As Republicans struggle to advance their budget framework, Democrats are warning that GOP cuts to nutrition assistance, combined with tariff-induced food inflation, could hammer low-income consumers.

Under a budget resolution GOP leaders hope to push through the House this week, the Agriculture Committee would be instructed to cut $230 billion over 10 years. Most, if not all of that, would come from cutting the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, but the reduction is likely to shrink once negotiations with the Senate begin.

The resolution, which the Senate approved last week, would only require the Senate Ag Committee to cut spending by $1 billion.

“We’ve got a pretty big divide between the Senate numbers and our numbers, and that’ll have to be reconciled,” House Ag Committee Chair Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., told Agri-Pulse on Tuesday.

He insisted the committee could cut $230 billion without reducing existing benefits.

“It was interesting to have my friends on the Democrat side of the aisle talking about the bill like they know exactly what is in it when there’s nothing in it at this point,” Thompson said.

The committee's SNAP hearing came as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is struggling to get some hardline conservatives to support the budget resolution. They are balking at supporting the framework because of uncertainty about how large the spending cuts will ultimately be.

President Donald Trump met with some of the holdouts Tuesday and later posted on social media that he would push for at least $1 trillion in cuts, $500 billion less than the minimum cut required from House committees in the budget resolution. 

One of the GOP holdouts, Chip Roy of Texas, continued to raise concerns late Tuesday about how much the Senate would agree to cut. "I’m not here for aspirations. The Senate’s bill does not add up — it’s all tax cuts with no spending cuts which = deficits," he posted on X.

During the House Ag hearing, Republicans pressed witnesses on ways states obtain waivers from existing work requirements for able-bodied recipients without dependents.  

 It’s easy to be “in the know” about agriculture news from coast to coast! Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news. Simply click here.

USDA allows states to waive work requirements if there’s a lack of sufficient jobs or 10% unemployment. However, Angela Rachidi, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said the definition of “sufficient jobs” can be manipulated by states to receive waivers even during fairly good economic conditions. 

Republicans criticized policies they called loopholes, allowing states to needlessly waive work requirements. Some Republicans also think the age limit of 54 for work requirements is too low.

Rachidi called the age cap “arbitrary” and said people are generally expected to work until retirement age.

Since the budget reconciliation process began, Democrats have criticized the plan for its potential cuts to SNAP. While Democrats on the committee continued to highlight the impact SNAP cuts would have on participants, they emphasized the impact it could have on farmers. 

Angie Craig gaggle AFBF 1.jpgRep. Angie Craig, D-Minn. (Agri-Pulse photo)
The committee’s ranking Democrat, Angie Craig of Minnesota, asserted that farmers could lose roughly $60 billion in revenue between SNAP cuts and impacts of tariffs. Craig also said average costs for American families could increase given the tariffs. She estimated annual costs for a typical SNAP household of four could increase by $6,000 between tariffs and potential SNAP cuts.

Diane Schanzenbach, a professor of human development and social policy at Northwestern University, said cuts to SNAP would also hurt others supported by the program such as grocers and transportation companies.

“Usually, when we’re looking at bad economic times in the future, we’re talking about shoring up programs like SNAP and making sure that we’re stimulating the economy and protecting people,” Schanzenbach told lawmakers Tuesday. “I hope that we can start talking about that here, too.”

Rep. Jill Tokuda, D-Hawaii, said proposed cuts to SNAP and work requirements will result in greater food insecurity in rural America.

Schanzenbach said SNAP is particularly important for rural communities because it keeps jobs in the area and stimulates the local economy. She added that rural communities tend to rely on the program more because of a declining work base, lack of affordable housing and transportation.

For more news, go to Agri-Pulse.com.