SNAP benefits resumed once the government shutdown ended, but it was a fraught 43 days for those families dependent on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In October 2025, SNAP’s funding was paused due to budget issues. Without funding, it lasted throughout October, but paused in November. After reaching an agreement on November 12, the government shutdown ended, and SNAP benefits resumed.
A consistent economic policy of the Trump administration has been to reduce government spending. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act has introduced many new changes to the SNAP program, specifically aimed at reducing and cutting the program and its spending.
Able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) cannot get SNAP benefits for more than 3 months, though there are exceptions. These exceptions included adults over the age of 54, those caring for a child, the homeless, veterans, and those under 24 who aged out of foster care. Section 10102 of the “Big Beautiful Bill” raises the age limit to 65, requires the child to be under 14 for benefits, and excludes the homeless, veterans, and those who aged out of foster care.
Section 10108 excludes certain non-citizen groups from SNAP benefits. It requires residence in the US, and to be either a green card holder, Haitian and Cuban refugee, or working under COFA. This thus excludes asylees, refugees, trafficking victims, and others from benefits.
For households that rely on LIHEAA or other energy programs that provide heating, cooling, and other energy needs, it previously did not count as income and thus did not reduce SNAP benefits. However, Section 10103 limits this to exclusively households with the elderly or disabled. Thus, for households without elderly or disabled persons, any money from LIHEAA and other programs will count as income and thus lower SNAP benefits. Similarly, Section 10104 excludes internet costs from household costs, lowering benefits.
Section 10105 requires states to pay matching funds requirements, shifting the burden of funding from 100% on the federal government to a portion on the states. Section 10106 shifts the responsibility and financial cost of the administration and distribution from 50% of the states to 75%. These changes are to begin in 2028 and 2027, respectively.
Section 10107 cuts all funding to the SNAP Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program (SNAP-ED). SNAP-ED aims to educate lower-income families on healthy eating options, and to thus reduce obesity, health issues, etc. However, unused funds from 2025 may be used to operate the program in 2026.
A cut in government spending has not solely been a SNAP issue. For instance, early into the presidency, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was formed to cut spending. Other methods included mass layoffs, canceling funds to USAID, PBS, and other organizations, cutbacks to university student aid, and reduced research funding.
The SNAP and food stamps program was created in the 1930s during a time of economic disaster and mass unemployment during the Great Depression. There are currently 42 million people monthly on SNAP, approximately 1/8th of the US population. The SNAP program accounted for 70.2% of the USDA’s spending.
As of 2024, the states and areas with the highest populations on SNAP benefits are Oregon, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Washington DC. More than 16% of the population in these areas are on SNAP benefits. As of 2023, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have poverty rates equal to or around 16% of their populations, with rates of 17.8%, 15.9%, and 18.9% respectively. DC has a rate of 14% and Oregon has a rate of 12.2%. Other states with higher poverty rates, such as Mississippi (18%), West Virginia (16.7%), and Kentucky (16.4%) have populations that receive less SNAP benefits, between 12% to 15%. Arkansas had one of the biggest discrepancies. Despite its 15.7% poverty rate, less than 8% of its population was on SNAP. Massachusetts, like Oregon, has a poverty rate of 10.4%, yet 14-16% of its population is on SNAP. Nevertheless, most other states have similar poverty and SNAP benefit rates, and many of these discrepancies could be due to other factors, such as how poverty is calculated.
