Happy Friday, and welcome to Food Fix. If you work in the food space, it’s absolutely worth upgrading to get Tuesday newsletters, which cover more topics and are (I’m told) enormously helpful for making sense of the food policy landscape. Almost everyone who upgrades to get Food Fix twice per week ends up renewing their subscription!
On the pods! In case you missed it: I recently launched a new podcast with Theodore Ross over at The Food & Environment Reporting Network. It’s called Forked, and we’ve put out two episodes all about (what else) MAHA.
As always, I truly welcome your feedback. Reply to this email to land in my inbox, or drop me a note: helena@foodfix.co.
Alright, let’s get to it –
Helena
***
Democrats rail against GOP push to cut billions from SNAP amid high food prices
As Republicans on Capitol Hill advance a massive reconciliation package — a combination of tax cuts and spending cuts — Democrats are unified and increasingly loud in their opposition to two particular parts of the plan: sweeping cuts to both Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
It’s not every day that SNAP — still known to many as food stamps — enters the mainstream political debate. In fact, it’s usually only really during farm bill cycles. For those of you who don’t follow farm bills: Congress used to pass these bills every five years, offering a chance for lawmakers to update food and farm policy — and also fight over farm subsidies and SNAP — but America’s legislative body has become so dysfunctional this isn’t really happening anymore.
Now, SNAP has been lobbed into the political ring because House Republicans this week advanced a plan to cut roughly $300 billion in spending from the program over the next decade as a way to help offset the cost of trillions in tax cuts — and also pay for some additional financial support to farmers. (This comes alongside proposed cuts to Medicaid that would result in millions losing access to the program.)
Messaging oppo: Republicans aren’t exactly leaning into talking about Medicaid and SNAP cuts — they’d much rather focus on the tax cuts, naturally — but Democrats are leaning in hard as they see an opportunity to get traction with voters and potentially lay the groundwork for the midterm elections.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) was in Rensselaer, N.Y. on Monday at an event with faith leaders, community organizers and food bank executives to rail against the GOP’s plans to cut SNAP spending. Schumer noted that the Republican proposal comes on the heels of the Trump administration pulling back $1 billion in local food funds that helped food banks and schools procure fresh food from local and regional farmers.
“The Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York has already been devastated by these cuts,” Schumer said at the event, per a local press report. “They’ve had 27 tractor trailers full of food canceled, 1 million pounds of fruits, vegetables, eggs, meat. And guess where most of that comes from? New York farmers.”
“Food insecurity is on the rise, and experts say it’s going to get a lot worse,” Schumer added. “No child should go to bed hungry. This is not a partisan issue. This is a moral issue.”
SNAP by the numbers: The bill that the House Agriculture Committee advanced this week proposes a number of changes that would slash spending over the next decade. For context, SNAP is currently about a $100 billion program per year, so the idea of cutting $300 ish billion over ten years is significant.
The biggest chunk of savings ($128 billion) comes from a new requirement that would force states to pay a portion of SNAP benefits for the first time starting in 2028 (it starts at 5 percent, but goes up from there if states have higher rates of administrative mistakes). Critics argue this move would essentially create a massive unfunded mandate and lead to benefit cuts. States currently share administration costs with the federal government — a 50/50 split — but under the new plan that share would shift to states picking up 75 percent of admin costs starting in 2028 (saving $27 billion).
Expanding work requirements for SNAP is projected to save $92 billion. As I explained earlier this week, we’ve long had work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents, a population known as ABAWDs. Currently, adults ages 18 to 54 who don’t have children in their household can qualify for SNAP benefits for three months in a three-year period, unless they comply with a 20-hour-per-week work requirement or live in an area where this requirement has been waived.
The House bill would expand this requirement to ABAWDs between the ages of 55 and 64 years of age. The bill also imposes the same work requirements on households with children ages 7 to 18, which means dependents only count if they are 6 and under. It also restricts USDA’s authority to give states the ability to waive work requirements.
The plan seeks several other cuts as well (Politico has a good breakdown here), including eliminating SNAP education, a program that supports nutrition education like cooking classes and other similar programs for low-income families.
Overall, nearly 11 million people, including more than 4 million children, live in households that “would be at risk of losing at least some of their food assistance” under the GOP proposal, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive think tank.
GOP defense: House Republicans, for their part, argue that the budget package essentially restores sanity to SNAP.
“For far too long, the SNAP program has drifted from a bridge to support American households in need to a permanent destination riddled with bureaucratic inefficiencies, misplaced incentives, and limited accountability,” said Rep. Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. “This portion of the One Big, Beautiful Bill restores the program’s original intent, offering a temporary helping hand while encouraging work, cracking down on loopholes exploited by states, and protecting taxpayer dollars while supporting the hardworking men and women of American agriculture.”
SNAP vs. billionaires: One of the talking points I’ve seen over and over from Democrats is pitting SNAP cuts against the tax breaks that the wealthiest Americans are set to get if the tax package becomes law.
“The Republican plan for the largest cut to food assistance in history will leave everyday Americans hungrier and poorer — all to fund tax breaks for billionaires,” House Democrats posted on X this week.
Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), who serves as ranking member on the House Agriculture Committee and recently announced a bid for Senate, has been sharpening her attacks on the SNAP cuts.
“It would be the largest cut to anti-hunger programs in American history,” Craig said this week. “We’re going to fight tooth and nail.”
