both Obama-appointed judges rejected Trump administration arguments that more than $5 billion in USDA contingency funds could not legally be tapped to continue Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for nearly 42 million people — about 1 in 8 Americans — while the federal government remains closed. But both also left unclear how exactly the relief should be provided, or when it will arrive for millions of families set to lose benefits starting Saturday.

    The two rulings came almost simultaneously Friday.

    In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani stopped short of granting California and a coalition of 24 other Democrat-led states a temporary restraining order they had requested. But she ruled that the states were likely to succeed in their arguments that the USDA’s total shutoff of SNAP benefits — despite having billions in emergency contingency funds on hand — was unlawful.

    Talwani gave USDA until Monday to tell her whether they would authorize “only reduced SNAP benefits” using the contingency funding — which would not cover the total $8.5 billion to $9 billion needed for all November benefits, according to the USDA — or would authorize “full SNAP benefits using both the Contingency Funds and additional available funds.”

    Separately, in Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John McConnell granted a temporary restraining order requested by nonprofit organizations, ruling from the bench that SNAP must be funded with at least the contingency funds “as soon as possible,” and requesting an update on progress by Monday.

    California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta — whose office helped bring the states’ lawsuit — praised the decisions of the two courts, saying SNAP benefits “provide an essential hunger safety net” to 5.5 million Californians. “Simply put, the stakes could not be higher.”

    Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which represented the nonprofit groups, said the ruling in that case “affirms what both the law and basic decency require” and “protects millions of families, seniors, and veterans from being used as leverage in a political fight.”

    The White House referred questions about the ruling to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not respond to a request for comment. It was not clear if the administration would appeal the rulings.

    While the orders were a win for states and the nation’s SNAP recipients, they do not mean that all those recipients will be spared a lapse in their food aid, state officials stressed. State and local food banks continued scrambling to prepare for a deluge of need starting Saturday.

    Asked Thursday if a ruling in the states’ favor would mean SNAP funds would be immediately loaded onto CalFresh and other benefits cards, Bonta said “the answer is no, unfortunately.”

    “Our best estimates are that [SNAP benefit] cards could be loaded and used in about a week,” he said, calling that lag “problematic.”

    “There could be about a week where people are hungry and need food,” he said. For new applicants to the program, he said, it could take even longer.

    The rulings came as the now monthlong shutdown continued Friday with no immediate end in sight.

    It also came after President Trump called Thursday for the Senate to end the shutdown by first ending the filibuster, a longstanding rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections to legislation. The rule has traditionally been favored by lawmakers as a means of blocking particularly partisan measures, and is currently being used by Democrats to resist the will of the current 53-seat Republican majority.

    Los Angeles Regional Food Bank Chief Executive Michael Flood, standing alongside Bonta as members of the California National Guard worked behind them stuffing food boxes Thursday, said his organization was preparing for massive weekend lines, similar to those seen during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “This is a disaster type of situation,” Flood said.

    “5.5 million Californians, 1.5 million children and adults in L.A. County alone, will be left high and dry — illegally so, unnecessarily so, in a way that is morally bankrupt,” Bonta said.

    Bonta blamed the shutdown on Trump and his administration, and said the USDA broke the law by not tapping its contingency funds to continue payments.

    Bonta said SNAP benefits have never been disrupted during previous federal government shutdowns, and should never have been disrupted during this shutdown, either.

    “That was avoidable,” he said. “Trump created this problem.”

    The Trump administration has blamed the shutdown and the looming disruption to SNAP benefits entirely on Democrats in Congress, who have blocked short-term spending measures to restart the government and fund SNAP. Democrats are holding out to pressure Republicans into rescinding massive cuts to subsidies that help millions of Americans afford health insurance.

    Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, previously told The Times that Democrats should be the ones getting asked “when the shutdown will end,” because “they are the ones who have decided to shut down the government so they can use working Americans and SNAP benefits as ‘leverage’ to pursue their radical left wing agenda.”

    “Americans are suffering because of Democrats,” Jackson said.

    In their opposition to the states’ request for a temporary restraining order requiring the disbursement of funds, attorneys for the USDA argued that using emergency funds to cover November SNAP benefits would deplete funds meant to provide “critical support in the event of natural disasters and other uncontrollable catastrophes,” and could actually cause more disruption to benefits down the line.

    They wrote that SNAP requires between $8.5 billion and $9 billion each month, and the USDA’s contingency fund has only about $5.25 billion, meaning it could not fully fund November benefits even if it did release contingency funding. Meanwhile, “a partial payment has never been made — and for good reason,” because it would force every state to recalculate benefits for recipients and then recalibrate their systems to provide the new amounts, they wrote.

    That “would take weeks, if it can be done at all,” and would then have to be undone in order to issue December benefits at normal levels, assuming the shutdown would have lifted by then, they wrote.

    Simply pausing the benefits to immediately be reissued whenever the shutdown ends is the smarter and less disruptive course of action, they argued.

    In addition to suing the administration, California and its leaders have been rushing to ensure that hungry families have something to eat in coming days. Gov. Gavin Newsom directed $80 million to food banks to stock up on provisions, and activated the National Guard to help package food for those who need it.

    Counties have also been working to offset the need, including by directing additional funding to food banks and other resource centers and asking partners in the private sector to assist.

    Dozens of organizations in California have written to Newsom calling on him to use state funds to fully cover the missing federal benefits, in order to prevent “a crisis of unthinkable magnitude,” but Newsom has suggested that is not possible given the scale of funding withheld.

    SNAP served about 41.7 million people in 2024, at an annual cost of nearly $100 billion, according to the USDA. Children and older people accounted for more than 63% of California recipients.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Kevin Rector

    Source link

  • ‘Everyone is doing well’: President Trump praises economy amid layoffs, potential SNAP crisis

    ‘Everyone is doing well’: President Trump praises economy amid layoffs, potential SNAP crisis

    President Trump promotes economic prosperity during his visit to Japan, while layoffs and a federal shutdown threaten millions back in the U.S.

    Updated: 3:03 PM PDT Oct 28, 2025

    Editorial Standards ⓘ


    White House Correspondent

    President Donald Trump is promoting Japanese companies investing $550 billion in the United States while visiting the East Asian country. The president said the funds would be “at my direction” as part of a trade framework secured with Japan. The president also boasted about the U.S. economy, despite contrasting economic challenges.”Well, everyone in our country is now doing well. My first term, we built the greatest economy in the history of the world. We had an economy like nobody has seen before now. We’re doing it again, but this time, actually, it’s going to be much bigger, much stronger,” Trump said.The president highlighted the stock market reaching all-time highs, but economists point to other indicators that tell a different story. Amazon announced it is cutting 14,000 jobs, UPS is eliminating roughly 48,000 positions and closing more than 90 buildings as part of a turnaround plan, and Target, Ford, and GM have also announced layoffs amid slowing demand. Additionally, the federal government shutdown threatens food aid benefits for more than 40 million Americans as soon as Nov. 1, and September’s CPI data showed prices are rising again just as the Federal Reserve has cut interest rates to support the economy.”I don’t really understand the optimism to be perfectly honest, and I’m a very optimistic, very little of a ‘doomer’ person. We’ve had seven months in a row of contractions and manufacturing output. The labor market cooled to such an extent that it forced the Fed to cut rates in September,” said Jai Kedia from the Cato Institute.President Trump is preparing to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping amid the ongoing U.S.–China trade war. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the two countries have reached a “very successful framework” ahead of their summit, covering tariffs, rare-earth exports and large U.S. agricultural purchases.Meanwhile, 26 states and Washington, D.C., are suing the USDA, arguing the agency has contingency funds that could be used to maintain SNAP benefits during the shutdown. In a memo, the USDA stated that those funds can only be used for a natural disaster or other emergency, not to operate during a shutdown, and placed the blame on Senate Democrats, saying, “We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats. Continue to hold out for the Far-Left wing of the party or reopen the government so mothers, babies, and the most vulnerable among us can receive timely WIC and SNAP allotments.” The states argue the law requires the USDA to issue benefits as long as money is available.It comes after another failed vote occurred today in the Senate. A federal judge in San Francisco has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from firing federal workers during the government shutdown. This move comes as a lawsuit challenges recent job cuts in education, health, and other areas.For more coverage from the Washington News Bureau here:

    WASHINGTON —

    President Donald Trump is promoting Japanese companies investing $550 billion in the United States while visiting the East Asian country. The president said the funds would be “at my direction” as part of a trade framework secured with Japan.

