

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"People who really, really need SNAP could potentially no longer receive it and not have a way to buy their groceries," warned one anti-hunger campaigner.
Maine taxpayers could be on the hook for around $50 million per year in spending on federal nutrition assistance under the Republican budget law that Sen. Susan Collins voted to advance as it moved through Congress last year.
The GOP law requires states to pay a portion of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit costs for the first time in the program's history, starting in October 2027. The size of states' obligation will range between 5% and 15% of their benefit costs; states with higher payment error rates—which experts say largely reflect administrative mistakes rather than fraud or abuse, as the Trump administration claims—will be forced to pay a larger percentage of benefit costs.
According to the latest data from the US Department of Agriculture, Maine's SNAP payment error rate in Fiscal Year 2025 was 10.81%—just above the national average of 10.62%. Maine's error rate puts the state in the 15% category for benefit cost obligations, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
“It’s shocking, and it’s wildly unfair,” Anna Korsen, deputy director of the Maine-based advocacy group Full Plates Full Potential, told Maine Morning Star last week. “If the state can’t find a way to pay for these benefits, that will mean that eligible people will go hungry. People who really, really need SNAP could potentially no longer receive it and not have a way to buy their groceries.”
Facing criticism from Democratic challenger Graham Platner—whose campaign has accused Collins of siding with President Donald Trump to give "billionaires and corporations a handout paid for by cuts to Medicaid and SNAP"—the Republican incumbent has emphasized that she voted against final passage of the Republican budget package.
But last June, Collins cast what Maine Public Radio described at the time as a "pivotal vote to begin debating" the budget measure, which will cut SNAP and Medicaid by roughly $1 trillion combined over the next decade. Thousands of Mainers—and millions of people nationwide—have lost SNAP and Medicaid benefits since the Republican law's enactment last summer.
Advocates have warned that the unprecedented shift of a portion of SNAP benefit costs onto states could be devastating, potentially forcing governments to cut SNAP benefits further, slash spending on education and other priorities, or potentially end their participation in the program completely.
Democrats are working to include a provision in the annual Farm Bill that would delay the SNAP cost-shift to give states more time to prepare. Last month, as Common Dreams reported, Senate Republicans unveiled legislation that omitted Democrats' proposed delay.
CBPP estimated in a recent analysis that states "may soon face a collective bill of roughly $9 billion, threatening benefits for millions of SNAP households, 79% of which include a child, a senior, or a person with a disability, who count on SNAP to help them meet their basic needs."
"Without immediate congressional action to delay this cost shift for all states," the think tank warned, "the unfolding emergency will only worsen as more people lose the SNAP benefits they need to afford groceries."
George Kelemen, senior vice president of the national No Kid Hungry campaign, called the GOP law's cost-shift "an existential threat to our most powerful anti-hunger program."
"Most states could be forced to cut funding for SNAP or other essential services, and at least four states have said they may be unable to continue administering SNAP entirely if this benefit cost shift goes into effect," Kelemen said last month. "This means millions of eligible kids and their families will lose access to vital grocery benefits."
"As families struggle to keep food on the table, Congress must prioritize work on efforts to lower costs and help Americans stay afloat," said the Washington Democrat.
As Americans face rising grocery prices under President Donald Trump and rally behind progressive policies and primary candidates, US Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Thursday introduced a bill that shows what kind of proposals could become reality with more Democrats like her in Congress.
Inspired by a program in her own district in Washington state, the chair emerita of the Congressional Progressive Caucus introduced the Fresh Bucks for Fresh Produce Act, which would create a pilot program at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that gives households earning 80% or less of their area's median income $60 per month to buy fruits and vegetables.
The USDA pilot would be modeled on Seattle's Fresh Bucks initiative, in which enrolled households "experience a 31% higher rate of food security and consume at least three daily servings of fruits and vegetables 37% more often than those assigned to a program waitlist," according to University of Washington (UW) research published last August.
"I would classify both of those numbers as pretty large," study co-author Jessica Jones-Smith a professor at UW and University of California, Irvine, said at the time. "We don't routinely see interventions that work that well. It's a pretty big impact on diet in terms of what we can do from a policy perspective and expect to make a difference in food insecurity."
In Seattle—generally ranked as an expensive but livable metropolis—a single person living within city limits on a monthly income of $7,070, or $84,850 a year, can apply for the program. For a family of four, it's $10,095 per month, or $121,150 annually. In January, the city the welcomed over 4,500 more local households off its waitlist and increased monthly benefits from $40 to $60.
