House Republicans Push SNAP Costs onto States in Sweeping Budget Proposal

Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee unveiled a controversial plan Monday night that would shift significant costs of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) – the nation’s largest anti-hunger initiative – to states. The move is part of a broader GOP megabill aimed at delivering $230 billion in savings and advancing Trump’s legislative agenda.

Under the proposed changes, states would assume responsibility for a share of SNAP benefits based on their payment accuracy. Beginning in fiscal year 2028, states with the lowest payment error rates would shoulder just 5 percent of the program’s costs, while those exceeding 10 percent error rates would bear 25 percent. Such a policy would disproportionately impact states like Alaska, South Carolina, Hawaii, Delaware, and New Jersey, which currently face higher error rates.

SNAP, which currently serves over 42 million low-income Americans, has historically been funded entirely by the federal government. Committee Chairman G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) has argued that shifting some costs to states is the only viable alternative to cutting benefits – a step opposed by many lawmakers, including Thompson himself and members of the Trump administration.

“If [states] want skin in the game, if they want to be able to control and manipulate the requirements that we set… they need to be paying part of the bill,” Thompson said in a recent interview.

However, the proposed cost sharing arrangement faces significant opposition from state officials across party lines. Leaders from both Republican and Democrat led states have expressed concern that shifting SNAP expenses to already stretched state budgets could inevitably lead to benefit reductions for families in need. The internal resistance even forced House Republicans to revise their proposal multiple times, delaying their initial committee markup due to pushback from centrist GOP members.

Trump himself signaled strong support for the measure Monday, urging party unity behind Thompson and other House committee leaders on his Truth Social platform.

Even if the proposal clears the House, it faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) has openly cautioned against the idea, warning it would impose an unsustainable financial burden on economically challenged states. Boozman has privately argued that including such expansive policy shifts beyond traditional farm bill measures – such as crop insurance and commodity reference prices – could jeopardize bipartisan support for passing a standalone farm bill later in the year.

The House Agriculture Committee will meet Tuesday evening to begin marking up the contentious bill, with debates expected to continue into late night before resuming again Wednesday morning.