Senate Republicans are in the final stages of finalizing a scaled-down plan to shift some of the federal costs of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to the states, a key component of the broader budget proposal aimed at funding a significant overhaul of the nation’s food assistance programs. The proposal, which has been revised in response to intense internal pushback from within the GOP ranks, is expected to take effect in fiscal year 2028, similar to the original House plan, though there are discussions about extending the implementation timeline further.
The revised plan would require states with the highest payment error rates to cover 15% of SNAP benefits, a significant reduction compared to the House GOP’s initial proposal, which intended to shift 25% of the costs to those states. This adjustment is intended to address concerns from red states, which previously raised alarms about the potential for billions in new costs for the program. However, the plan also maintains the House’s provision requiring states to shoulder 75% of administrative costs, up from the current 50% level. These changes aim to balance the fiscal implications of the broader party-line bill while still implementing tighter cost-sharing mechanisms.
Key figures in the process include Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.), who is expected to present the revised plan to his colleagues during a closed-door meeting on Wednesday. Boozman’s leadership is critical as the Senate GOP continues to navigate the complexities of funding the proposed legislation, which includes the House’s plan to impose stricter work requirements on SNAP recipients. Despite the adjustment, the Senate’s revised plan is likely to save less money than the House’s original proposal, which aimed for $300 billion in SNAP cuts.
Senate GOP leaders are pushing for the Agriculture panel to hit $150 billion in net spending cuts while also addressing the funding for the $70 billion farm bill package that is a priority for farm-state Republicans. This leaves a significant gap in the budget plan, particularly when compared to the House’s more substantial cuts. As the debate continues, the final details of the plan are still under negotiation, with Boozman indicating in a brief interview Tuesday that the agricultural provisions are still in limbo, and that the committee is still working to reach consensus among its members.