Those enrolled in Seattle's program can buy "fresh fruits and vegetables at supermarkets, and fresh, frozen, canned, and dried fruits and vegetables (with no added fats, sugars, or salt) at farmers markets and independent grocers" that accept Fresh Bucks cards.
Adam Porter, who directs the Meals on Wheels program at the Seattle-based Sound Generations, said Thursday that "older adults across King County are facing impossible choices as grocery prices continue to rise. Seattle's Fresh Bucks program has had a substantial impact on our clients' health and quality of life: We have seen firsthand how a targeted produce benefit can increase health equity, improve food security, and keep food dollars circulating locally.
"A USDA pilot modeled on that success would be a meaningful step toward healthier households and stronger community food systems nationwide," Porter continued. In addition to his organization, groups endorsing Jayapal's bill include the Center for Biological Diversity, Coalition for Organic and Regenerative Agriculture, Farm Action Fund, Food & Water Watch, National Education Association, Southern Poverty Law Center, White Center Community Development Association (WCCDA), and over a dozen more.
"In White Center and historically underinvested communities across King County, we see every day how rising grocery costs continue to strain working families, seniors, immigrants, and households already navigating increasing housing and living expenses," said WCCDA executive director Aaron Garcia. "Access to healthy, culturally relevant food should not be determined by income—it should not be considered a luxury."
"At WCCDA, we believe thriving communities require systems that make healthy food accessible, affordable, and attainable—and that investments in food access are investments in community health, economic stability, and opportunity," Garcia said. "We strongly support Congresswoman Jayapal's leadership in advancing innovative solutions that respond to the realities families face today while strengthening local food systems and neighborhood businesses that give us our vibrancy."
"Expanding the proven Seattle Fresh Bucks model through a federal pilot offers an opportunity to increase food security, support local producers and retailers, and help communities across the country build healthier, more resilient futures," he added.
Jayapal has celebrated recent primary wins by leftists in New York, and on Thursday, with the November midterms just four months away, she called out her Republican colleagues—who are trying to hang on to their narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress after using them to pass cuts to federal food and healthcare programs while giving more tax breaks to the rich.
"As families struggle to keep food on the table, Congress must prioritize work on efforts to lower costs and help Americans stay afloat," said Jayapal, who is joined in sponsoring the bill by Democratic Reps. Alma Adams (NC), Nanette Barragán (Calif.), Chris Deluzio (Pa.), Shomari Figures (Ala.), Jahana Hayes (Conn.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Andrea Salinas (Ore.), Adam Smith (Wash.), and Shri Thanedar (Mich).
"While Republicans in Congress enacted legislation to raise food prices and are hell-bent on cutting food assistance, Seattle is once again leading the way with the Fresh Bucks program, which is successfully keeping people fed with nutritious food and reducing hunger," she said. "We must pass this legislation to expand the program nationwide and get families in every corner of the country healthy produce they can afford."
A new report argues it is "impossible to reconcile" the Trump administration's Make America Healthy Again rhetoric with unprecedented cuts to federal nutrition assistance.
The unprecedented cuts to federal nutrition assistance that President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans enacted nearly a year ago directly undermine the administration's "Make America Healthy Again" initiative, argues a new report by a pair of food policy experts.
The so-called MAHA project, spearheaded by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., emphasizes the importance of a healthy diet to childhood development. But the new white paper, published Wednesday and authored by Joelle Johnson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and Priya Fielding-Singh of George Washington University's Global Food Institute, notes that research shows the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) "reduces food insecurity—which is itself linked to increased risk of poorer diets among children—and may improve health outcomes among households with low incomes."
"How the administration’s health objectives can be achieved alongside policies that reduce both food access and nutrition education is a question these dual agendas do not resolve," the report states. "Understanding this tension also helps explain why the administration’s MAHA messaging has at times appeared disconnected from the SNAP policies it has simultaneously pursued."
The GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR 1) will inflict nearly $190 billion in cuts to SNAP over the next decade—the largest in the program's history—and expand work reporting requirements, despite evidence showing that such mandates do virtually nothing to boost employment or reduce poverty. According to one estimate, the expanded SNAP work reporting requirements could cause nearly 70,000 avoidable deaths by 2040.
The Republican law also forces states to pay a portion of SNAP benefits for the first time, straining budgets and potentially forcing deeper food aid cuts.