    The president also boasted about the U.S. economy, despite contrasting economic challenges.

    “Well, everyone in our country is now doing well. My first term, we built the greatest economy in the history of the world. We had an economy like nobody has seen before now. We’re doing it again, but this time, actually, it’s going to be much bigger, much stronger,” Trump said.

    The president highlighted the stock market reaching all-time highs, but economists point to other indicators that tell a different story.

    Amazon announced it is cutting 14,000 jobs, UPS is eliminating roughly 48,000 positions and closing more than 90 buildings as part of a turnaround plan, and Target, Ford, and GM have also announced layoffs amid slowing demand.

    Additionally, the federal government shutdown threatens food aid benefits for more than 40 million Americans as soon as Nov. 1, and September’s CPI data showed prices are rising again just as the Federal Reserve has cut interest rates to support the economy.

    “I don’t really understand the optimism to be perfectly honest, and I’m a very optimistic, very little of a ‘doomer’ person. We’ve had seven months in a row of contractions and manufacturing output. The labor market cooled to such an extent that it forced the Fed to cut rates in September,” said Jai Kedia from the Cato Institute.

    President Trump is preparing to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping amid the ongoing U.S.–China trade war. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the two countries have reached a “very successful framework” ahead of their summit, covering tariffs, rare-earth exports and large U.S. agricultural purchases.

    Meanwhile, 26 states and Washington, D.C., are suing the USDA, arguing the agency has contingency funds that could be used to maintain SNAP benefits during the shutdown.

    In a memo, the USDA stated that those funds can only be used for a natural disaster or other emergency, not to operate during a shutdown, and placed the blame on Senate Democrats, saying, “We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats. Continue to hold out for the Far-Left wing of the party or reopen the government so mothers, babies, and the most vulnerable among us can receive timely WIC and SNAP allotments.”

    The states argue the law requires the USDA to issue benefits as long as money is available.

    It comes after another failed vote occurred today in the Senate. A federal judge in San Francisco has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from firing federal workers during the government shutdown. This move comes as a lawsuit challenges recent job cuts in education, health, and other areas.

    For more coverage from the Washington News Bureau here:

    Source link

  • Is Walmart closing Nov. 1 as SNAP benefits run out for millions? What to know

    As SNAP benefits run out for November, rumors circulate that Walmart will close its doors.

    As SNAP benefits run out for November, rumors circulate that Walmart will close its doors.

    Photo by Zack Yeo on Unsplash.

    As the government shutdown continues, millions of people will lose SNAP benefits in November. With that comes social media chatter about store closures; but is it true?

    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP, is set to “run dry” Nov. 1, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    As millions of Americans prepare for the loss of food assistance right before the holidays, online rumors circulated that Walmart will be closing its doors as a direct effect.

    One TikTok video, masked as a news story, said Walmart was halting in-person shopping to “avoid possible disorder” and in an attempt to prevent “chaos before it starts.”

    Other individuals have taken to social media, spreading the message that Walmart will close and urging people to prepare.

    One TikTok user posted a video that got over 1 million views with the caption; “Breaking news just in — Walmart said not today, baby! November 1st, they locking them doors like Fort Knox. You can order online, but don’t even think about stepping inside!”

    The truth

    A Walmart spokesperson told McClatchy News on Oct. 28 that the rumors are not true and Walmart has no plans to close and will remain open as usual.

    Digging into the rumors, Snopes found several sources that may have contributed to the origin of the rumors, including social media posts and vague news headlines.

    Despite the misinformation spreading online regarding the closing of Walmart, it is true that millions of Americans are preparing for the impact of not receiving their expected food assistance.

    Although the USDA has roughly $5 to $6 billion in a contingency fund designated for emergency scenarios, it is not enough to cover the $8 billion in SNAP benefits set to go out in November, according to the Hill.

    Just as well, the USDA said in a memo, it legally cannot use the fund to cover regular benefits.

    “SNAP contingency funds are only available to supplement regular monthly benefits when amounts have been appropriated for, but are insufficient to cover, benefits. The contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exists,” the memo said.

    It goes on to say, “the contingency fund is a source of funds for contingencies, such as the Disaster SNAP program, which provides food purchasing benefits for individuals in disaster areas, including natural disasters like hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods, that can come on quickly and without notice.”

    Jennifer Rodriguez

    mcclatchy-newsroom

    Jennifer Rodriguez is a McClatchy National Real-Time reporter covering the Central and Midwest regions. She joined McClatchy in 2023 after covering local news in Youngstown, Ohio, for over six years. Jennifer has made several achievements in her journalism career, including receiving the Robert R. Hare Award in English, the Emerging Leader Justice and Equality Award, the Regional Edward R. Murrow Award and the Distinguished Hispanic Ohioan Award.

    Jennifer Rodriguez

    Source link

  • Fact-checking a chart of SNAP recipients by ethnicity

    With millions of people at risk of losing access to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program starting Nov. 1, a viral chart claimed to show the majority of the nation’s food stamp recipients are non-white and noncitizens.

    The chart, titled “Food Stamps by Ethnicity,” listed 36 groups of people and said it showed the “percentage of U.S. households receiving SNAP benefits.” 

    The groups were labeled by nationality such as “Afghan,” “Somali,” “Iraqi,”  along with the racial groups “white,” “Black” and “native.” The chart appeared to show that Afghan people were the largest group receiving SNAP benefits, at 45.6%, followed by Somali (42.4%) and Iraqi (34.8%). White people, represented on the chart with the American flag, were third to last at 8.6%.

    The federal government shutdown, which started Oct. 1, is the cause of the looming SNAP funding lapse. SNAP provides food purchasing benefits to low-income households. Conservatives have peddled the misleading narrative that Democrats are pushing for healthcare for illegal immigrants, and people commenting on the chart rehashed a similar talking point.

    “Who is getting their EBT cut,” read the caption of an Oct. 25 X post sharing the chart, which had 3.1 million views as of Oct. 27. EBT stands for Electronic Benefits Transfer, which is a SNAP payment system.

    “Only 18.7% of EBT or food stamp recipients are American. Let that sink in…” read another post sharing the chart, seemingly mistakenly referring to the figure next to the word “Armenian”; there was no “American” category in the chart. “We are subsidizing foreigners on the taxpayers dime.”

    The chart doesn’t show the full picture of SNAP recipients by race or ethnicity. The most reliable source for the breakdown of SNAP recipients by demographics comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the program. 

    According to the most recent USDA data available, from 2023, white people are the largest racial group receiving SNAP benefits, at 35.4%. African Americans are next, making up 25.7% of recipients, then Hispanic people at 15.6%, Asian people at 3.9%, Native Americans at 1.3% and multiracial people at 1%. The race of 17% of participants is unknown.

    The same report found that 89.4% of SNAP recipients were U.S born citizens, meaning less than 11% of SNAP participants were foreign-born. Of the latter figure, 6.2% were naturalized citizens, 1.1% were refugees and 3.3% were other noncitizens, including lawful permanent residents and other eligible noncitizens.

    While large shares of the groups listed in the chart may receive food stamps, “they are certainly a tiny share of the households and spending on SNAP,” said Tracy Roof, University of Richmond associate professor of political science.

    Survey data shows incomplete picture on SNAP recipients

    The chart shared on social media originated from a June blog post from The Personal Finance Wizards, which cited “U.S. Census Table S0201” as its source. The site offers financial advice, but published a disclaimer saying it cannot guarantee the “completeness, accuracy, or reliability” of its information.

    The site’s authors appeared to cherry-pick groups to include in the chart, noting, “It’s important to note that the graph highlights a selection of ethnicities we felt would be most relevant and engaging for our audience.” It did not name an author.

    In a comment on an Instagram post sharing the chart, Personal Finance Wizards shared a link to the U.S. Census table it used. It shows data from the 2024 American Community Survey, filtered by 49 racial and ethnic groups. The filtered groups don’t completely overlap with the groups in the chart, but the dataset has a column for “households with food stamp/SNAP benefits” which shows percentages similar to the ones in the chart. 

    The data does not show what percentage of all SNAP beneficiaries belong to an ethnic or nationality group. 

    Joseph Llobrera, senior director of research for the food assistance team at the liberal think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the chart appeared to show the shares of households receiving SNAP based on the household respondents’ reported ancestry, which is different from citizenship status.

    “Without context, this graphic is misleading and may lead some to conclude that many non-citizens are participating in SNAP, which is not true,” he said.

