[searchandfilter id="40551"] 
Senators today forecast the devastating impacts on American families should Republicans succeed at cutting $300 billion in SNAP spending, with one describing the cuts as a ‘moral obscenity.’
June 4, 2025
June 4, 2025 – At a Capitol Hill forum today hosted by Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico) and Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota), Senate Democrats and their invited witnesses painted a picture of the devastating impacts on American families should Republicans succeed at including $300 billion in cuts to food aid currently proposed in the budget reconciliation bill, which Republicans have titled “One Big Beautiful Bill.”
Expand your understanding of food systems as a Civil Eats member. Enjoy unlimited access to our groundbreaking reporting, engage with experts, and connect with a community of changemakers.
Already a member?
Login
While the forum was not an official hearing because of its partisan nature, more than a dozen lawmakers showed up to participate, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who said the caucus would use “every tool in our toolbox” to fight the cuts.
“It doesn’t matter what party someone may be affiliated with. All of our constituents are going to be hurt,” Luján said at the start. “We’re going to hear why every community across the country is going to feel this, and especially rural parts of America. What I hope this forum will illustrate is that this significant cut . . . is not just an abstract number printed on a piece of paper in Washington, D.C.”
Republican lawmakers have said the changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) proposed in the bill are not cuts because they don’t directly reduce benefit amounts. Instead, they claim they’re saving money by shifting costs to states and tightening various requirements within the program. Klobuchar called that messaging a “sleight of hand,” calling attention to the fact that shifting costs to states would likely force many of those states to cut benefits due to budget constraints.
Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, a Northwestern University economist who studies federal nutrition programs, testified that shifting costs to states could also make future recessions much worse for SNAP participants, farmers, grocers, and the broader American public.
She said SNAP “serves as an automatic stabilizer in difficult economic times,” explaining that as more people need benefits, that money circulates back into the economy almost immediately. “By design, SNAP can very quickly adapt when we have an economic downturn.” States, however, generally face budget crises during recessions, she said, and wouldn’t be able to deal with ups and downs in the same way.
Senators also attacked Republicans’ plans to expand work requirements, which they argued would cause hard-working people to lose benefits due to red tape. For example, witness Jade Johnson, a SNAP participant, said that she works two jobs while studying to become a dialysis technician and taking care of her daughter as a single mom. One of her jobs, as a home health aid, can involve unpredictable hours. So if she lost hours one month, that might cause her to lose benefits even though she may get more hours the next, she said.
Katy Anderson, a vice president at Roadrunner Food Bank of New Mexico, testifies in front of the Senate about proposed cuts to SNAP. (Photo courtesy of the office of Senator Luján)
Witness Barbara Guinn, the New York Commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, said certain groups, including refugees, will lose access to benefits because of new immigration restrictions. Katy Anderson, a vice president at the Roadrunner Food Bank of New Mexico, said lines are getting longer at her food bank and others across the country and that the charitable food aid system cannot meet current needs—and that such large cuts to SNAP would leave many more people without food.
Several lawmakers said that the bill represents Republicans paying for tax breaks for billionaires by eliminating food assistance that would go to children, elderly people, and veterans. “That is the height of cruelty,” said Senator Cory Booker (D-New Jersey). “It is a violation of our values. It is a moral obscenity.”
The bill is currently being negotiated in the Senate, where it’s likely significant changes will be made.It will then have to go back to the House for another vote before President Trump can sign it into law. (Link to this post.)
Stories change how we see food — and how we act on it.
From farmworkers to policymakers, Civil Eats lifts up the people building a better food system.
Your gift this season will be doubled through NewsMatch, fueling independent journalism that’s hopeful, honest, and free for all.
Together, we can keep these stories alive — and keep the movement growing.
Give Today.
June 26, 2025
At our latest Civil Eats virtual salon, our team talked about the launch and evolution of the Tracker, a running report on federal actions that affect food and agriculture.
January 20, 2025
Like the story?
Join the conversation.
Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 16
Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 21