Millions of people across the US—including more than 800,000 children—have lost SNAP benefits since Trump signed the Republican budget package into law on July 4, 2025. It is well established that food insecurity, which is on the rise across the US, is associated with chronic disease.
“It is impossible to reconcile the administration’s MAHA rhetoric on reducing chronic disease in childhood with the cruel cutbacks to SNAP brought about by HR 1,” Johnson, who serves as deputy director for healthy food access at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), said in a statement. “Whatever MAHA initiatives CSPI might have otherwise supported are completely subsumed by the biggest cut to SNAP in the program’s history.”
"Cutting off food assistance for millions of families undermines MAHA's stated goals of improving diet quality and preventing chronic disease."
The new report stresses the "ripple effects" of the Trump-GOP SNAP cuts across the food safety net, pointing to negative impacts on kids' eligibility for school meals and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
"Approximately 16 million children live in households that rely on SNAP to meet their basic food needs, and many will face cascading losses of access to other nutrition programs as a result of HR 1's cuts," the report warns. "Children who lose SNAP also risk losing automatic enrollment in WIC and free school meals, forcing families already stretched thin to navigate multiple re-enrollment processes with no guarantee of restored access."
Trump and the GOP are not finished attacking nutrition assistance for low-income families. Last month, House Republicans approved legislation that would slash fruit and vegetable benefits for millions of young children and pregnant and postpartum women—a cut consistent with the White House's budget proposal for the coming fiscal year.
"If we are serious about improving Americans' health, we need policies that make healthy food more accessible, not less," said Fielding-Singh, director of policy and programs at the Global Food Institute. "Cutting off food assistance for millions of families undermines MAHA's stated goals of improving diet quality and preventing chronic disease. Food security and public health go hand in hand."
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated," warned one expert.
Senate Republicans unveiled annual farm legislation this week that would do nothing to address the worsening nationwide hunger crisis spurred by President Donald Trump and the GOP's unprecedented assault on federal food aid.
The draft bill introduced Tuesday by Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, omits a Democratic proposal to delay a provision of the 2025 Republican budget law that will require states to pay a share of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for the first time in the program's history, while also increasing states' share of administrative costs. State leaders have warned of massive budgetary impacts that could result in even deeper cuts to food aid—and potentially force states to withdraw from the SNAP program entirely.
Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), said it was "unconscionable" for Republicans to do nothing in the face of large-scale loss of food aid—including among children—and a looming budgetary disaster for states across the country.
"The harm unfolding across the country is already far greater than many anticipated, with more than 4 million people losing SNAP through March," Cox said in a statement Tuesday. "Even more people will lose the vital food assistance they need to afford groceries unless Congress immediately delays HR 1’s unprecedented shift of significant new SNAP costs to states."
Without congressional action, the SNAP cost-shifting provision of the Republican budget law will take effect on October 1, 2027. Survey data released this month shows that nearly 30% of US state governments believe they could be forced to narrow SNAP eligibility to cope with the new costs, which are expected to average $218 million per state. Eleven percent of states "identified withdrawing from SNAP as a potential risk," according to the poll conducted by the American Public Human Services Association.
It really seems like it should be a bigger deal that 11% of states who responded to this survey identified *withdrawing from SNAP entirely* as a potential risk of the massive cost shift that's about to hit state budgets thanks to H.R. 1. https://t.co/RbsY9LNdLv pic.twitter.com/TKOQIIK0ci
— Katie Bergh (@Katie_Bergh) June 23, 2026
Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, said Tuesday that the Republican farm bill "ignores the needs of tens of millions of people, including families with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, who are finding it increasingly difficult to put food on the table."
"By shifting program costs to states, expanding time limits, and putting a cap on future benefit adjustments, HR 1 has undermined SNAP, the stability of families, communities, and local economies, and weakened state budgets," FitzSimons warned. "The SNAP benefit cost shift to states and increase in states’ administrative costs will force states to make impossible choices: reduce education funding, delay infrastructure investments, cut public health programs, constrain Medicaid spending, raise taxes, or reduce access to SNAP itself."
Senate Republicans unveiled their farm legislation amid a growing hunger and affordability crisis that experts say is directly attributable to Trump-GOP policies, from blanket tariffs to the war on Iran to SNAP cuts that the new bill—like the House version—does nothing to reverse.
Survey data released Tuesday by the No Kid Hungry campaign found that 55% of low-income families with children have had to cut back on groceries recently to make ends meet. The poll also found that 90% of families surveyed reported that they "would have to cut back significantly on food" if they lost SNAP benefits.
"Rising prices are making it harder for families to afford basic necessities," George Kelemen, senior vice president of the No Kid Hungry campaign, said in a statement. "That’s why SNAP’s grocery benefit, which helps feed about 40 million Americans including nearly 16 million children, is a vital support for helping them put food on the table."
"This SNAP crisis is too dangerous to ignore," Kelemen added. "Reasonable steps must be included in this farm bill to delay the cost-sharing until states have the time they need to implement all the complex changes handed to them."
"Millions losing SNAP, including children, is an emergency that Congress needs to fix now, before more people are hurt."
An analysis updated Monday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that millions of people, including more than 800,000 children, have lost Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits since Republicans’ 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act took effect.
In total, CBPP estimates that "SNAP participation nationwide fell by more than 4 million people (10%) between the law’s July 2025 enactment and March 2026," with declines "especially pronounced" in Arizona, which has seen enrollment fall by more than 50%.
CBPP finds that, in 13 states with available data, 808,000 children have stopped receiving SNAP assistance since July, which it notes "accounts for nearly half of the 1.7-million-person decline among people of all ages in those states."
The number of people losing access to SNAP is projected to grow in the coming months given that the budget law's biggest changes to the program won't take effect until next year, writes CBPP.
"Starting in 2027, most states will have to pay between 5 and 15% of SNAP benefit costs, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars a year in many states," explains CBPP. "And the amount a state will have to pay will be based on current error rates, factoring in errors that states are making today."
These drastic funding changes "may incentivize states to take drastic measures to reduce their payment error rates quickly and cut program costs, even if it means delaying or improperly denying benefits to eligible people," the center adds.
Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at CBPP, commented that the latest data shows that the changes made in the GOP budget law appear "to be driving far greater harm than many anticipated," as "states have raced to minimize their exposure to these massive new costs."
"Many people who remain eligible for SNAP on paper—including kids—are losing the benefits they need," Bergh emphasized. "Millions losing SNAP, including children, is an emergency that Congress needs to fix now, before more people are hurt."
Tahra Hoops, director of economic analysis at Chamber of Progress, described the GOP's SNAP cuts as "disastrous," with "kids losing much needed food assistance thanks to policies that are cruel and ineffective."
Hoops also provided historical context to the rapid drop in SNAP enrollment.
"The last time SNAP participation fell this sharply, this fast was after the 1996 welfare reform law," Hoops explained. "That cut took 2.2 million people off food assistance over 8 months. We are already seeing almost twice the damage and the unemployment rate has remained flat."
Policy analyst Michael Linden described the impact of the GOP's budget law on the SNAP program as "the Memorial Reflecting Pool of keeping kids from going hungry," a reference to President Donald Trump's calamitous attempted renovation of the iconic pool located near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC.
The fundraiser comes as a recent study from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York showed food insecurity in the US has reached its highest levels since the Covid-19 pandemic.
A super political action committee created to support Donald Trump is preparing to hold a big-money fundraiser at the president's Virginia golf course that will charge attendees $1 million each.
As reported by NBC News, MAGA, Inc. will host the $1 million-per-plate event at the Trump National Golf Club Washington DC on the day before the president is set to host Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) events at the White House as part of his 80th birthday celebration.
"The fundraiser is at least the sixth such $1 million-per-person event held by Trump-aligned groups for the midterm elections," reported NBC News. "Republicans at nearly all levels hold a significant midterm cash advantage over Democrats, who expect to be outpaced financially in many key House and Senate races."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, linked the ritzy fundraiser to Trump's economic policies that have primarily benefited the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the working class.
"The comingling of 250th anniversary events, Trump’s UFC fight, and a $1 million per-plate fundraiser on Trump’s own birthday," Gilbert said, "gives corporate interests and wealthy donors not just an ultimate fight—but the ultimate opportunity to pay tribute to the president. Rather than celebrate our nation’s anniversary in the bipartisan manner directed by Congress, the Trump administration has directed public money and public property to politicized events."
"Major corporations, such as Chevron, Exxon, MasterCard, and many more," Gilbert added, "should be ashamed to be associated with this corrupt spectacle."
The fundraiser comes as a recent study from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York showed food insecurity in the US has reached its highest levels since the Covid-19 pandemic.
The New York Fed researchers said their study found “a remarkable increase in food insecurity, particularly among lower-educated and lower-income households and households with young children,” as well as “a contemporaneous increase in pessimism among the same groups, along with a sharp decline in job-finding expectations.”
The researchers noted that "while many households are doing fine and economic activity overall has been expanding at a solid pace," there are large numbers of people "facing high levels of economic insecurity and financial strain," which has resulted in plunging overall consumer sentiment.
"Did 700,000 children simply not apply?" asked one advocate in response to USDA chief Brooke Rollins' Senate testimony.
The head of the US Department of Agriculture on Wednesday falsely told senators that "no one was kicked off" the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, claiming that the millions of people—including many children—who have lost federal nutrition assistance in recent months were no longer eligible for aid or decided not to apply for it.
USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins declared that "no one in Washington or in America wants to see a family go hungry," but insisted that anyone who is no longer receiving SNAP benefits has "chosen not to reapply or they're an able-bodied adult that can either work for 20 hours a week or volunteer."
Rollins' testimony conflicts with a growing number of anecdotal reports and expert analyses showing that families across the United States are losing SNAP benefits at the fastest rate in decades. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) estimates that at least 700,000 children have lost SNAP since President Donald Trump signed into law a Republican budget package last summer, enacting the largest-ever cuts to the federal nutrition program.
Rollins: No one was kicked off of SNAP. If they are not on SNAP, they have chosen not to reapply or they are an able bodied adult that can work. pic.twitter.com/eaiVO9XRwb
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 10, 2026
"Did 700,000 children simply not apply?" Rachel Sabella, director of the No Kid Hungry New York campaign, asked in response to Rollins' remarks.
Katie Bergh, a CBPP policy analyst, pointed to recent reporting by NBC News, which spoke to a mother of two in Arizona who said her "benefits stopped without warning three months ago" after the state began implementing new eligibility requirements included in the Republican budget law.
"It's been really hard," the mother said. "We've been going to food banks every week... We're eating less, we're eating more frozen stuff."
Rollins, a multimillionaire, has openly celebrated the massive and rapid decline in SNAP participation during Trump's second White House term, claiming that the roughly 4 million people who have been "moved" off the program are closer to realizing "the American dream"—even as hunger grows to levels not seen since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic.
"This is a celebration of work and the dignity of work," Rollins told senators on Wednesday.
But CBPP concluded in an analysis released in late April that the "dramatic" loss of SNAP benefits across the country "cannot be explained by a rapid improvement in people’s economic well-being or reduced need for help affording food."
"Labor force data show that the unemployment rate was flat between July 2025 and March 2026, the most recent data available," the think tank observed. "A more likely explanation for why people are losing access to food assistance is that states are now facing new challenges as they respond to the cuts in [the Republican budget law]—the largest in the program’s history."
"SNAP participation is already declining at alarming rates, with over 3.5 million people leaving" the program since the passage of the GOP budget law, the Democratic senators said.
Several US senators who formerly served as their states' governors on Tuesday warned that the cuts to food aid in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act are a "ticking time bomb" for millions of Americans.
In a joint statement, Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and Angus King (I-Maine) drew on their experiences as governors to outline how the changes made to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in the GOP's 2025 budget law would soon handcuff state governments' ability to deliver essential assistance.
"Starting October 2027, most states will be required to pay 5% to 15% of SNAP benefit costs for the first time," the senators said. "The Congressional Budget Office projects this will shift more than $35 billion from the federal government to states between 2028 and 2034, with states expected to respond by cutting another $7 billion in food assistance."
The senators said that the GOP's SNAP cuts mean states "will be forced to raise taxes, cut education, healthcare, or transportation, or restrict access to SNAP itself," with some being "forced to drop the program entirely."
They then pointed to numbers showing that "SNAP participation is already declining at alarming rates, with over 3.5 million people leaving" the program since the passage of the GOP budget law.
The senators' warnings about the impact of the SNAP cuts came shortly after a study from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York showing food insecurity in the US reaching its highest levels since the Covid-19 pandemic.
The New York Fed researchers said their study found "a remarkable increase in food insecurity, particularly among lower-educated and lower-income households and households with young children,” as well as “a contemporaneous increase in pessimism among the same groups, along with a sharp decline in job-finding expectations."