What’s next: These proposals still have to clear the House of Representatives, which means that some moderate Republicans will be facing a very tough vote. The Senate, meanwhile, is not expected to accept the level of cuts House Republicans have proposed for both Medicaid and SNAP, so we still have a long way to go here. In the meantime, Democrats are going to continue to hammer Republicans about SNAP.
***
What I’m reading
‘UNBELIEVABLY DAUNTING’: Kennedy allies launch nonprofit to help RFK reform the public health establishment (The Daily Signal). “Allies of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. gathered Thursday to launch the Make America Healthy Again Institute, an organization aiming to outsource the Health and Human Services Department’s oversight and reform efforts,” writes Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell. “‘The people in the bureaucracies like the status quo, and so Bobby Kennedy and all of the great people who are at the top of these organizations, they have behind them this movement, this mass of people who care deeply, who’ve been working for years,’ MAHA Institute co-founder Mark Gorton said. ‘The MAHA Institute has set itself as a goal to channel this energy, to channel this mass movement,’ Gorton continued. White House health adviser Calley Means said the new institute will help connect the MAHA and MAGA movements. While the MAGA movement is male-dominated, there is no gender gap in the MAHA movement, according to Means, whose sister has been nominated by President Donald Trump to be U.S. surgeon general.”
The hypocrisy behind Kennedy’s ‘Make America Healthy Again’ movement (Washington Post). “At the core of the ‘Make America Healthy Again’ movement is a fatal contradiction. On the surface, it purports to favor the prevention of diseases over the treatment of them. Some of its approaches seem to be common sense: Who could argue against cutting ultra-processed food and removing harmful pesticides?” writes Leana S. Wen, in an opinion piece. “The problem is that many in the movement want to do the exact opposite: They oppose public health’s most effective tools to avert diseases (vaccines) and would rather replace them with infections. Squaring these two views is impossible. MAHA’s leader, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., exemplifies this tension. As Kennedy remakes America’s health system by altering the vaccine approval process, directing federal funds to relitigate debunked conspiracy theories and even calling into question the primacy of averting infectious diseases, the medical community and the public need to press MAHA’s leaders on their views. Is MAHA a scientific proposition to improve America’s health, or is it an ideology that glorifies favored interventions while denouncing others, regardless of the evidence?”
Embrace the woo woo (The Economist). “[Amid] the chaos, crowing and lamentation enveloping the second term of Donald Trump, it might be good for everyone to take some time to marvel at how he is making the Republican party a home for people who ask trees for help with their love lives, dabble with psychedelics, bemoan consumerism, long for European-Union-style regulation, and turn for insight to the poet Sylvia Plath and the Disney movie ‘Moana’. Mr Trump has largely imposed his taste and views as he has coaxed or bullied Republicans to reverse their former orthodoxies when it comes to tariffs, autocrats, certain forms of rioting or a president’s receipt of lavish gifts from foreign potentates. There is one seeming exception: the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement.”
Dangerously high levels of arsenic and cadmium found in store-bought rice, report finds (CNN). “Samples of store-bought rice from more than 100 different brands purchased in the United States contained dangerously high levels of arsenic and cadmium, according to a new report,” writes Sandee LaMotte. “‘Even at low levels, both arsenic and cadmium have been linked to serious health harms, including diabetes, developmental delays, reproductive toxicity and heart disease,’ said coauthor Jane Houlihan, research director for Healthy Babies, Bright Futures. One in four samples of rice purchased from grocery and retail stores across the United States exceeded levels of inorganic arsenic set in 2021 by the US Food and Drug Administration for infant rice cereal.”
The golden age of the fried-chicken sandwich (The Atlantic). “If, six years ago, the fried-chicken sandwich was a novelty worth standing in line for, today it is a fact of eating in America. From 2019 to 2024, fried-chicken-sandwich consumption increased 19 percent at American restaurants, while burger consumption dropped 3 percent, according to industry analysis firm Circana,” Ellen Cushing writes. “This is a challenge to the hierarchy that has ruled American fast food since it was invented: Burgers were the core product, and when fried chicken was available at all, such as at KFC, it tended to come bone-in, or as nuggets or tenders or ‘popcorn.’ … Fried-chicken sandwiches are particularly well suited to the ways Americans like to eat – in general, but especially recently. Eating in one’s car has become far more common than it used to be, and sandwiches are car food. We also really love chicken. During the second half of the 20th century, per capita chicken consumption in the United States quadrupled. The fried-chicken sandwich is one of the great American inventions – a holy mash-up of tradition and newness, convenience and indulgence, crunchy and soft.”
***
Why you should upgrade to a paid subscription to Food Fix
Become a paid subscriber to unlock access to two newsletters each week, packed with insight, analysis and exclusive reporting on what’s happening in food, in Washington and beyond. You’ll also get full access to the Food Fix archive — a great way to get smart on all things food policy.
Expense it: Most paid subscribers expense their subscriptions through work. It’s worth asking!
Discounts: We also offer discounts for government, academia and students. See our subscription options. Individuals who participate in SNAP or other federal nutrition programs qualify for a free Food Fix subscription — just email info@foodfix.co.
Get the Friday newsletter: If someone forwarded you this email, sign yourself up for the free Friday edition of Food Fix. You can also follow Food Fix on X, Bluesky and LinkedIn.
See you next week!