    The American Community Survey allows respondents to self-identify their race. It also defines ancestry as a “person’s ethnic origin or descent, roots or heritage, place of birth, or place of parents’ ancestors before their arrival in the United States.” 

    Colleen Heflin, Syracuse University expert on food insecurity, nutrition and welfare policy, said the American Community Survey data on SNAP receipts is self-reported, and that question “is known to have a great deal of measurement error” when compared with SNAP administrative data.

    Chart reflects higher levels of need in groups with higher shares of SNAP participation 

    Groups such as Afghans and Iraqis, who are first and third on the chart, would have been more likely to have immediately qualified for the SNAP program before the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s passage because of their special immigration status. 

    Before the law’s passage, refugees and people who had been granted asylum were also eligible for SNAP without a waiting period. Somalis, who were second on the chart, are “more likely” to qualify based on those criteria, Roof said.

    Other noncitizens, such as lawful permanent residents, could be eligible for SNAP only after a five-year waiting period. 

    But the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act changed the eligibility, making refugees and asylees ineligible. Immigrants in the country illegally are not and have never been eligible for SNAP.

    RELATED: Food stamps: Facts to know as millions on SNAP face losing benefits during shutdown

    Source link

  • Trump administration posts notice that no federal food aid will go out Nov. 1

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture has posted a notice on its website saying federal food aid will not go out on November 1, raising the stakes for families nationwide as the government shutdown drags on.

    The new notice comes after the Trump administration said it would not tap roughly $5 billion in contingency funds to keep benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as SNAP, flowing into November. That program helps about 1 in 8 Americans buy groceries.

    “Bottom line, the well has run dry,” the USDA notice says. “At this time, there will be no benefits issued on November 01. We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats.”

    The shutdown, which began Oct. 1, is now the second-longest on record. While the Republican administration took steps leading up to the shutdown to ensure SNAP benefits were paid this month, the cutoff would expand the impact of the impasse to a wider swath of Americans – and some of those most in need – unless a political resolution is found in just a few days.

    The administration blames Democrats, who say they will not agree to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate with them on extending expiring subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Republicans say Democrats must first agree to reopen the government before negotiations.

    Democratic lawmakers have written to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins requesting to use contingency funds to cover the bulk of next month’s benefits.

    But a USDA memo that surfaced Friday says “contingency funds are not legally available to cover regular benefits.” The document says the money is reserved for things like helping people in disaster areas.

    It cited a storm named Melissa, which has strengthened into a major hurricane, as an example of why it’s important to have the money available to mobilize quickly in the event of a disaster.

    The prospect of families not receiving food aid has deeply concerned states run by both parties.

    Some states have pledged to keep SNAP benefits flowing even if the federal program halts payments, but there are questions about whether U.S. government directives may allow that to happen. The USDA memo also says states would not be reimbursed for temporarily picking up the cost.

    Other states are telling SNAP recipients to be ready for the benefits to stop. Arkansas and Oklahoma, for example, are advising recipients to identify food pantries and other groups that help with food.

    Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., accused Republicans and Trump of not agreeing to negotiate.

    “The reality is, if they sat down to try to negotiate, we could probably come up with something pretty quickly,” Murphy said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We could open up the government on Tuesday or Wednesday, and there wouldn’t be any crisis in the food stamp program.”

    Copyright © 2025 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

    AP

    Source link

  • Trump considers massive bailout of at least $10 billion for American farmers hurt by his trade war

    Washington (CNN) — American farmers are having a tough year, in no small part because of President Donald Trump’s trade war. Now, the White House is gearing up to extend them a multi-billion-dollar bailout, sources tell CNN.

    Surging costs and foreign retaliation from tariffs have hurt the US agriculture industry — as have immigration-related labor shortages and plummeting commodity prices. Farm production expenses are estimated to reach $467.4 billion in 2025, according to the Agriculture Department, up $12 billion from last year.

    Farm bankruptcies rose in the first half of the year to the highest level since 2021, according to US courts data.

    Trump’s policies have exacerbated those woes, from the deportation of the industry’s key migrant workforce to renewed trade tensions between the United States and China. And for traditional American crops, such as soybeans, the situation has grown particularly precarious.

    “There’s no doubt that the farm economy is in a significant challenge right now, especially our row croppers,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told reporters Tuesday. “So not just soybeans, although I think they’re probably the top of the list, but corn, wheat, sorghum, cotton, et cetera.”

    Indeed, the US soybean industry has become the poster child of the farm economy’s plight in the first year of Trump’s second term. The president recognizes these problems, White House officials tells CNN, and has increased pressure on his administration to address them urgently.

    Over the past few weeks, the White House has held a series of interagency meetings with the Departments of Agriculture and Treasury as they attempt to finalize a relief package for US farmers, the sources said. Discussions over the best way to aid the agriculture industry are ongoing, the officials said, but they have zeroed in on two options.

    “There are a lot of levers we can use to help ease the pain they are feeling,” one of the officials told CNN. One idea, floated publicly by Trump as recently as Wednesday, is to give farmers a percentage of the income the United States is receiving from the administration’s tariffs on goods being imported into the country.

    “We’ve made so much money on Tariffs, that we are going to take a small portion of that money, and help our Farmers. I WILL NEVER LET OUR FARMERS DOWN!” Trump wrote on social media this week. The other is tapping into a “slush fund,” as the officials described it, at the Department of Agriculture.

    The Trump administration also dipped into the fund, known as Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP), in March to similarly provide assistance to farmers. USDA at the time issued $10 billion in direct payments to eligible agricultural producers of eligible commodities for the 2024 crop year.

    The administration has also discussed implementing a combination of the two, depending on where they can most quickly pull the funds from, one White House official said. The current range of aid they are looking to offer ranges from $10 billion to $14 billion.

    “The final figure will depend on how much farmers need and the amount of tariff revenue coming in,” the official told CNN.

    Trump himself as privately been applying pressure on his team to ensure that American farmers, many of whom the Trump administration credit for helping the president win the November 2024 election, are protected. But the other reason they are making the agriculture industry such a priority, officials say, is because the Trump administration views protecting farmers as a national security issue.

    “We need to grow our own food. We can’t rely on imports from other countries, that poses a problem for national security. And right now, the government is subsidizing a lot of that process,” one Trump administration official argued.

    US soybean industry in crisis

    An issue complicating the Trump administration’s goals revolve around soybeans — America’s largest agricultural export, valued at more than $24 billion in 2024, according to USDA data.

    Last year, about half of those exports went to China, but since May, that’s dropped down to zero as a result of an effective embargo China has placed on US soybeans in retaliation for Trump’s tariffs on the country. China has implemented 20% tariffs on US soybeans, making the crop from other countries significantly more attractive.

    That couldn’t come at worse time for soybean farmers, with the harvest season in full swing and some farms reporting strong yields. And their luck might not change anytime soon, with Beijing ramping up its reliance on South America — inadvertently aided the US Treasury’s financial lifeline provided to Argentina in recent weeks.

    A combine harvester during a soybean harvest at a farm outside St. Peter, Minnesota. Credit: Ben Brewer/Bloomberg / Getty Images via CNN Newsource

    Last week, the Trump administration said it would arrange a $20 billion lifeline to Argentina’s central bank, which would exchange US dollars for pesos to help stabilize Argentina’s financial market. Argentina also temporarily scrapped export taxes on grains to help stabilize the peso, but China didn’t waste any time.

    Beijing purchased “at least 10 cargoes of Argentine soybeans,” according to a report from Reuters. Brazil has also helped meet China’s demand for soybeans, with both countries announcing a pact in July to deepen agricultural trade ties.

    As a result, America’s hobbled soybean industry is calling on the Trump administration to finish its trade negotiations with China.

    “US soybean farmers have been clear for months: the administration needs to secure a trade deal with China. China is the world’s largest soybean customer and typically our top export market,” American Soybean Association President Caleb Ragland said last week in a statement.

    Pressure on Trump

    Many farmers say time is of the essence as they start to bring in this year’s crop.

    “We’re always hopeful that those negotiations are moving forward, but yet with harvest here, patience may be running thin,” one Indiana farmer told CNN, describing the industry’s many challenges, which also include the deportation of key workers.

    Trump has heard the calls for action.

    On Wednesday, Trump blamed China for the pain soybean farmers are facing, arguing Beijing is refusing to buy soybeans for negotiating purposes amid the two countries’ tariff dispute. He added that he plans to make soybeans “a major topic of discussion” when he meets face-to-face with China’s President Xi Jinping in South Korea next month.

    Part of the reason Trump has given the issue so much attention, White House officials say, is because Rollins has forced the issue with not only the president, but also one of his closest advisers: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

    On Tuesday, a photo of Bessent’s phone captured by the Associated Press went viral, showing a text from a contact named “BR,” presumed to be Rollins. Her messages illustrated panic within the Trump administration over the soybean industry’s woes, which worsened over the Argentina ordeal.

    During this “time of uncertainty” for farmers and ranchers, Rollins said that she is in “constant communication” with the White House and partners across the government. Rollins also called Trump’s idea of temporarily giving tariff revenue to farmers “a very elegant solution.”

    “To this moment of uncertainty, the ability to offset any payments to the farmers through potential tariff revenue is really where the president wants us to head, and that’s what we’re looking at,” she added.

    Alayna Treene, Bryan Mena and CNN

    Source link

  • Listeria Causes Ready-To-Eat Pasta Meals Recall – KXL


    USDA has issued a recall for ready-to-eat pasta meals due to listeria contamination.

    WASHINGTON, DC – The United States Department of Agriculture is issuing a public health alert that some ready-to-eat pasta meals may be contaminated.  According to the department, some packages of Marketside Linguini With Beef Meatballs and Marinara Sauce may be contaminated with Listeria, and the affected product was shipped to Walmart locations nationwide.

    The pre-cooked pasta is packaged in 12-ounce clear plastic trays.

    USDA has issued a recall for ready-to-eat pasta meals due to listeria contamination.

    The agency advises customers not to consume the pasta and throw it away or return it to the store of purchase.

    Ready-to-eat pasta recall by the USDA.

    More about:


    Tim Lantz

    Source link

  • Maryland leaders fight a plan to close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center – WTOP News

    Leaders from Maryland have launched a campaign to stop a proposal that would close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center and move personnel to other states.

    Leaders from Maryland have launched a campaign to stop a proposal that would close the 115-year-old Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC) and move personnel to other states across the U.S.

    On Monday, lawmakers, including U.S. Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Angela Alsobrooks, Rep. Steny Hoyer, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Rep. Glen Ivey, Prince George’s County Executive Aisha Braveboy and other state leaders, gathered to highlight the importance of the facility and why it should stay in Maryland.

    “It was not that long ago that we all gathered together with this simple message: BARC provides really important resources and research to the country and that it should stay right here in Prince George’s County, Maryland,” Van Hollen said, who took a tour of the facility located in Beltsville.

    “After [speaking to employees] on the tour, the special nature of BARC came through to all of us,” Van Hollen said.

    “There’s been a multi-billion dollar investment of American’s taxpayers dollars in this space,” said Ivey.

    “If you just pick it up and move it, you’re squandering that money, and it’s expensive to move, and you’ll have to build a new facility wherever you go,” Ivey said. “And you’re going to lose the human capital to move out to wherever they’re trying to take them to. It just doesn’t make sense.”

    In July, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins unveiled a major restructuring plan aimed at relocating Department of Agriculture employees out of the D.C. area, citing high housing costs and salaries as key factors. However, Rollins acknowledged that as many as half the affected staff may opt to leave the agency rather than move.

    BARC spans 6,500 acres and has been a cornerstone of agricultural innovation in Maryland for over a century.

    It is home to the George Washington Carver Center, which houses the headquarters of the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, as well as several University of Maryland research initiatives. These include a premier turf grass research facility and long-term agricultural study fields.

    BARC employs more than 1,000 federal workers and plays a vital role in supporting hundreds of jobs throughout the community.

    “We’re going to fight this for the American people,” said Hoyer. “For the AG community, not only here, but around the country,” he said.

    “Our global standing will be hurt even further,” said Alsobrooks. “We’re losing revenue. We’re losing our workforce. And this would mean much of the same.

    “This is really the collective voice of each of us, standing up and saying now that BARC is so important, not only to the state of Maryland but to our country, and we are here to say that we absolutely cannot afford to close it.”

    “You can’t just move soil,” Braveboy said, who notes it makes sense to keep the facility in Beltsville because of Maryland’s diverse climate. “And so the decades of research that has been conducted here means something.”

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    Alan Etter

    Source link

  • Trump administration cancels USDA’s annual food insecurity survey, WSJ reports

    (Reuters) -The Trump administration has canceled the USDA’s annual food insecurity survey, ending a decades-long effort to track how many Americans struggle to access enough food, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture said the report had become “overly politicized” and was no longer necessary, though the 2024 edition will still be released in October; the 2025 survey will not be conducted, the Journal added, citing a USDA spokesperson.

    The report added that the cancellation comes amid rising food insecurity and recent cuts to federal food assistance programs, including tighter work requirements for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients.

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    The White House did not immediately respond to Reuters' request for comment. Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

    (Reporting by Rajveer Singh Pardesi in Bengaluru; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Alcohol escapes a government crackdown—for now

    Just over a year ago, I wrote about the bureaucratic machinations in the U.S. attempting to import an anti-alcohol agenda into the government’s 2025 Dietary Guidelines. Now, it appears that alcohol has officially escaped the government’s wrath—at least for another half-decade.

    The U.S. dietary guidelines are revised every five years, with the latest revision expected this year. The lead-up to the revision unfolds over several years, and recommendations for safe drinking levels are traditionally included alongside food in the final guidance. For decades, the guidelines have held that men can safely consume up to two alcoholic drinks a day and women one. But myriad sources from inside the federal government were reporting that the new guidelines were planning to include a declaration that “no amount of alcohol is acceptable for a healthy lifestyle.” (This was a standard imported from the World Health Organization, which declared in 2023 that “no amount of alcohol is safe”). 

    This news supercharged a long-simmering debate over whether alcohol is good or bad (or simply medium) for you. Researchers have become increasingly split over this issue, with some sharing evidence that moderate alcohol consumption reduces overall mortality rates, while others point to studies finding a link between alcohol and cancer. Regardless of the science, however, the process through which the government was attempting to arrive at a “no safe level” declaration for alcohol was deeply alarming.

    The dietary guidelines revisions are spearheaded by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Biden-era HHS delegated the alcohol issue to the little-known Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Prevention of Underage Drinking (ICCPUD).

    ICCPUD’s marching orders were to issue a report on the health impacts of drinking, but it turned out ICCPUD had stacked its deck. Reports started coming out that at least half of the six-person research panel not only had well-publicized anti-alcohol stances but also didn’t even reside in the United States. The decision over whether alcohol would be deemed safe or not was being put in the hands of a group of biased international academics who were essentially accountable to no one. (Several commentators have also pointed out that ICCPUD, whose putative focus is supposed to be underage drinking, was being put in charge of determining adult drinking recommendations.)

    A potential “no safe level” declaration was particularly worrisome for the alcohol industry, since perceptions about the health impact of alcohol have already been trending negatively among younger demographics, a trend that would likely accelerate if the U.S. government were to state that no amount of alcohol is safe to drink. Attorney Sean O’Leary noted that such a declaration would also be likely to trigger a wave of Tobacco-style class action lawsuits against the drinks industry.

    Congress—surprisingly—reacted to this backdoor attempt to smuggle a neo-prohibitionist agenda into the American dietary guidelines by playing a decently effective watchdog role. It first tasked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to prepare a separate report on the health effects of drinking, which concluded that while moderate drinking raises the risk of certain types of cancer, it reduces all-cause mortality by decreasing the risk of heart disease.

    The remaining elephant in the room, however, was how President Donald Trump’s administration would handle the ICCPUD draft report that it inherited from the Biden administration. All eyes were on the new HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., famously a teetotaler, but he was silent about how the 2025 Dietary Guidelines would address alcohol.

    At long last, in early September, the House Appropriations Committee announced it was planning to defund ICCPUD, followed by news that ICCPUD’s draft report would no longer play a role in the 2025 guidelines revisions. It now appears that the alternative NASEM report will inform the new guidelines, although it’s not even certain that the guidelines will mention alcohol at all anymore (RFK Jr. has previously suggested that the 2025 Guidelines would be a mere 4 pages long, down from 160 pages in 2020).

    In the end, this counts as a narrow escape for the alcohol industry and U.S. drinkers. The science of drinking will likely be debated for years to come, but at the very least, the process should be allowed to play out in public view.

    C. Jarrett Dieterle

    Source link