Despite this, Trump-appointed US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins last month described millions of people losing their access to SNAP as a positive sign that "America is back in business."
When confronted by Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) about this during a House Agriculture Committee hearing last week, Rollins baselessly claimed that all of the people who had been removed from SNAP had been added to the program fraudulently, including “200,000 dead people.”
"The poorest families around the world, far from the center of the crisis, are being hit the hardest."
The United Nations World Food Program on Friday warned that President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran is pushing millions of people across the world into hunger.
A report published by the WFP on Friday finds that the Iran war, which has resulted in the months-long closure of the Strait of Hormuz, is "generating significant spillovers, particularly through fuel, food price, and income shocks, and trade disruptions."
The impacts of the war are being felt most in some of the world's poorest countries, particularly those that rely on shipments from the Persian Gulf region for essential commodities.
The report projects that 2.3 million more people in Afghanistan will face severe hunger in 2026 due to the impact of the war, along with 2.5 million people in Somalia, and 1.3 million people in Sri Lanka.
"Extensive dependence on energy and food imports and external trade corridors has left the countries we studied exposed to the effects of the crisis," the report states. "In Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, and Somalia, impacts include supply chain disruptions and the pass through of higher global energy prices to domestic prices. Governments’ fiscal space is constrained by reduced revenue from falling import duties and the burden of high public debt."
The report also warns that the conflict is harming WFP's operational capabilities and its inability to provide relief to people suffering from hunger will only grow the longer the war continues.
"WFP estimates it will now serve 1.5 million fewer people that it originally planned to in 2026," the report explains. "If the conflict continues for six months, more than 9 million people could lose assistance, driven by a combination of higher operational costs and rising local food prices, which also increases the cost of cash-based assistance. In the meantime, funding for WFP operations have also decreased."
WFP's analysis also expresses concerns about political instability caused by rising hunger, pointing to the increased number of anti-government demonstrations in recent months as a sign of "increasing popular discontent."
Jean-Martin Bauer, Director of WFP’s Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Service, noted that the current crisis was predicted to happen by WFP months ago, but that its warnings went unheeded.
“Early warnings only matter if the world acts on them,” said Bauer. "We warned that this crisis could push millions more people into hunger; now we are watching it happen in real time. In many cases, the poorest families around the world, far from the center of the crisis, are being hit the hardest."
"More people are going hungry now than at the height of the pandemic. Families are skipping meals, relying on food banks, and turning to SNAP to get by."
An analysis released this week by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York shows that food insecurity in the US has reached levels not seen since the height of the coronavirus pandemic, underscoring the devastating impact of Republican cuts to federal nutrition assistance and President Donald Trump's inflationary economic and foreign policy decisions.
In a blog post, New York Fed researchers detailed their findings of "a remarkable increase in food insecurity, particularly among lower-educated and lower-income households and households with young children," as well as "a contemporaneous increase in pessimism among the same groups, along with a sharp decline in job-finding expectations."
The researchers cited new data showing increases in the percentage of Americans who reported receiving food donations and skipping meals in recent months, as prices for basic necessities rose. Cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that Trump and congressional Republicans enacted last summer are also having an impact, stripping food aid from hundreds of thousands of low-income children and millions of people overall.
Among those who reported skipping meals and relying on food banks, "there is a lower, and more rapidly declining, net share of respondents expecting to be better versus worse off financially a year from now," despite some topline figures indicating a relatively strong economy (such as a low unemployment rate), the researchers observed.
"This means that an increase in the incidence of food insecurity is associated with a deterioration in consumer sentiment," they added.
More people are going hungry now than at the height of the pandemic. Families are skipping meals, relying on food banks, and turning to SNAP to get by. Hunger is rising and Congress cannot look away. https://t.co/ImAFSuTJSg
— Food Research & Action Center (@fractweets) May 28, 2026
The New York Fed's analysis came amid a flurry of new data showing that rising inflation—now at a three-year high—is eroding Americans' paychecks and causing personal savings rates to plummet as households are forced to spend more on gas, food, and other basics.
Following the release of new federal data on Thursday, the nonprofit research group Equitable Growth pointed to "an important milestone: Household incomes are now down year-over-year. American households had more money to spend in April of 2025."
"Although income is down for all households this month, it is falling faster for the bottom 50% households, who have seen their income fall by 1.6% compared to April of last year," noted Equitable Growth visiting fellow Austin Clemens. "This group’s income has fallen in five of the last six months.”