SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
food aid
While Spending Billions on Iran War, Trump Quietly Moves to Boot Millions More Off Food Aid
"Americans can't afford their groceries, they can't afford their medicine, they can't afford the cost of living, and yet we're dropping a billion dollars of bombs, it seems, every day in Iran," said one Senate Democrat.
Mar 10, 2026
The Trump administration is quietly pursuing a regulatory change that would strip federal nutrition assistance from an estimated 6 million low-income Americans—including nearly two million children—as it spends billions on an illegal, open-ended war on Iran that has killed more than a thousand people and plunged the global economy into chaos.
The change sought by the US Department of Agriculture would curb broad-based categorical eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Broad-based categorical eligibility allows states to automatically qualify residents for SNAP if they are already enrolled in other aid programs, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, thus reducing administrative hurdles and costs.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) estimated in a blog post published late last month—the day before President Donald Trump announced the joint US-Israeli assault on Iran—that gutting broad-based categorical eligibility would likely strip modest federal food aid from around 6 million people, including nearly 2 million children.
"The people losing access to food assistance from SNAP, school meals, and [the Women, Infants, and Children Program] would mainly be working families, older adults, and people with disabilities," the think tank noted. "In other words, the change would primarily harm groups that federal and state policymakers from across the political spectrum have long sought to help: people who work but are living near poverty; older adults and people with disabilities with low, fixed incomes; and people trying to build modest savings in order to become more economically independent."
The Congressional Budget Office has projected that restricting broad-based categorical eligibility would result in roughly $11 billion in savings over a 10-year period—or just over $1 billion a year.
The Trump administration is currently spending around $1 billion per day in US taxpayer money waging war on Iran—a price tag that would be enough to cover the daily costs of SNAP benefits for the more than 40 million Americans on the program.
Over just the first two days of the military onslaught, the Pentagon "burned through $5.6 billion worth of munitions," according to figures reported late Monday by the Washington Post.
"Americans can't afford their groceries, they can't afford their medicine, they can't afford the cost of living, and yet we're dropping a billion dollars of bombs, it seems, every day in Iran," US Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said in a CNN appearance on Monday.
During Trump's first White House term, his administration proposed a rule that would have curtailed states' option to use broad-based categorical eligibility for SNAP, but the rule was never finalized and the Biden administration later rescinded it.
The Trump Agriculture Department revived the effort late last year, submitting a rule purportedly aimed at ensuring that "categorical eligibility is extended only to households that have sufficiently demonstrated eligibility."
"The end result," CBPP's Katie Bergh recently warned, "will be more hunger and hardship."
The Trump administration's new push comes months after the president signed into law the largest SNAP cuts in US history—around $187 billion over the next decade.
Trump bragged about the cuts during his State of the Union address last month, declaring that his administration has "lifted 2.4 million Americans" off SNAP—a euphemistic description of kicking people off the critical anti-poverty program.
Last week, Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee advanced a farm bill that would do nothing to mitigate the reverberating impacts of the Trump-GOP SNAP cuts.
"Instead of prioritizing the health and well-being of tens of millions of Americans, the committee failed to reverse course and continued down a path that will strip food from the tables of children, veterans, caregivers, older adults, and people experiencing homelessness," said Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Disgusting': Republicans Applaud as Trump Brags About Taking Food Aid From Millions
"His Big Ugly Bill ripped food away from hungry moms, kids, and seniors to fund tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans," said one House Democrat.
Feb 25, 2026
US President Donald Trump received a standing ovation from Republican lawmakers and administration officials Tuesday night when he bragged during his State of the Union address about taking nutrition assistance from millions, which he euphemistically characterized as lifting people off food stamps.
"In one year, we have lifted 2.4 million Americans—a record—off of food stamps," Trump said during his nearly two-hour speech.
The Republican reconciliation package that Trump signed into law last summer included $187 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over a 10-year period, the largest cuts to the program in US history.
Trump: "In one year, we have lifted 2.4 million Americans -- a record -- off of food stamps" (In other words, Republicans cut food stamps) pic.twitter.com/19EoNEUmPF
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 25, 2026
The Republican law includes reductions in federal nutrition funding for states—which administer SNAP—as well as expanded work requirements, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated would strip nutrition benefits from "roughly 2.4 million people in an average month" over the next decade.
As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted in a recent analysis, changes enacted by the Trump-GOP law mean that "for the first time in the 50-year history of the modern SNAP program, the federal government will no longer ensure that the lowest-income people, including children, older adults, veterans, and people with disabilities, in every state have access to the food assistance they need because states that refuse to pay the cost share could see the program end."
Shortly after Trump signed the Republican megabill into law, his administration canceled an annual US Department of Agriculture survey aimed at measuring food insecurity, undercutting efforts to track the impact of the unprecedented SNAP cuts. The USDA's final reports estimated that nearly 48 million people in the US faced food insecurity in 2024—including nearly one in five households with children.
"Trump says he 'lifted' millions off food stamps," Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) wrote in response to the president's State of the Union remarks. "But what he really means is his Big Ugly Bill ripped food away from hungry moms, kids, and seniors to fund tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. The lies are blatant and disgusting."
Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) denounced her Republican colleagues for their celebratory response to Trump's boast.
"They're applauding ripping food out of people’s mouths to fund their tax cuts for billionaires," McBride wrote on social media.
USDA data released ahead of Trump's speech shows that around 696,000 fewer people received SNAP benefits in November 2025 compared to the previous month.
Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst on the food assistance team at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, noted that "people haven’t been dropping off SNAP because they no longer need help."
"Economic conditions haven’t improved and groceries haven’t gotten more affordable," Bergh added. "They're losing basic food assistance because of policy choices. Allowing this trend to continue is also a policy choice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
How States and Cities Can Take Care of Those Left Behind by the GOP’s Big Ugly Bill
With Trump and Congress turning their backs on American families, states have to rise to the moment.
Aug 18, 2025
The new tax law US President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans passed this summer drastically reduces taxes on the wealthiest, slashes essential spending, and adds over $4 trillion to the deficit over a decade.
The law weakens healthcare and food assistance more than any legislation in history. Combined with tax cuts that give a whopping $1 trillion to the richest 1%, no law has ever done so much to enrich the wealthy while hurting those of modest income.
What does it mean for your state and community? For starters, states will lose billions in federal funding for healthcare, food, and other necessities.
Federal funds provided more than 1 of every 3 dollars that states spent last year—and much more in places like Mississippi, Indiana, and South Dakota. In Louisiana, federal aid delivers fully half of state spending. But we’re likely to see layoffs of federal employees in every state—and potentially of state and local employees whose paychecks rely on federal dollars, too.
All in all, this law will leave our communities sicker, less educated, and less safe.
For families, it means less access to the basics.
Hospitals and nonprofits (like food banks) depend on federal funding and will reduce staff at best and shutter at worst. More than 300 rural hospitals face likely elimination. And because of Trump’s healthcare cuts, more than 50,000 Americans will die early every single year.
In addition to these cuts, Trump has also illegally withheld congressionally authorized funding for healthcare, Head Start, child care, disease control, disability services, and more, causing crises at organizations nationwide.
Funding is also getting cut for community colleges, four-year universities, financial aid, loans, and first-generation students. This will block access to degrees for working class kids coast to coast.
Federal emergency funding, long the bedrock of state response to floods, hurricanes, and other disasters, is also on the chopping block—meaning more devastation, less recovery, and billions in costs shifted to states. Transportation projects will stall too, harming commuters and construction jobs.
All in all, this law will leave our communities sicker, less educated, and less safe.
Only the federal government can raise sufficient funds from those most able to pay and distribute them to poorer states like Alabama, Mississippi, and West Virginia, who have less capacity to raise dollars locally.
But policymakers can fill some of the gap with improved state and local taxation. With Trump and Congress turning their backs on American families, states have to rise to the moment.
States have many options.
They can raise more by bolstering income taxes on the wealthiest—policies that have won recently in Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Minnesota. They can also tax income from wealth by improving capital gains income taxation. Washington, Maryland, Minnesota, and New Mexico have passed such reforms recently.
And they can stop corporations from hiding profits in other states, as most states now do, or in other countries, something innovators are increasingly proposing.
Localities have options too: enacting mansion taxes, as cities in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New Mexico, and New York have done, and passing local income taxes as thousands of communities in Ohio, Indiana, and 13 other states do. At the very least, local policymakers could rein in costly corporate tax breaks that shortchange schools.
Tax dollars pay for essentials that make America healthy, educated, and safe. If Trump and his allies slash those fundamentals to enrich the richest, we must insist that states and cities get creative in taking care of the rest of us.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular